D&D General On Skilled Play: D&D as a Game

[Warpiglet-7]

Did you check out the OP?

Whether your character knows tactics is kind of beside the point of Gygaxian Skilled Play. The skill being referred to is the player's skill. Problem-solving in the game is done by the player in this mode of play.

Reread it in fact. If you don’t see what I am getting at it’s no worry.

but I am picking what the op is laying down and added a clear example that supports the existence of skilled play.

 

[Nefermandias]

Reread it in fact. If you don’t see what I am getting at it’s no worry.

but I am picking what the op is laying down and added a clear example that supports the existence of skilled play.

It doesn't look like you have read the OP, tbh.

 

[Garthanos]

Consider this in 4e player skill involves strategic resource management both individual and team tactical choices, including risk, position and target lots of skillful choices to be made in the 4e game. (some like in 3e are in character design though they are not overwhelming / though some may be important in how and what are your best choices)

However both player and character skill enter the field even under tactical arena --> Not sure if I can explain this well

A player making the comment hey my warlord character knows this kind of thing can i roll for him to decide of who is the best enemy to focus on? The answer is sort of yes (to a point). Though it may feel more proactive. The Warlord Player decides hey that enemy right there is the best one to focus on next turn and sure enough everyone gets bonuses which in a sense the player decided would be there. This is at the character skill level choosing to do that at a given time is still player and there may be other reasons that long term that enemy was not "really" the right one to focus on.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

That still doesn't satisfy the actor because it's still not about the character's ability, it's about the player's -- either in building a character to 'win' or the player's ability to socialize.

I don't think we know that. I mean, famously, ALL acting is player skill! How does Dungeon World, to use a random example, further an actor agenda? I mean, it seems to me that the best a game can do here is delineate what your character's personality is like in some fashion. D&D is primitive in this regard perhaps, but that doesn't seem to me to be related to SP, just to the fact that PCs are modeled in a simple way in classic D&D. I'd note that nothing in classic D&D actually impedes your RP. You might even say that more elaborate systems can get in the way of it.

Obviously classic D&D is mostly about dungeon crawls, at least as conceived, which is not conducive to acting or dramatic story arc. So, to the extent that 'actor' is about the drama of the overall story, then yes, a modern Story Now game will work better. To the degree that it is about acting in the personality sense of RP, you might be better off in OD&D than any other game.

OTOH, dramatic story arc is more 'Story Teller' agenda vs 'Actor', though the two may be closely linked in some cases. As I said, actual persons cannot be described accurately by these pigeon holes, but they are still useful for analysis at some level.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I'd note that nothing in classic D&D actually impedes your RP. You might even say that more elaborate systems can get in the way of it.

Except that part where if you don't break character to engage the skilled play elements, you get to stop playing that character because they died.

Also, I really hate the constant implication that lack of rules is good for RP. The rules help you play characters with mental capabilities or actual abilities different from your own. 'Creatives' that insist that rules and structure inhibit creativity are generally either just wrong or lying for the cred.

 

[Garthanos]

Except that part where if you don't break character to engage the skilled play elements, you get to stop playing that character because they died.

Also, I really hate the constant implication that lack of rules is good for RP. The rules help you play characters with mental capabilities or actual abilities different from your own. 'Creatives' that insist that rules and structure inhibit creativity are generally either just wrong or lying for the cred.

Indeed that playing different abilities than my own is fundamental I feel. (hence my Warlord example earlier and how even in a game where player tactical choices are significant the game still enables character excellence to have its say)

 

[Fanaelialae]

Except that part where if you don't break character to engage the skilled play elements, you get to stop playing that character because they died.

Also, I really hate the constant implication that lack of rules is good for RP. The rules help you play characters with mental capabilities or actual abilities different from your own. 'Creatives' that insist that rules and structure inhibit creativity are generally either just wrong or lying for the cred.

Lack of rules is arguably "good for RP". "Let's pretend" is essentially pure RP, and has no rules. If you don't have rules you're basically forced to RP (or do nothing at all).

That said, I do think that people that suggest that rules are bad for RP are objectively wrong. You can RP just as much if you have rules as if you don't (unless you literally have a rule that forbids RP, but that seems like a silly hypothetical). Really, if the players want to RP they're going to RP. My friends and I sometimes even RP when we're playing non-RP Gs, just for fun.

However, it could be subjectively true at an individual level. If someone doesn't like RP, or even just doesn't feel comfortable with it, having rules to engage with as an alternative might be preferable to RP, resulting in less RP. I think it's silly to say that this is a bad thing though. It's the player engaging with the game in a preferred manner. It's only if "you" enjoy RP and want to force your preferences on others that having rules is a "hindrance" to RP.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Except that part where if you don't break character to engage the skilled play elements, you get to stop playing that character because they died.

Well, that is a character of Gygaxian Skilled Play is to punish 'lack of skill' by resetting the player's character level to 1, yeah. I think SP doesn't DEPEND on it though. I mean, it should provide rewards and possibly punishments as feedback presumably, or to serve as proxy indicators/concrete goals. They could be other than ganking your PC.

Also, I'm not sure that a notion of 'must break character' to perform skilled play is NECESSARILY accurate in the first place. Certainly it COULD be true, and the implication of meta-gaming might tend to cause that in some situations. OTOH why can't I simply make up a reason my PC knows fire burns trolls? It isn't like it has to be some dark obscure secret of the game world. Other things could be trickier, my INT5 PC is supposed to figure out something clever, OK, not very realistic perhaps. OTOH what exactly are the rules of RP here? Are you saying I cannot break character at the table now and then to interject some suggestion for the Wizard player with 18INT to think about? Maybe that DOES conflict with 'actor agenda', maybe, depending on how you define it.

Also, I really hate the constant implication that lack of rules is good for RP. The rules help you play characters with mental capabilities or actual abilities different from your own. 'Creatives' that insist that rules and structure inhibit creativity are generally either just wrong or lying for the cred.

I wasn't trying to make that argument. Nor is it one that I generally subscribe to. OTOH there are examples of such rules, like alignment (which interestingly has nothing to do with SP and is pretty close to the only 'role playing rule' in classic D&D).

Anyway, it isn't like I'm an apologist for OSR. I would vastly rather play Dungeon World than old school OD&D mostly. I enjoy the greater ease of story generation and I like world-building as opposed to being told what is written down by the GM exclusively. That isn't really what this thread is about, or so I was recently told!

If I was to compare OD&D and DW, then I would think overall actors or story tellers will be happier in the later, for sure. Power gamers, maybe its a wash, though 'power' is a very different concept in each game. Explorers, probably depends on your preferences, exploring a pregenerated world vs exploring a jointly constructed one as it is being defined.

 

[Voadam]

Except that part where if you don't break character to engage the skilled play elements, you get to stop playing that character because they died.

I am not following here.

If they have to break character to survive in skilled play, and their mechanics match that character who would not survive without breaking character, then the mechanics are not going to support surviving that encounter either and they get to stop playing their character because they died.

The problem in your scenario is that the consequence of failure is death, not that someone chooses to engage in skilled play.

If the character is a Macguyver in concept and mechanics who works through problems they will not break character either in acting like Macguyver and skilled playing their way through a challenge or rolling their appropriate mechanics check.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I am not following here.

If they have to break character to survive in skilled play, and their mechanics match that character who would not survive without breaking character, then the mechanics are not going to support surviving that encounter either and they get to stop playing their character because they died.

The problem in your scenario is that the consequence of failure is death, not that someone chooses to engage in skilled play.

If the character is a Macguyver in concept and mechanics who works through problems they will not break character either in acting like Macguyver and skilled playing their way through a challenge or rolling their appropriate mechanics check.

Obviously you could complain that its a pretty narrow game if it only really supports 'McGuyver' as a character concept (and to a degree classic D&D is a bit like that I suppose). Honestly, classic D&D, IMHO, is a VERY niche game anyhow.