Search results

Is there a way to find out the nature of the danger? If the players are just picking blindly based on “more dangerous”, I would not consider that an informed decision.

It seems like if the players should make informed choices, they ought to be made aware of the mechanics behind them.

I think the core disagreement is over whether it’s sufficient to be structurally sufficient. I think the idea is interesting, but I’m not sure. There are certainly some interesting things that would follow if it were. You seem to be in the no camp. The experience of a story, and the experience...

Well, then why not a “story machine” as a source of a narrative? Isn’t it creating one based on the events it generates? You still have to execute. You can know what’s coming —in fact, that’s how those games can be so difficult without feeling unfair; but you still have to execute. Whether...

When relating those events, does it have to be done in a particular medium or structure? Can the relationship between characters in a scene create a narrative (as used in the example at the start of the segment on story machines)? Does it not? You have an initial condition and a goal. As you...

I don’t know. There’s going to be some enumeration because that’s just the nature of providing systems to do things. That’s fine if not expected. I’m pushing back on the seeming implication that the alternative to having a lot of enumeration is needing to find out (or what I assume is meant by...

Well, what is “narrative” and “narrative meaning”? I think this is where the video does something a bit unusual with Freytag’s pyramid. It’s not actually talking about the stories themselves but how we experience them. It makes the case that what the audience experiences follows a particular...

Are games really meaningless in their moments? I would be very surprised if moment to moment play isn’t very meaningful for any game worth playing. Whether it’s having to figure out how to defeat a boss that just appeared in the adventure board game you are playing or how to reunite the stupid...

Unless I’m reading you incorrectly, this seems like a false dichotomy. The alternative to a system like PF2 is not necessarily one with a lack of mechanics or fewer ones. It’s how the mechanics are deployed that I dislike in PF2 (and notably also PbtA games) rather than the existence of...

Hopefully this is not another way PF2 ends up being similar to 4e (i.e., no video games released using the actual RPG rules).

Owlcat made a couple of good games based on PF1 APs (Kingmaker and Wrath of the Righteous). It’s a shame the new licensee isn’t making Pathfinder games but just games using the Pathfinder setting IP.

One thing I’ve learned bout myself from running PF2 and playing Stonetop is I find I don’t like encoding the process of play too much in the game’s mechanics. I don’t like skill actions in PF2 and moves in PbtA games for about the same reasons. I would rather have something more top-down with...

I thought it was a great video. The main part is only the first twenty minutes, but the last ten minutes where he discusses citations is also worth watching.

There things I like about it and think it does well, but there are also some parts of its design I really dislike. I ran it for about a year before I burned out on running it.

Kingmaker was my group’s favorite AP for Pathfinder 1e (and also the only one we finished).

The article was discussing it in the context of “sportsmanship”, calling such plays “unsporting”. I was reacting to that because the idea of “proper” play is used to delegitimize playing RPGs as games. I’m trying to use “authorship” the way the article is using it. Substitute my own definition...

I read the article. I’m not a fan of it for a few reasons. I don’t like the “tell me a story” style of argument. I find it obfuscatory and tedious at times. That’s a me problem though. Regarding the article itself, it falls into the trap of advancing a particular view of RPGs (that they’re about...

This kind of jargon seems like it occupies the same space as mechanics in RPGs. If I ask for a skill check or call for a saving throw when we’re playing D&D, that’s jargon, but the other people at the table should (hopefully) understand what that means and not find it contentious. There are...

Or whether “walking simulators” are even games. Video game discourse can be incredibly toxic.

There’s something about Internet discussion that makes it difficult to admit to being wrong or changing your mind. I can’t be the only one who’s had the other participants in the discussion take that as a signal to step up the attack. (See also: not every discussion is a damn debate.)