Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
With Respect to the Door and Expectations....The REAL Reason 5e Can't Unite the Base
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5989598" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>The player interacts with the gameworld using dice. The PC uses swords, shovels, etc. Different tools.</p><p></p><p>Also, in D&D there is no technique whereby a player can try to lop the head off an enemy. But presumably PCs try to do so from time to time.</p><p></p><p>A better definition of actor stance: the player declares actions for his/her PC that follow from that PC's already-established character and motivation.</p><p></p><p>Author stance generally means that the player declares actions for his/her PC for reasons that the <em>player</em> cares about (eg doing something cool at the table, irritating his/her fellow players, etc) without any such motivation being pre-established for the PC. The PC's state of mind is then retroactively estabilshed.</p><p></p><p>Come and Get It has nothing to do with author stance. Its forced movement is director stance. Its metagame character has nothing to do with stance as such.</p><p></p><p>Come and Get It is director stance: the player gets to dictate how NPCs act. Every time a player says "I want to pick up a rock and throw it" in circumstances where the GM hasn't already mentioned that there are rocks on the ground, the player is entering director stance.</p><p></p><p>There is no particular link between director stance and "story game style", I don't think.</p><p></p><p>Actor stance is completely consistent with metagame limited powers - the player decides when to use powers only with reference to his/her PC's personality and motivations.</p><p></p><p>As I've already posted a couple of times, so-called "dissociative mechanics" don't have much to do with stance. They are related to metagame features, not stance features: namely, that there are considerations relevant in the action resolution mechanics that do not correspond in any pregiven way to any causal process in the fiction itself.</p><p></p><p>I mentioned hit points already: hit points include knowledge of how lucky you will be in the next fight. How does a PC know this about him-/herself? (My answer: s/he doesn't. Hit points are a metagame mechanic.)</p><p></p><p>Also - you still havent' told us what you think is happening in the fiction when you roll initiative for your PC. (My answer: nothing. It's a purely metagame device for handling action declaration, which is itself a purely metagame concept.)</p><p></p><p>What's your basis for this claim? It's not like this in my game, for any of the PCs.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 5989598, member: 42582"] The player interacts with the gameworld using dice. The PC uses swords, shovels, etc. Different tools. Also, in D&D there is no technique whereby a player can try to lop the head off an enemy. But presumably PCs try to do so from time to time. A better definition of actor stance: the player declares actions for his/her PC that follow from that PC's already-established character and motivation. Author stance generally means that the player declares actions for his/her PC for reasons that the [I]player[/I] cares about (eg doing something cool at the table, irritating his/her fellow players, etc) without any such motivation being pre-established for the PC. The PC's state of mind is then retroactively estabilshed. Come and Get It has nothing to do with author stance. Its forced movement is director stance. Its metagame character has nothing to do with stance as such. Come and Get It is director stance: the player gets to dictate how NPCs act. Every time a player says "I want to pick up a rock and throw it" in circumstances where the GM hasn't already mentioned that there are rocks on the ground, the player is entering director stance. There is no particular link between director stance and "story game style", I don't think. Actor stance is completely consistent with metagame limited powers - the player decides when to use powers only with reference to his/her PC's personality and motivations. As I've already posted a couple of times, so-called "dissociative mechanics" don't have much to do with stance. They are related to metagame features, not stance features: namely, that there are considerations relevant in the action resolution mechanics that do not correspond in any pregiven way to any causal process in the fiction itself. I mentioned hit points already: hit points include knowledge of how lucky you will be in the next fight. How does a PC know this about him-/herself? (My answer: s/he doesn't. Hit points are a metagame mechanic.) Also - you still havent' told us what you think is happening in the fiction when you roll initiative for your PC. (My answer: nothing. It's a purely metagame device for handling action declaration, which is itself a purely metagame concept.) What's your basis for this claim? It's not like this in my game, for any of the PCs. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
With Respect to the Door and Expectations....The REAL Reason 5e Can't Unite the Base
Top