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
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: 8535227" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p>Right, so PACE has this issue, which is addressed better in PbtAs (and probably is why I haven't run it in a while, one reason anyway) which is it can be hard to 'get back to the fiction' sometimes. Jon is 'Debonair: 4' and Jill (an NPC) is 'Hard as Nails: 3'. Jon needs to seduce Jill (we'll assume there's a motive here, which is pure fiction that we start from, as well as fictional position putting them in an appropriate situation). So, Jon's player naturally declares some sort of action, "Jon, using his skill with the ladies, picks an opportune moment and kisses Jill." The GM decides this is no foregone conclusion, Jill's motivations aren't entirely compatible with Jon's, he's going to have to stake something on the outcome. Now, he SHOULD at this point need, fictionally, to describe some stake, at the very least perhaps his actions could put her off and make him look bad. As the GM has called this a conflict, however, its pretty easy to leave all that unstated and the player can simply say "well, I have 4 points on my side, for Debonair." The GM could simply respond likewise "well, I have 3 points for Hard as Nails, and I spend 2 more from my pool, for 5..." But what actually happened? You can run this mechanical 'boxes' auction and its so general it can represent anything, and you don't even have to say. I mean, you SHOULD say, but its too easy not to. Its not like DW where you really CANNOT proceed without fiction. Now, I think this is a lot like what Baker was complaining about with In a Wicked Age, and the observation that it "eventually catches up with you" is equally valid. At SOME POINT we will have to know what happened between Jon and Jill in fictional terms! (maybe it will just remain untold, depending on the direction things take, perhaps). At the very best we've not resolved something about Jon's character. Did he try to force himself on her? Had she heard about how he treated her friend Jane? Does he actually have feelings for her? And if so, how can he show that when he's just seen by everyone as an insincere lady-killer (as implied by his trait)? Unless we actually attach the fiction to the mechanics, we won't know, but the PACE system doesn't really have a way to put 'teeth' on the fiction (not surprising, its author described it as a game that was just written as an exercise, and it is only a few pages long).</p><p></p><p>Yeah, I think admonishing the GM to say 'what matters' and then taking every such statement of fiction as being NECESSARILY important and thus worthy of some rightward arrow is OK. It might, for instance, be a sort of way to fix PACE, where you say "well, lets add points for situation, anything I say as GM matters, and if you can describe how it helps you, then I MUST grant you the right to spent points on it." It still needs to be coupled with stronger reasons to tie back to fiction, like maybe the player can ONLY spend points on things that the GM describes in his part of the fiction, or something like that. You then need DW-like principles to insure the GM actually does it, etc. The problem here being, DW STARTS at the principles, PACE starts at a bidding system. Its a bit of a fun game for one-offs, but unless the players are pretty versed in Story Game, it won't work well. I think 5e* has analogous issues. You and I and Manbearcat could sit down and play a Story Now game with it that would work, but I'm pretty sure if some of the other posters here run it, even sticking to the 'letter of the law' for narration, it will come across as just D&D, bog standard. Maybe GOOD D&D, but not different from any other good 5e game.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 8535227, member: 82106"] Right, so PACE has this issue, which is addressed better in PbtAs (and probably is why I haven't run it in a while, one reason anyway) which is it can be hard to 'get back to the fiction' sometimes. Jon is 'Debonair: 4' and Jill (an NPC) is 'Hard as Nails: 3'. Jon needs to seduce Jill (we'll assume there's a motive here, which is pure fiction that we start from, as well as fictional position putting them in an appropriate situation). So, Jon's player naturally declares some sort of action, "Jon, using his skill with the ladies, picks an opportune moment and kisses Jill." The GM decides this is no foregone conclusion, Jill's motivations aren't entirely compatible with Jon's, he's going to have to stake something on the outcome. Now, he SHOULD at this point need, fictionally, to describe some stake, at the very least perhaps his actions could put her off and make him look bad. As the GM has called this a conflict, however, its pretty easy to leave all that unstated and the player can simply say "well, I have 4 points on my side, for Debonair." The GM could simply respond likewise "well, I have 3 points for Hard as Nails, and I spend 2 more from my pool, for 5..." But what actually happened? You can run this mechanical 'boxes' auction and its so general it can represent anything, and you don't even have to say. I mean, you SHOULD say, but its too easy not to. Its not like DW where you really CANNOT proceed without fiction. Now, I think this is a lot like what Baker was complaining about with In a Wicked Age, and the observation that it "eventually catches up with you" is equally valid. At SOME POINT we will have to know what happened between Jon and Jill in fictional terms! (maybe it will just remain untold, depending on the direction things take, perhaps). At the very best we've not resolved something about Jon's character. Did he try to force himself on her? Had she heard about how he treated her friend Jane? Does he actually have feelings for her? And if so, how can he show that when he's just seen by everyone as an insincere lady-killer (as implied by his trait)? Unless we actually attach the fiction to the mechanics, we won't know, but the PACE system doesn't really have a way to put 'teeth' on the fiction (not surprising, its author described it as a game that was just written as an exercise, and it is only a few pages long). Yeah, I think admonishing the GM to say 'what matters' and then taking every such statement of fiction as being NECESSARILY important and thus worthy of some rightward arrow is OK. It might, for instance, be a sort of way to fix PACE, where you say "well, lets add points for situation, anything I say as GM matters, and if you can describe how it helps you, then I MUST grant you the right to spent points on it." It still needs to be coupled with stronger reasons to tie back to fiction, like maybe the player can ONLY spend points on things that the GM describes in his part of the fiction, or something like that. You then need DW-like principles to insure the GM actually does it, etc. The problem here being, DW STARTS at the principles, PACE starts at a bidding system. Its a bit of a fun game for one-offs, but unless the players are pretty versed in Story Game, it won't work well. I think 5e* has analogous issues. You and I and Manbearcat could sit down and play a Story Now game with it that would work, but I'm pretty sure if some of the other posters here run it, even sticking to the 'letter of the law' for narration, it will come across as just D&D, bog standard. Maybe GOOD D&D, but not different from any other good 5e game. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
5e* - D&D-now
Top