GM no-roll

[Umbran]

OK, I'm following you, but I think this is still conflating other design elements with being player-facing.

I have already effectively noted that this is not necessary to be player-facing, and that not all player facing systems have this structure, so I am very clearly NOT conflating the two.

However, removing the GM-element loops is pretty common in player-facing systems, because it is one way to serve the needs/goals of player-facing play.

If you resolve a combat scene with a single contested roll, as in (for example) QuestWorlds, that's fewer loops than if you take 5 or (gods save us) 10 rounds of combat to resolve a combat in a completely player-facing game like Dungeon World.

Sure. But "resolve an entire scene in a single contested roll" is an edge case, a specific, extremely simple, cherry-picked example. It is not the general operation of most systems in our experiences, is it?

So, when we consider design elements and practical effects, that's not a great point of comparison.

 

[Duke_]

I have already effectively noted that this is not necessary to be player-facing, and that not all player facing systems have this structure, so I am very clearly NOT conflating the two.

However, removing the GM-element loops is pretty common in player-facing systems, because it is one way to serve the needs/goals of player-facing play.



Sure. But "resolve an entire scene in a single contested roll" is an edge case, a specific, extremely simple, cherry-picked example. It is not the general operation of most systems in our experiences, is it?

So, when we consider design elements and practical effects, that's not a great point of comparison.

A lot of games focused on conflict resolution vs task resolution have single-roll resolution. You can even get it in far more traditional games like Savage Worlds, which has Quick Encounter rules to allow for resolving in a single roll for things you don't want to spend a lot of time on. It's not the "cherry-picked" edge case you're portraying it as.

The comparison is there to illustrate a point. My entire point has been that "GM has to spend less time on mechanics and has more time to narrate" is not an inherent benefit of player-facing systems, which is a claim made early and often in these threads. Your first sentence in this reply acknowledges the fact that it's not an inherent benefit. So I'm not sure what you're still arguing about at this point.

 

[Umbran]

My entire point has been that "GM has to spend less time on mechanics and has more time to narrate" is not an inherent benefit of player-facing systems, which is a claim made early and often in these threads.

Ah. It is a claim that I felt was already ceded as not entirely accurate in this one, as we started from the position that you can technically play D&D as player-facing, which saves nobody much of anything.

But, we should note that "is not an inherent benefit" while technically accurate, is not really all that helpful. Many things are not technically accurate as an absolute statement, but are "usefully correct" in common, practical terms.

So, for example, if one wants to spend more of your GM attention on narration (and maybe narration adjacent things, like pacing), then player-facing games are still a good place to look for that. Even if it isn't inherent to the style, it is common in the style.