Aldarc
Legend
The past few pages have been an enjoyable read. Thanks, @Manbearcat and @prabe.
What is the point of GM's notes?
Campbell
Relaxed Intensity
Traditional skilled play of the fiction is fairly important to me, even when it comes to Story Now play. I think it's a big part of my preference for games with more open ended (snowballing) resolution and a decent amount of prepared scenario design over no myth play. I suspect I am probably a more strict referee than Manbearcat when it comes to running Dungeon World (although I would almost always prefer Freebooters to Dungeon World). I would also suspect that when I run Blades I put somewhat more emphasis on the negotiation stage (determining position and effect).
From a player's point of view I would say the biggest difference for me (compared to anodyne D&D) in something like Apocalypse World, Dogs in the Vineyard, Freebooters, or Sorcerer is that the social environment is included in the model and skilled play is seen within the context of first playing an individual character (who has a well developed agenda and place in the world) with integrity. The scope of challenge is defined by the scope of that agenda, but the adversity must be honest.
From a player's point of view I would say the biggest difference for me (compared to anodyne D&D) in something like Apocalypse World, Dogs in the Vineyard, Freebooters, or Sorcerer is that the social environment is included in the model and skilled play is seen within the context of first playing an individual character (who has a well developed agenda and place in the world) with integrity. The scope of challenge is defined by the scope of that agenda, but the adversity must be honest.
I've found that a lot of the GM principles from DW/Blades are pretty widely useful for running any system, if that kind of game experience is what you're after. You have to make allowances for system of course, whether that's 5E or whatever, but I run mostly run games like that regardless of system.
There is also, should be interested, a hack for 5E of some Blades stuff including Flashbacks that someone did up to scaffold running Dragon Heist. It's called Here's to Crime, and I approve. The inspiration system can be hacked to all manner of wonderful things.
I thought I remembered you talking about such a hack in the past. I had figured that if I felt a need to use such rules, I'd ask you for advice/links. Still might.
Manbearcat
Legend
Bolded the strict there. Working backwards:
1) I couldn't say for sure if you put more emphasis on the negotiation stage of Pos/Eff in Blades, but mine is as orthodox as it gets. Assess Threat for Position (and convey that explicitly) and Assess Factors for Effect (and convey that explicitly). My guess is that I have players sacrificing Position for Effect at likely the normal rate (if there is one) across the distribution of Blades games; that is to say, a fair bit. Getting xp for a Desperate Action Roll and then marshaling all your resources to ensure a 6 is likely pretty common among Blades tables (and it fits with the play paradigm/genre tropes).
2) What work is "strict" doing in the refereeing of DW above? Are you saying you figure you're more apt to "say no" to a proposed player move? Or that you're more apt to "not use answers" of players? Or that your frequency of question asking is reduced by compared to my own? Some combination of those ? Something else?
What effect do you feel your increased "strictness" has on play?
3) I'm very curious about your thoughts on skilled play of the fiction and prepped/encoded scenario design vs No Myth play. For instance, my thoughts are as follows (you can tell me if you agree/disagree/how):
a) Skilled Play of the fiction orbits around how granular the spatial and temporal relationships of the system/play-space are. For instance, Torchbearer's dungeon is procedurally generated and much less "myth-ey" than your typical map and keyed Dungeon Crawl. However, because all of the relationships work holistically, skilled play is extraordinarily high (honestly, higher than classic D&D for sure).
If the game's encoded units, spatial relationships, temporal relationships, and/or/either the referees framing and telegraphing (not too much...not too little...provocative but no more) have disagreements, you'll have a (let's call it) "skilled play leakage" that damages the competitive play environment (possibly to the point of no recovery).
b) Once you get into a situation where granularity of spatial, temporal, game unit relationships change, skilled play changes. What is the biggest example of this in TTRPGs?
Leaving the dungeon.
Now here, GM framing, the game's encoded pressure points, deft GM deployment of those pressure points (in both framing and complication rendering), and the action resolution mechanics are absolutely paramount.
There is not much use for heavy myth/prep here in my opinion (in fact, I suspect it can serve as an impediment in many cases).
For instance...I would all but guarantee that there is no D&D game ever that has a more wilderness Skilled-Play-intensive play loop than my Perilous Journeys (using The Perilous Wilds) in Dungeon World...particularly those Perilous Journeys that involve topographical hazards/obstacles.
This is because the game works extremely well (and coherently) in all of the ways I mentioned above and because I'm very familiar with (a) outdoor hazards/obstacles and (b) how to mechanize them in Dungeon World action resolution and resource attrition.
Campbell
Relaxed Intensity
I'll have more later, but when it comes to Dungeon World / Freebooters I tend to be pretty strict about the fictional positioning required for moves. It's been awhile since we played together though so I cannot be sure, but I find I have a stronger referee bent than most GMs I have played under when it comes to Dungeon World.
Manbearcat
Legend
Just going to break out some thoughts here and they're going to be a bit all over the place.
If
* a 5e game used the Success w/ Complications module
And
* a 5e game had every single aspect of action resolution encoded (therefore intuitable before the orient > action declaration phase) and player-facing
And
* the 5e game had more pressure points to exert on players than just HPs and Fatigue (the game just doesn't have enough vectors to attack player resources...real resource cost with teeth...and diversity of resource cost with teeth)
Then
Act Now Plan Later and Embrace the Soundrel's Life (Go into Danger Boldly....Fall in Love With Trouble) would be much more portable to 5e. That is because 5e PCs, like Dungeon World and Blades PCs are extremely robust/potent against threats that can take them out (however, unlike DW/Blades, 5e suffers from (a) lack of parity in noncombat conflict resolution and (b) serious runaway power by some classes in noncombat conflict resolution).
Act Now Plan Later isn't just about marshalling resources/the fiction via Flashbacks. Its about (a) going heedless into danger because you know you're up to the challenge (you can both play skillfully and the PC build mechanics and action resolution mechanics create robust PCs who can come off the ropes from an early setback) and/or (b) just playing your character recklessly because its fun.
(a) and (b) above push back hard against orthodox D&D culture. Overwhelmingly, our culture has stigmatized (b) as unskillful play because D&D has historically (outside of 4e) rewarded extreme planning and extreme turtling and the most careful of resource rationing and dedication to controlling the resource refresh cycle. Everything about this is different than in Blades and in DW. And its not just because the game mechanically isn't suited for this (the action resolution mechanics are going to put you on the ropes...its how you deal with being on the ropes that is skillful in DW/Blades...interestingly...this is 100 % the exact same arc as 4e D&D combat), but the game is just fundamentally less fun and not rewarding (from an xp paradigm/advancement paradigm as well) if you play that way.
So that is a big cultural gap to manage.
So if you can (i) manage that culture, (ii) ensure that the game doesn't get away from you and become way too dangerous because you're using a large number of creatures (5e's bounded accuracy makes #s profoundly more dangerous than D&D of yore), (iii) play with that module, (iv) encode action resolution and make it player facing (so its inferable and modellable for skilled play), (v) develop/hack in more pressure points for complications than is present in 5e...
You do all of those things, then those principles will be considerably more harmonious in their integration with 5e (and when I say harmonious here, I'm meaning both in potency on play and in coherency with the entire loop of play).
But its more complex than just porting them in. Now, you can port them in, but the potency and coherency is not going to be there like it is for DW/Blades. The work its doing won't create a through line of play that is both consistently and potently product of the signal of those principles (at least not in the way that it is in the aforementioned games).
Manbearcat
Legend
Not sure!
Maybe @darkbard has some insight into how strict/not-strict he feels I am about fictional positioning > moves triggered in DW. If he has an example where he felt I was particularly lenient, particularly strict, or just about right may help anchor the conversation!
Manbearcat
Legend
Also, our play was play by post. That isn't remotely representative of how I run games live. Personally....play by post sucks. I don't like it unless you're constantly managing a chat with people via phone to clarify details (and then I barely like it). You're either spending too much time clarifying things or you're eliding things that you would clarify via conversation just to play at all.
So my guess is, there may be an instance of action resolution that happened in our play by post game that isn't remotely how I run games live (merely because of the logistical difficulties of PBP) that is something you're recalling as representative.
So...yeah...sorry for all of you folks who love PBP...I can't stand it and its not remotely how I run games normally.
Campbell
Relaxed Intensity
So I think skilled play of the fiction does not necessarily have to rely strongly on geography and physical space. I think what you prep is just as important as how much you prep. When leaving the dungeon behind we can continue to focus on physical space, how well fortified a particular area is, and other such concerns. That definitely benefits from less myth because trying to navigate those sorts of questions beyond a narrowly confined physical space is untenable as the physical space we care about increases. My own games feature less of a focus on those sorts of details.
My favored approach is more what Paul Czege calls a social crawl. Prep looks a lot like the scenario design in Blades in the Dark, town creation in Dogs in the Vineyard, fronts in Apocalypse World and the Sorcerer NPC/location venn diagram thing. A lot of focus on competing factions, NPC agendas, obstacles between PCs and their goals. Not less prep. Different prep.
