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
*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="kenada" data-source="post: 9240757" data-attributes="member: 70468"><p>Skill checks are roll versus a target number. It’s static + factors. Combat works on the same basic math, but the target number is the target’s Armor defense (= Proficiency + Block / Dodge / Parry). The key difference so far is both sides take swings while PCs make skill checks. This change would align skill check with checks in combat in that both sides could make them depending on the circumstances. The big unknown is how well this works in play and whether my players will go along with consequences setting.</p><p></p><p>That’s an important part of the solution. As I mentioned in <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/a-neotrad-ttrpg-design-manifesto.701957/post-9237265" target="_blank">post #161</a>, there’s a conflict of interest between being both an adjudicator and being a player. In most cases, which role to perform can be toggled by the rules with certain parameters on discretion. When you are initiating though, you can’t adjudicate your own action. That would create unwanted dynamics. Instead, the natural thing to do is to shift the foregrounding of consequences to the target. That should keep the dynamics intact while adding flexibility for when an NPC needs to make a move.</p><p></p><p style="text-align: center">⁂</p><p></p><p>To bring this back on topic, if I were looking at this from a perspective of “I’m making an X, which implies these kinds of mechanics,” I may not have considered this approach. It still could suck, but at least it’s something to try. That’s why I want to eschew manifestos and taxonomies. I don’t want to be constrained by rigid implications. Being able to reason about dynamics seems preferable to me.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="kenada, post: 9240757, member: 70468"] Skill checks are roll versus a target number. It’s static + factors. Combat works on the same basic math, but the target number is the target’s Armor defense (= Proficiency + Block / Dodge / Parry). The key difference so far is both sides take swings while PCs make skill checks. This change would align skill check with checks in combat in that both sides could make them depending on the circumstances. The big unknown is how well this works in play and whether my players will go along with consequences setting. That’s an important part of the solution. As I mentioned in [URL='https://www.enworld.org/threads/a-neotrad-ttrpg-design-manifesto.701957/post-9237265']post #161[/URL], there’s a conflict of interest between being both an adjudicator and being a player. In most cases, which role to perform can be toggled by the rules with certain parameters on discretion. When you are initiating though, you can’t adjudicate your own action. That would create unwanted dynamics. Instead, the natural thing to do is to shift the foregrounding of consequences to the target. That should keep the dynamics intact while adding flexibility for when an NPC needs to make a move. [CENTER]⁂[/CENTER] To bring this back on topic, if I were looking at this from a perspective of “I’m making an X, which implies these kinds of mechanics,” I may not have considered this approach. It still could suck, but at least it’s something to try. That’s why I want to eschew manifestos and taxonomies. I don’t want to be constrained by rigid implications. Being able to reason about dynamics seems preferable to me. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
A neotrad TTRPG design manifesto
Top