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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 8522736" data-attributes="member: 71699">No, I'm not making any claim about the surface experiences. My question is whether 5e, played naturally and consistently, produces fiction-first roleplay? 5e* is my argument to the effect that it does. I like <a href="https://fate-srd.com/odds-ends/fiction-first-fiction-rules-interaction-and-nonsensical-results" target="_blank">this discussion</a> in the context of FATE. (The link is to an article in the FATE SRD.)7. Narrate the resolution within the given constraints.3. The DM narrates the results of their actions.3. The GM narrates the results, based on the player's roll.Over the course of this thread I've even come to feel that grasping "narrates" as an imperative regulatory rule is vital to 5e*. It signals the shift from system to fiction, ending the basic loop in the fiction. I know we don't agree on the intertextual interpretation, so I will just say that seeing this word used the same way in games that we have no reason to doubt are fiction-first, inspires me to interpret it that way in 5e*.In the quoted texts above I notice variation. What has 5e to say about bringing complications or constraints back into the fiction? 5e* says that this is mandated because a roll wasn't called for unless it had complications correlated with it. That is something I wanted to explore as a follow up to [USER=6915329]@Faolyn[/USER]'s latest.Oh, I'm surprised you can take that from anything I've written. On the one hand, I am saying Baker was influential. On the other hand, I'm saying that he made important progress on problems that communities of RPG theorists were concerned with (whether designers, players, or scholars, systematically or casually). Solutions to those problems didn't create new space for RPG, but clarified and structured space already in view. I'm reading The Elusive Shift at present, and perhaps will have a differing view of that later on. Design arcs such as FUDGE to FATE are of interest to me.Your question here might be more one of whether 5e can be naturally and consistently interpreted to play as story-now? As you and others have pointed out, there is some rules support in TIBFs and Inspiration. I currently see fiction-first and story-now as sympathetic rather than synonymous.When we discussed the LP earlier, this was something I was trying to get at. System does seem to do some work beyond ensuring agreement. The possibility of differing systems producing differing experiences seems to require it. The LP describes what is necessary, but doesn't say what is sufficient (to create such differences.) What does system do to make the imagining we agree to, the particular play experience?Exactly. Failure alone isn't sufficient. 5e* insists on the upholding of the DMG 237 rule, and through insistence on reaching meaningful narration, ensures that rule influences the game holistically.Reflecting here on conversation about FK a few months back, 5e* says that DM doesn't need to be told expressly what to narrate. 5e* even suspects it might be better to leave that up to DM (due in part to skepticism about the possibility of complete instructions.)Good questions, and I do plan to explore that. Not today though (work looms.)As I anticipated, it's easy to quibble my examples. They're simply the most barebones case that had so far come up. With them I only wanted to address some basic doubts. Recollecting that I say fictional positioning is the total set of all of the valid gameplay options available to player at this moment of play. I believe they encourage understanding saying something meaningful, to be saying something that matters in the fiction (which it must, to produce coherent gameplay, given the F > S > F core loop!)Knowing your tastes, it has never been on my agenda to persuade you to play 5e, in any form! I'd sooner suspect your account of being usurped.<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" />I like the way you put that. Certainly I now believe that grasping the 5e* rule as an imperative regulatory rule successfully ensures players begin and end their core loop in the fiction. Interpreting "narrates" as "say something meaningful" ensures that the principle captured in the DMG 237 rule lives in the PHB 6 basic pattern, i.e. matters throughout. That is one way that it counts.</blockquote>

Verification