Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="P1NBACK" data-source="post: 5337413" data-attributes="member: 83768">Not true. We've already established that Dogs, and even 4E skills (outside of challenges) cannot be played this way. They require fiction to adjudicate. I never said it was "wrong" - in fact I said, "more power to you". But, I did say it was switching to a boardgame mode. If you think that's "wrong" that's on you. No, I'm not. Not at all. Sigh... I'm saying, if mechanics do not influence the fiction and vice-versa, it's not roleplaying! If mechanics DO influence the fiction, and vice-versa, it is roleplaying. So, "allowing mechanics to direct the roleplay" is kind of a redundant statement. That IS roleplaying. No one is arguing against this. In fact, I argued FOR this. It's exactly what happens in Dogs. What I am arguing for is the inverse - allowing the fiction to influence the mechanics (i.e. allowing someone to push a swarm with forced movement because they described a way that made sense, or not allowing someone to grab a creature because it's entirely outside the realm of possibility...). By doing this, you have fiction that coincides with the mechanics. In other words, the mechanics are not disassociated. No. The narrative is determined by US, the roleplayers. Rules can't "make fiction" for you. We make the fiction, the rules help is adjudicate it. If the rules don't do this, we're not playing a roleplaying game. How is "I try to kill the monster" a future event? No. It's happening right now in the fiction unless someone argues otherwise. If I say, "I swing my sword at the monster with the intent to kill it..." that is happening right now in the fiction. Right now. The dice determine whether that action, right now, in the moment, is successful. I swing my sword at the monster! Ok, your sword goes flying at the monster and it attempts to dodge! MECHANICS - DICE - RESOLUTION - ATTACK VS ACSuccess! Your sword hits the monster, succeeding in your attempt! I don't understand how this isn't clear to you. No. When I say, "I try to climb the wall" it means right now, at this moment, my character is springing to ACTION. I am starting to climb the wall. The dice don't determine that. The dice determine: Do I make it to the top? Do I fall somewhere in the process? Do I make it up 10 ft and stall? Unless, we're playing a game where you have to roll dice to take action, such as: Player: My character climbs the wall!DM: Well, it's kind of scary! Roll your courage first! Player: Ok! Unless you have mechanics that resolve whether you can go through with your intent, then it happens. And, even in that case, as soon as you succeed in your "Courage" roll, you start climbing at that point. Clearly, you and I have different ideals for resolution in roleplaying. Intent is very important in my games. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> Why doesn't "I walk across the room" engage the mechanics and "I walk across the pitching floor" does? It depends on the game and who else at the table says otherwise. Player: I walk across the room.DM: No way. The NPC grabs you. Invoke mechanics. Player: I walk across the ship!DM: It's storming and the ship is pitching, but you make it to the cabin! No mechanics. Player: I try to stab the kobold in the throat!DM: Ok. You do! Blood starts spilling out of his throat and he dies. Now, what? No mechanics. Player: I try to stab the kobold in the throat!DM: Ok! Roll for initiative. Then, give me an attack roll. Invoke mechanics. Obviously, you're the one who is making judgments about other people's playstyle and we're totally on different pages about how RPGs should work and what impact the mechanics role in the game is.</blockquote>

Verification