Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
5e* - D&D-now
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 8528358" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p>I think the main observation I have is that we have rather different conceptions of what constitute 'arrows', or maybe an alternative way to put it is what is really substantive. So, if a player states that the motivation for their character to do X is something fictional, and X is a mechanically governed procedure, and only other mechanically defined elements of the situation impact X, I wouldn't count that as "fiction being determinative of mechanics", the player could have said nothing about their motives and simply executed mechanical process X, the result would be substantively the same. </p><p></p><p>Some things are more grey areas. If a PC attempts to convince an NPC of something, we have both RP as a potential avenue for that, or we could have a check of some sort. In the later case there isn't, in a game like 5e, a definitive way to state that all checks followed from fiction or not. I think the substantive test would be "would the check be made differently if the player described their action differently?" or more broadly, did they have to speak a specific fiction to invoke that check? Sometimes the answer could be basically 'no', basically the fiction could have merely been an indicator that the GM (or even player) should invoke a roll of the dice. Your example shows a case where the GM decides no roll is required at all, but this seems less dependent on the specific fiction spoken by a player than on the general situation and considerations of overall motive.</p><p></p><p>So, fiction is clearly important, and it may be that there are points here where it directly impinges on how the mechanics work, or a mechanic has to reference fiction in order to be arbitrated. OTOH I think a lot of cases might be just as easily classified as 'mechanics with color'. Do the motives of the Clement for example matter? Mechanically he moves forward and invokes a class ability (or maybe its a spell, I am not so familiar with 5e bards, etc.). Do the character's stated motives impact this action? I don't see how. </p><p></p><p>IMHO this is a characteristic of really 'ground up' story games, that the fiction actively determines what mechanics happen, and how and why, and/or the mechanics directly reference fictional conditions which must be adjudged, and aren't simply codified in a cue already. Default 5e has, for example, no grid, and thus any factors of position and such must be purely adjudged via reference to existing fiction, that is to the shared imagined state of things. So, when you play "Theater of the Mind" there is likely to be a greater linkage between mechanics and fiction, perhaps. Honestly, my core observation is that there's a fundamental difference of process between say, DW and IMHO anything that is likely to arise in 5e via practices I've ever experienced using that and similar systems. They can be fairly similar at times, but DW, in my experience, will consistently do things differently and in a way that puts the PC's fiction more at the center of play. </p><p></p><p>So, for instance, I cannot conceive of how you could possibly write a 'module' for DW. It just doesn't seem possible to me. Not in the sense that you could for 5e, where you could build entire geographies of elements that are almost entirely described and populated by threats that have been pregenerated without reference to anything relating to specific characters. The most a DW 'module' could do, IMHO, would be to present some loose geography, some fronts, etc. and even then it would have to be advertised as "here's a specifically themed set of elements that could be presented in the form of GM prep, assuming the players agree to the whole thing beforehand and make up characters with this in mind." I'd note that this is a bit different from the default expected DW process, though I'm sure it can be made to work with a little thought.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 8528358, member: 82106"] I think the main observation I have is that we have rather different conceptions of what constitute 'arrows', or maybe an alternative way to put it is what is really substantive. So, if a player states that the motivation for their character to do X is something fictional, and X is a mechanically governed procedure, and only other mechanically defined elements of the situation impact X, I wouldn't count that as "fiction being determinative of mechanics", the player could have said nothing about their motives and simply executed mechanical process X, the result would be substantively the same. Some things are more grey areas. If a PC attempts to convince an NPC of something, we have both RP as a potential avenue for that, or we could have a check of some sort. In the later case there isn't, in a game like 5e, a definitive way to state that all checks followed from fiction or not. I think the substantive test would be "would the check be made differently if the player described their action differently?" or more broadly, did they have to speak a specific fiction to invoke that check? Sometimes the answer could be basically 'no', basically the fiction could have merely been an indicator that the GM (or even player) should invoke a roll of the dice. Your example shows a case where the GM decides no roll is required at all, but this seems less dependent on the specific fiction spoken by a player than on the general situation and considerations of overall motive. So, fiction is clearly important, and it may be that there are points here where it directly impinges on how the mechanics work, or a mechanic has to reference fiction in order to be arbitrated. OTOH I think a lot of cases might be just as easily classified as 'mechanics with color'. Do the motives of the Clement for example matter? Mechanically he moves forward and invokes a class ability (or maybe its a spell, I am not so familiar with 5e bards, etc.). Do the character's stated motives impact this action? I don't see how. IMHO this is a characteristic of really 'ground up' story games, that the fiction actively determines what mechanics happen, and how and why, and/or the mechanics directly reference fictional conditions which must be adjudged, and aren't simply codified in a cue already. Default 5e has, for example, no grid, and thus any factors of position and such must be purely adjudged via reference to existing fiction, that is to the shared imagined state of things. So, when you play "Theater of the Mind" there is likely to be a greater linkage between mechanics and fiction, perhaps. Honestly, my core observation is that there's a fundamental difference of process between say, DW and IMHO anything that is likely to arise in 5e via practices I've ever experienced using that and similar systems. They can be fairly similar at times, but DW, in my experience, will consistently do things differently and in a way that puts the PC's fiction more at the center of play. So, for instance, I cannot conceive of how you could possibly write a 'module' for DW. It just doesn't seem possible to me. Not in the sense that you could for 5e, where you could build entire geographies of elements that are almost entirely described and populated by threats that have been pregenerated without reference to anything relating to specific characters. The most a DW 'module' could do, IMHO, would be to present some loose geography, some fronts, etc. and even then it would have to be advertised as "here's a specifically themed set of elements that could be presented in the form of GM prep, assuming the players agree to the whole thing beforehand and make up characters with this in mind." I'd note that this is a bit different from the default expected DW process, though I'm sure it can be made to work with a little thought. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
5e* - D&D-now
Top