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
Creativity?
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: 8930976" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p>See, I found the fact that 4e was fairly 'loose' in terms of the effects part (not entirely, it hard quantified jumping for instance) was pretty cool. So, you were always going to want to produce faithful fiction of a sort which matches well with the levels the PCs are at, so epic PCs have epic DCs to climb, but the thing they are climbing is a diabolical ice wall in Cania that is -100C and SENTIENT.</p><p></p><p>Either I am far from understanding what you are saying here, or we are very far from agreement. I would say there IS NOTHING more fundamental in terms of process of play (loop if you will) than what is described in, say Dungeon World. It is the very essence of the activity of RPGs shorn of most of its baggage (and then a measured amount is layered back on atop the core).</p><p></p><p>Better in what way? You have to first HAVE an agenda, and the idea of decisions you CAN make also implies ones you CANNOT make, which now brings us to things like genre.</p><p></p><p>What are you trying to achieve? I had this argument a billion times in the 4e days WRT the 19 item skill list of 4e. Someone would invoke a scenario, lets say the lighting of the signal fire, and insist that there must be some sort of skill that has to cover lighting signal fires. My answer is, no, because you aren't trying to light a signal fire, you are TRYING TO SIGNAL SOMEONE, and you are doing so for some purpose. Lets say the purpose is to get rescued, then "Roll a Survival check to see if you can light the fire and attract one of the ships sailing by in the channel." Notice how this is now WHAT you want to accomplish, and not HOW you are accomplishing it. The how is the fiction, and can be any genre appropriate description. That description might feed back into the mechanics too, So if you pour a flask of oil (IE use up a resource) on the beacon, maybe the DC is a bit lower. </p><p></p><p>I mean, sure, PCs desire success and not failure, presumably or they wouldn't bother to do stuff. Its a bit more complicated with PLAYERS, and they're the actual motive force here.</p><p></p><p>Again though, you are only saying relevant things within a very specific agenda. So, sure, it may be that your D&D game is all about acquiring big piles of loot, getting to level 20, and not getting killed. Given that agenda you can make statements about 'good' or 'bad' play. I can equally make exactly the same sorts of statements about my BitD play, except the goals will be a lot different, because the agenda is different.</p><p></p><p>Well, actually, IME declarations of intent, and games operating on units of intention and not material quantification, is a stronger type of design all around. RARELY is it a GM's goal to subvert PC's intent. It is generally in those sorts of games the goal of the GM to make things 'follow' and see what happens as you play. So when the character says he's going to attract some ships that are in the channel to rescue him, then maybe if, in DW, he rolls crappy on his Defy Danger (lets call this 'suffers a calamity', this check is resolving the character being stranded on an island) then if he rolls a 6-, yeah, maybe he doesn't manage to build the fire and the ships go by. Maybe on a 7-9 the ship that approaches is a pirate ship, nasty vicious pirates who like to take slaves. That doesn't seem at all like 'using it against you', and in fact in DW the concept of the GM using things against you doesn't REALLY make sense! I mean, yes, he could leverage a part of your backstory to describe an 'unpleasant truth' or some such, but the GM is already making that move, what fiction is employed is secondary! If it wasn't "your sister is sick" it would something else, "plague rats are coming" or whatever.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 8930976, member: 82106"] See, I found the fact that 4e was fairly 'loose' in terms of the effects part (not entirely, it hard quantified jumping for instance) was pretty cool. So, you were always going to want to produce faithful fiction of a sort which matches well with the levels the PCs are at, so epic PCs have epic DCs to climb, but the thing they are climbing is a diabolical ice wall in Cania that is -100C and SENTIENT. Either I am far from understanding what you are saying here, or we are very far from agreement. I would say there IS NOTHING more fundamental in terms of process of play (loop if you will) than what is described in, say Dungeon World. It is the very essence of the activity of RPGs shorn of most of its baggage (and then a measured amount is layered back on atop the core). Better in what way? You have to first HAVE an agenda, and the idea of decisions you CAN make also implies ones you CANNOT make, which now brings us to things like genre. What are you trying to achieve? I had this argument a billion times in the 4e days WRT the 19 item skill list of 4e. Someone would invoke a scenario, lets say the lighting of the signal fire, and insist that there must be some sort of skill that has to cover lighting signal fires. My answer is, no, because you aren't trying to light a signal fire, you are TRYING TO SIGNAL SOMEONE, and you are doing so for some purpose. Lets say the purpose is to get rescued, then "Roll a Survival check to see if you can light the fire and attract one of the ships sailing by in the channel." Notice how this is now WHAT you want to accomplish, and not HOW you are accomplishing it. The how is the fiction, and can be any genre appropriate description. That description might feed back into the mechanics too, So if you pour a flask of oil (IE use up a resource) on the beacon, maybe the DC is a bit lower. I mean, sure, PCs desire success and not failure, presumably or they wouldn't bother to do stuff. Its a bit more complicated with PLAYERS, and they're the actual motive force here. Again though, you are only saying relevant things within a very specific agenda. So, sure, it may be that your D&D game is all about acquiring big piles of loot, getting to level 20, and not getting killed. Given that agenda you can make statements about 'good' or 'bad' play. I can equally make exactly the same sorts of statements about my BitD play, except the goals will be a lot different, because the agenda is different. Well, actually, IME declarations of intent, and games operating on units of intention and not material quantification, is a stronger type of design all around. RARELY is it a GM's goal to subvert PC's intent. It is generally in those sorts of games the goal of the GM to make things 'follow' and see what happens as you play. So when the character says he's going to attract some ships that are in the channel to rescue him, then maybe if, in DW, he rolls crappy on his Defy Danger (lets call this 'suffers a calamity', this check is resolving the character being stranded on an island) then if he rolls a 6-, yeah, maybe he doesn't manage to build the fire and the ships go by. Maybe on a 7-9 the ship that approaches is a pirate ship, nasty vicious pirates who like to take slaves. That doesn't seem at all like 'using it against you', and in fact in DW the concept of the GM using things against you doesn't REALLY make sense! I mean, yes, he could leverage a part of your backstory to describe an 'unpleasant truth' or some such, but the GM is already making that move, what fiction is employed is secondary! If it wasn't "your sister is sick" it would something else, "plague rats are coming" or whatever. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Creativity?
Top