What Do You Think Of As "Modern TTRPG Mechanics"?

Fenris-77 said:

This is very true and as a result the agendas do function more like mechanics in some ways, I agree. The problem is that there isn't always a clear answer what the result should be, which seems to still leave them in a different category than things like fortune or experience mechanics.

Click to expand...

I'm not entirely sure; lot of systems have some fairly subjective bits in things like experience awards and at least some sorts of currency (though admittedly in the latter case, its the ones that are more narrative forms that have some non-quantitative options).

Here's another example from cards:

One way to lose a hand of bridge or five hundred is to get unlucky in the deal. If I'm dealt four suits, with none greater than 3 or 4 length, and no card higher than a 10, I'm probably not going to win the hand. (And for the five hundred players out there, I've got two suits no lower than a 7 - so no misere.)

Another way is to mis-bid, or mis-play. And yet another is bid and play well, but to be out-played by your opponent.

These are all different experiences. The first has you cursing your luck, the second cursing yourself, the third admiring your opponent's skill and wishing you were better.

And there are analogues of this in RPG play:

Being attacked by the Orcs because of a wandering monster roll, or because of a bad reaction roll: I got unlucky.

Being attacked by the Orcs because I didn't anticipate that the GM's notes might mention Orc guards at the dungeon entrance: I've been outwitted by the GM.

Being attacked by Orcs because the GM thinks that makes for a good encounter: things are unfolding in accordance with the GM's aesthetic sensibilities.

These are all different experiences too. It doesn't help us understand RPGing - how it works, and why it can be fun - to glom them all together!

pemerton said:

I think that AW could be clearer in its advice on (i) what prep looks like, (ii) how to use that prep, and (iii) how to combine, and/or prioritise, saying what prep demands and saying what honesty demands. I think that increased clarity could take at least two forms (and there are probably ways of being clearer that I've not thought of!): (a) better examples, in the text, of being constrained by and using prep (in Moves Snowball, there's reference to Isle's family as a threat, but no example of using a threat's countdown clock, for instance); and (b) reorganisation of the text, to combine some of the stuff that is said in the Threats/Fronts chapter into the discussion of agenda and principles.

The book does say not to create any fronts/threats until after the first session. But I think it could be even clearer about why that is - I've found your comparison to In A Wicked Age helpful in understanding this, and think the book could do a better job.

Click to expand...

This conversation inspired me to go back to AW and formalise and tighten up what I’d do. My word is it complicated. The way threats are organised in 2e is weird because they’re both an actual thing (sometimes) and organisation nodes. So I went and contrasted Burned Over and 1E against each other. In conclusion, I don’t think getting rid of Fronts was a great idea but the way Fronts are formed in the 1e text has issues.

The issue with 2E is that some threats have a cast list and clocks. In which case they’re really a collection of threats. In which case sharing the same name with individual threats muddies the water. So we’re back to Fronts.


I’ve not done a comprehensive write up and this is subject to revision but here’s the process I came up with.

Between every scene you look at your threat map and follow the steps below:

1) Update NPC priorities if they would be updated. Tick clocks if they would tick.

2) Urgent: Any active threats/fronts engaging with the P.C’s right now? If yes cut to scene. (this could be a deadly storm or someone sending an errand boy to the Savvyhead because the water generator is broken)

3) Open: If nothing then just let the PC say what they’re doing but bear in mind you need to telegraph threats if you’re on the future badness part of the clock. You can also just decide to tick a clock at this stage if you want.

When in the scene (not before), you can activate any latent threats if you want.

edit; edited part 3 for clarity.