Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
A neotrad TTRPG design manifesto
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="pemerton" data-source="post: 9239852" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>I found this - plus your back-and-forth with [USER=70468]@kenada[/USER] about the FL actual play - helpful in terms of what you are looking for and what you regard as a disappointment in that respect.</p><p></p><p>But I'm a bit unclear on something, as I will try to explain. To frame my question:</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px">*I think we all (that is, at least you, me and [USER=70468]@kenada[/USER]) agree that there is Hickman-ish trad. Heavily influenced by Edwards, Baker and Harper, I would describe this as being based around somewhat toothless resolution mechanics with a good dose of GM-as-glue to make sure the desired experience is nevertheless delivered. From other threads I think you might describe it slightly differently, but still I think we agree that this is a <em>thing</em>.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">*I think we all agree that there is Baker-ish "indie"/"story now" which eschews GM-as-glue (ie it makes the GM a "player" in some sense, as this thread has canvassed in perhaps tedious and ideologically-riven detail). While still aimed at "an experience", this sort of RPGing does not characterise that experience in terms of a particular GM-curated story.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">*And I think maybe we all agree that there are modern RPGs that borrow some indie-type mechanics (eg more player-facing rolls; clearer GM-side guidelines and techniques that facilitate cutting to the action; etc) which nevertheless aim to deliver an overall experience similar to Hickman-ish trad - to be a bit crude about it, the experience would be Hickmani-ish trad but with cruft like encumbrance completely removed, and with better systems used to reduce the ad hocery on the GM side. But the GM still remains glue(-ish) in a way that is different from Baker's games.</p><p></p><p>Now [USER=70468]@kenada[/USER] calls the last thing "neo-trad" (I think) and sees the meaning of the "neo-" simply being that it is up-to-date in its design. (To reiterate my own crudity, it cuts away cruft from legacy RPG design, and uses better systems to reduce ad hocery.)</p><p></p><p>I am also happy to call the last thing "neo-trad", but have a question about it: namely, if it integrates the indie methods in more than a superficial way, it's goal of overall GM curation will come under pressure. (And perhaps this just means that, by my lights, the integration of indie methods is merely superficial.)</p><p></p><p>But you, [USER=71699]@clearstream[/USER], seem to see at least some of the games falling under my third and last dot point as <em>failures</em> from the point of view of your manifesto - as in, they are really just "trad" with no genuine "neo". And I'm curious as to what you envisage the "neo" being, that goes beyond the games you see as failures but that doesn't just amount to a game being a Baker-ish indie game (ie an example of my second dot point).</p><p></p><p>I hope this question to you - [USER=71699]@clearstream[/USER] - makes sense!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 9239852, member: 42582"] I found this - plus your back-and-forth with [USER=70468]@kenada[/USER] about the FL actual play - helpful in terms of what you are looking for and what you regard as a disappointment in that respect. But I'm a bit unclear on something, as I will try to explain. To frame my question: [indent]*I think we all (that is, at least you, me and [USER=70468]@kenada[/USER]) agree that there is Hickman-ish trad. Heavily influenced by Edwards, Baker and Harper, I would describe this as being based around somewhat toothless resolution mechanics with a good dose of GM-as-glue to make sure the desired experience is nevertheless delivered. From other threads I think you might describe it slightly differently, but still I think we agree that this is a [i]thing[/i]. *I think we all agree that there is Baker-ish "indie"/"story now" which eschews GM-as-glue (ie it makes the GM a "player" in some sense, as this thread has canvassed in perhaps tedious and ideologically-riven detail). While still aimed at "an experience", this sort of RPGing does not characterise that experience in terms of a particular GM-curated story. *And I think maybe we all agree that there are modern RPGs that borrow some indie-type mechanics (eg more player-facing rolls; clearer GM-side guidelines and techniques that facilitate cutting to the action; etc) which nevertheless aim to deliver an overall experience similar to Hickman-ish trad - to be a bit crude about it, the experience would be Hickmani-ish trad but with cruft like encumbrance completely removed, and with better systems used to reduce the ad hocery on the GM side. But the GM still remains glue(-ish) in a way that is different from Baker's games.[/indent] Now [USER=70468]@kenada[/USER] calls the last thing "neo-trad" (I think) and sees the meaning of the "neo-" simply being that it is up-to-date in its design. (To reiterate my own crudity, it cuts away cruft from legacy RPG design, and uses better systems to reduce ad hocery.) I am also happy to call the last thing "neo-trad", but have a question about it: namely, if it integrates the indie methods in more than a superficial way, it's goal of overall GM curation will come under pressure. (And perhaps this just means that, by my lights, the integration of indie methods is merely superficial.) But you, [USER=71699]@clearstream[/USER], seem to see at least some of the games falling under my third and last dot point as [I]failures[/I] from the point of view of your manifesto - as in, they are really just "trad" with no genuine "neo". And I'm curious as to what you envisage the "neo" being, that goes beyond the games you see as failures but that doesn't just amount to a game being a Baker-ish indie game (ie an example of my second dot point). I hope this question to you - [USER=71699]@clearstream[/USER] - makes sense! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
A neotrad TTRPG design manifesto
Top