D&D General 1s and 20s: D&D's Narrative Mechanics

[Theory of Games]

The problem is the OP's use of "narrative", as far as I can tell, has little-to-nothing to do with capital-N Narrativism as espoused by game theory wonks; and is thus perhaps a poor choice of terms (though whether there's a better alternative is an open question).

Again:
Narrative mechanics gain the designation as "narrative" because they focus on telling a story (outside of trad gameplay), specifically focusing on a player controlling the storytelling instead of the GM. Narrativism is that school of ttrpg theory that focuses exclusively on player-centric storytelling. SO narrative mechanics/rules are an aspect of Narrativist theory and play.

We've already described what a narrative mechanic was:

Thread 'What is a "Narrative Mechanic"?'

Sep 19, 2023

In your own words, not using jargon or other bespoke terminology. What, to you, qualifies as a "narrative mechanic"?

• Reynard
• Replies: 635
• Forum: *TTRPGs General

And so we have our terms on the same page, a definition of Narrativism:

Narrativism 101

Narrativism Narrativism is a style of roleplaying where the whole point of playing is to have player characters freely make choices* and actions based on human issues. There’s your one-senten…

bankuei.wordpress.com

If you aren't using the terms correctly, people get confused

 

[Lanefan]

OD&D: No extra weight, critical hits and fumbles were house rules, third party supplements like Arduin might have them.

AD&D: Same. Although the Saving Throw rules mention that a nat 1 always fails regardless of modifiers, which can very much matter at high levels with magic items.

Not quite. A nat 20 in combat could hit a range of ACs considerably beyond just "one-more than a nat 19 would hit".

 

[Lanefan]

Again:
Narrative mechanics gain the designation as "narrative" because they focus on telling a story (outside of trad gameplay), specifically focusing on a player controlling the storytelling instead of the GM. Narrativism is that school of ttrpg theory that focuses exclusively on player-centric storytelling. SO narrative mechanics/rules are an aspect of Narrativist theory and play.

Except the way I read it, the question is whether a nat 1 or 20 gives the DM more latitude for narration of what happened. The player still doesn't get to narrate anything unless the DM cedes over that right.

 

[Mannahnin]

Not quite. A nat 20 in combat could hit a range of ACs considerably beyond just "one-more than a nat 19 would hit".

Yes, as might be obvious from me citing each edition and mentioning a page number, I both know the rules and looked before posting.

I know about the repeating 20s. By "no extra weight" I'm not talking about THAC0, I'm comparing to the attack tables. A nat 20 in 1E gives you exactly what the attack tables tell you. There's no special automatic hit, critical hit, or other bonus rule activated.

 

[Umbran]

... using it as a way to bypass the discussion is disingenuous.

Mod Note:
"Disingenuous" is, unfortunately, a polite word for "lying". Probably should avoid that accusation.

 

[Theory of Games]

Except the way I read it, the question is whether a nat 1 or 20 gives the DM more latitude for narration of what happened. The player still doesn't get to narrate anything unless the DM cedes over that right.

The most consistent (and amusing) theme in the thread is that no one really understands the OP's question, largely because it uses improper terminology. But, if we're determined, we can still have an interesting discussion.

 

[payn]

The most consistent (and amusing) theme in the thread is that no one really understands the OP's question, largely because it uses improper terminology. But, if we're determined, we can still have an interesting discussion.

I don’t get it, I mean your confusion. Made sense to me.