Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6424733" data-attributes="member: 42582">The textual change is small only if you don't care about who has authority over what.The Classic rulebook gives, as examples, the availability of certain goods or services. This is about the player determining that certain stuff is available to his/her PC, although his/her PC did not create that stuff. The Mega rulebook gives, as an example, the infiltration of a smuggling ring (I'm not sure how I mistyped that in my earlier post!). This about resolving something within the scope of the PC's causal agency.These are differences in the allocation of authority over the availability of stuff to PCs. If you're trying to look at who was authority over what, that is a salient difference.From my point of view, I would describe it as a nerfing of Streetwise. From the point of view of many posters in this thread, though, I would expect it to be considered an improvement: it clearly puts the authority over what stuff is available to the PCs back into the hands of the GM. I would have expected you to agree with that approach.Traveller has no binding social mechanics. That is why I describe the "infiltration of a smuggling ring" as illusionism. Contrast, say, the Traveller combat rules: absent GM fudging, these are binding and hence not illusionistic. Contrast also [MENTION=386]LostSoul[/MENTION]'s game: he as GM randomly determined the availability of rocket ships, but then the PC was able to obtain one via binding social resolution. LostSoul's game is not illusionist either, although it deploys a different mechanical approach from the one I have been favouring in this thread.As to whether the late-80s to mid-90s favoured non-binding mechanics, that is a bigger issue but I think the emphasis on GM override of mechanical outcomes "in the interests of the story", found in many RPGs from that period including AD&D and the White Wolf games, tends to support my characterisation. I think in this sort of game having "Streetwise-3" on my PC sheet isn't so much about being able to achieve definite outcomes within the fiction, but rather is about conveying a certain flavour in respect of my character: he's the streetwise guy! Which the GM should then pay some regard to in narrating outcomes, NPC reactions etc.</blockquote>

Verification