I definitely did not do a good job of explaining my thesis, with the amount of responses that seem to be talking about auto success and failure and crits.They are not narrative mechanics.
I definitely did not do a good job of explaining my thesis, with the amount of responses that seem to be talking about auto success and failure and crits.They are not narrative mechanics.
I was the second post in the thread. I asked what you meant by 'narrative mechanics'. I got some laugh reacts but I was genuinely asking. You didn't clarify.I definitely did not do a good job of explaining my thesis, with the amount of responses that seem to be talking about auto success and failure and crits.
Sounds like a normal failure result to me!Right. "Narrating" is not "narrative" in a mechanical sense. I am referring to the tendency for folks to give extra in-fiction weight to 1s and 20s. So, if a PC rolls a 1 on a a Persuasion attempt, the GM decides that the baron is offended and orders the guards to arrest the PC(s) -- importantly, when that was NOT the "normal" outcome of failing the roll. Like that.
Your normal failure results are this extreme?Sounds like a normal failure result to me!![]()
You asked "what is a narrative mechanic?" Frankly, given what I wrote in the OP, it felt like a disingenuous question. I chose not to address it.I was the second post in the thread. I asked what you meant by 'narrative mechanics'. I got some laugh reacts but I was genuinely asking. You didn't clarify.
It is pretty common for current players in 5E games to roll that Nat20 and suggest (or request) a bigger than usual success. I think that still qualifies as "narrative" in this context.
Yeah inspiration and BIFTs were after thoughts for many.I was going to mention this in my previous comment.
In the groups I play in players do request things outside the rules after rolling a nat 20. It's not something that happens every time, nor is the request always granted. But's it does happen.
At the start of 5E I allowed inspiration points to be spent by players if the wanted to effect the narrative, which worked OK. Unfortunately, most of the DM's I've played with eventually forget to give out inspiration.
Particularly for those not playing 5.xe.Yeah inspiration and BIFTs were after thoughts for many.
It's a shame, I really liked inspiration as a currency players could use to effect the narrative (even if it was just a house rule).Yeah inspiration and BIFTs were after thoughts for many.
Numenera and it's offspring work that way as well. I guess I was thinking of D&D when I answered as I did. This style of play is far from what I prefer and I was sad to see Monte Cook pursue that approach for his game.As an example: Fate, and the Fate Point Economy.
In Fate, the player's ability to succeed is strongly influenced by their having Fate Points to spend. The primary way of the player getting Fate Points is by accepting when the GM Compels them, at which point the GM give the player a point, and adds a complication to the scene, thematic to the PC's Aspect being compelled.
Same game, another mechanic:
In Fate, character death is never delivered by strict mechanical results. When a character cannot absorb stress, and is Taken Out of the scene, the responsible party gets to choose what happens in the narrative. The GM can choose that the character dies. They can also choose that they get captured, left for dead, etc.
Flip side of that, any party in a conflict can choose to Concede, and may thereby choose the nature of their withdrawal from the scene. The villain can always get away, so long as they try before they get Taken Out.