As far as my understanding of the game goes, it is not possible with Torchbearer.I'm afraid that you are underestimating the pervasive power of Rule -1: Gamemasters will read and play assuming Rule 0 even when the rule is entirely absent.
As far as my understanding of the game goes, it is not possible with Torchbearer.I'm afraid that you are underestimating the pervasive power of Rule -1: Gamemasters will read and play assuming Rule 0 even when the rule is entirely absent.
Nah. Rule -1. GMs will force Rule 0 even where it is unwarranted.As far as my understanding of the game goes, it is not possible with Torchbearer.
I really think Torchbearer is enormously instructive to this conversation. I would encourage everyone to buy the game and read it through (if not play it).
As a mash-up of (a much more punishing) Moldvay Basic and Burning Wheel, it combines classic dungeon crawl procedures with an indie ethos.
This is the very context in which my games run - multiple parties within the same campaign and setting - and I still don't like the idea.Works great in the context of multiple PC groups within the same campaign - the context he assumed.
Well put.In the context of fiction I think that realism overlaps with, but isn't the same as, verisimilitude and naturalism.
* Verisimilitude is the property of having an intuitive/experiential plausibility - so it depends on the expectations/experiences of the audience. I would say that variable weapon damage in D&D is a manifestation of verisimilitude. Likewise healing rates in Rolemaster (which factor in the nature and location of the injury). Presumably for martial artists, variabe weapon damage is more likely to lack verisimilitude (or at least in more danger of doing so); and presumably for doctors the same is true of the RM healing rules.
* Naturalism is a particular way of presenting a fictional world, as characterised by a certain sort of "ordinariness" or "groundedness". If you've ever read Jack the Giant Killer (I think the version I've read is in the Blue Fairy Book) it is wildly non-naturalistic: giants just pop up, with their treasure, with no rhyme or reason. Whereas I see one of JRRT's major achievements as a writer being to present fairy tale and Arthurian romance-type tropes in the form of a naturalistic novel (eg his treatment of Lorien presents the faerie woods with a faerie queen in the mode of being a real, imaginable and in some sense measurable place). Naturalism can support verisimilitude but isn't necessary for it - the Hobbit is less naturalilstic than LotR (eg Rivendell in the Hobbit really isn't treated naturalistically at all) but I'm not sure it's any less verisimilitudinous. And sometimes the attempt at naturalism can undermine verisimilitude - the naturalistic presentation of the Shire in LotR to me ultimately undercuts verisimilitude because the material standard of living seems utterly implausible to me given the economic geography.
* Realism I would think of as meaning resemblance to or imitation of reality. Lorien is naturaistically presented, but not realistic - what do all those elves eat? and who is making their wine? Likewise the Shire, for the reasons I gave earlier. Conversely, a fiction might be relatively realistic but not very naturalistically presented - some Hal Hartley films are like this, for instance. Realism can support verisimilitude, but not necessarily - it can be quite realistic, for instance, for people's moods or allegiances to swing in volatile ways, but this may undermine verisimilitude or cause the audience to have to question their understanding of or intuitions about the work because they have to reframe it to re-establish plausibility.
System has a lot to say here, though, and can't be ignored. Consider something as basic as 5' squares vs. fluid spacing for movement and-or combat - and even ignoring the specific mechanics involved in either, consider the tone these things set for the game as a whole.Concepts applied to RPGing
With RPGing, I would think of the above features as properties of the play experience and the fiction it produces, not of systems. (Eg tracking encumbrance may produce a realistic play experience, or not, depending on how the application of the rules plays out in the context of the shared fiction at the table. In 4e I found the outcome unrealistic - even ordinary people seem (to me) inordinately strong; in Traveller the lack of realism feels the same but for the opposite reason - ordinary people seem to be penalised by quite light loads.)
I completely agree.I think an RPG game/fiction is realistic if the characters who figure in it have plausible and recognisable motivations; if the social contexts and institutions are likewise able to be made sense of (this can be tricky, because human cultures are incredibly diverse and if not familiar can seem quite alien - but I rarely see this done well in RPGs); if the unfolding of events appears to be explicable in its own terms.
@Sadras
Awesome! Enjoy.
If you’re going to most likely just port things to your 5e game, focus on Failure handling (Fail Forward with either a Twist or a Condition + you get what you want), Exploration Turns + Condition/Light Clock, gear handling, CampPhase/Rest handling, and the mapbuilding procedures (similar to Travellers Lifepaths but for adventure sites). That’s easily enough ported (but you’re going to have to hack magic Light effects in 5e).
To the Dogs
Your remaining fresh rations spoil or go stale. You can discard them at the gates for the beggars and dogs.
I just wanted to respond to the fact that your first quoted sentence refers to a phenomenon, but in the second sentence it has transmuted into a problem.I think that some dismiss the MMI phenomenon entirely by saying simply "that's just how the game is played." In other words, it's a complete denial that the problem described exists or could exist, which I also find unhelpful.