Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="kenada" data-source="post: 9243377" data-attributes="member: 70468">Even in a system that allows the GM to decide a situation in whatever way, the decision is still about that situation. That is suggestive of certain dynamics. How the audience feels about that is the area of experiences not dynamics.The point of a framework like MDA and DDE is to organize your thinking in a way that allows you to reason about your design. The separation of dynamics and experiences is purposeful to that end. It separates aspects you can control fully (even if indirectly) from those you can’t. Mixing those things together undermines the purpose of the framework.I would speculate that the reason why it seems impossible to apply a framework like this to tabletop RPG design is due to certain assumptions and a lack of worked examples of how it would be done. I attempted to do some of the latter in <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/a-neotrad-ttrpg-design-manifesto.701957/post-9239804" target="_blank">post #245</a> to analyze 4e and PF2, but there are no examples of such a framework being applied systematically to design a whole game. The fact that this thread is in the top ten results on Google for “MDA tabletop RPG” is a reflection of the sad state of affairs.</blockquote>