D&D 5E D&D compared to Bespoke Genre TTRPGs

[AbdulAlhazred]

You've failed to explain how my argument is "facile" in any bad way, so that's really just kind of a weird insult-y way of admitting I'm "technically correct, the best kind of correct".

Certainly you appeared to imply that there's some kind of mandate or principle to "swing for the fences" in all PtbA games, and I was being weird, but even a cursory examination of DW (which I have in front of me) shows that definitely isn't true there. And the range of moves you have is frequently extremely constrained.

As for "limited only by the fiction", well one good example in DW where I feel like you're demonstrably wrong is debilities. You can basically go wild inflicting them on PCs (nothing suggests otherwise), and equally you can do stuff like rip out people's hamstrings or chop off their arms and so on whilst staying within the fiction, and you going hog-wild on that is going to very rapidly see the adventurers all crippled or incapable, and unless they have the right magic, which they probably don't.

Also in the D&D-style settings "SURPRISE DRAGON" can be following the fiction (though at least in DW there's a decent chance they'll beat it). I can think of multiple D&D adventures featuring a "surprise dragon". Hell, Thunderspire Labyrinth, H2 for 4E, had one for example (a Green Dragon in a place that makes zero sense and where the attempted explanation for its presence does not at all make the situation better).

Here's the thing: In Dungeon World, what actually is the measure of the 'hardness' of a move? I mean, you have a loop where the players roll checks on 2d6 against whatever move they are making. There's no adjustments to this. DW doesn't have "DC" where when you fight a dragon you gotta roll a 20 to do anything against it! One move isn't 'harder' than another. GM moves are either 'soft' (IE they simply evolve the fiction and don't invoke a specific immediate threat) or they are 'hard' and they do. The former are setup moves, which allow the GM to build the tension. The hard moves then release it.

The only other element here in DW is resources. PCs have hit points, and they have various gear, coin, etc. They also have whatever fictional relationships and such exist for them, which are less formalized resources (IE your family, your town, your friends). The GM can threaten the later (or the former) and the resources can be expended, which is basically a soft move (often a consequence of a player move). These are just there to up the tension and maybe add to the fiction a bit. Really, about all the GM decides is hard vs soft (does Jason leap out at you, or do you hear some noise) and what resources have you still got (did you drop the knife when you ran or not).

Again, there's no 'difficulty' in PbtA game play. You aren't 'letting out all the stops' or 'going easy'. Every check has the same success threshold, no matter what. Everything that happens leads from one move and its check to the next. The fiction is what matters, the mechanics just tick along.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

While I generally agree with this statement I believe at least the character who repeated adventured in the dreamlands did so without going insane. I could be wrong, but that is my recollection. He had a campaign's worth of adventures.

I'm pretty sure that guy didn't physically go there, and I don't think he had anywhere near that many adventures.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Dungeon World is structured with a set of agenda and principles that, in light of the rest of the games mechanics, pretty well shows you what to do next. The GM is the 'fan of the PCs', his agenda is basically to give them a chance to be big heroes by pushing them, throwing adversity at them, and seeing what happens. If they get themselves out of one pickle (out of the frying pan) by gosh you make the "Reveal an Unwelcome Truth" move and now THEY ARE IN THE FIRE!

I mean, sure, in PbtA games it is up to the GM to figure out what move to make in order to frame things in the direction the players want to go, and to introduce pressure and drive the story forward. You DO have choices. However, if you read the rules carefully there is a lot of very solid GMing advice, and a number of subsystems like fronts and dooms, that naturally reinforce a virtuous cycle. And honestly, the fiction, and how exactly you interpret it mechanically can help set the tone of the game. You can make the PCs be almost super hero-like, or they can seem practically like just schmucks grubbing in the dust. That's where the flexibility really is in terms of what games a PbtA can run.

FitD is MUCH more process intensive and pretty much everything drives off of position and what sorts of effect the players can get, etc. The GM in that game is not free to set these constraints, normally. They will be mostly dictated by the rules. A threat of a certain tier in a given situation generates a certain initial position (modulated by a die roll). From there things evolve based on what choices the players make and what the dice produce. The GM is just serving it up and creating scenes as needed.

Was totally with you until you started talking about FitD and position/effect.

Position is entirely set by the framed situation and what the player declares as an action. Tier has nothing to do with it. It's a straightforward decision by the GM as to what the consequence space for that action in this situation is. Tier difference does show up in Effect, but only after the GM determines the Effect. The GM evaluates how successful the action will be at gaining the goal and sets the Effect accordingly. If I want to kill that thug, using a sword will have good Effect. Using a toothpick will have little or no effect. Then, once this is set, teir differences modify it. If the thug is a highrr teir than me, the Effect is lessened to reflect he's more badass/has training/has better gear than me. If my toothpick is of higher quality than the thug, it's more effective.

But, at it's base, Position and Effect are set by the GM based on the current fiction and the declared action.

This new tech in FitD over PbtA is that these things more tightly indicate and constrain the outcomes and put the risk/reward negotiation up front and clearly player facing.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Again, there's no 'difficulty' in PbtA game play. You aren't 'letting out all the stops' or 'going easy'. Every check has the same success threshold, no matter what. Everything that happens leads from one move and its check to the next. The fiction is what matters, the mechanics just tick along.

Sure, I don't really disagree with this, most of what you're saying is just irrelevant to what I've been saying. My original point is that I don't find DW a particularly "unconstrained" game, I find it pretty constrained as a DM.

 

[Ovinomancer]

You're going to have skill bonuses as well I would think. But to your bigger point... It's weird if you view Lovecraft's mythos through a specific lens which, IMO is fine but he's not really consistent on the point in his stories, especially when it comes to the protagonists.

There's nothing in the stories anywhere that even suggests that a higher level of sanity is beneficial to understanding what's going on. Sanity is a cost in Lovecraft stories, it's not a tool that helps ypu understand what's going on better.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

So it's the act of interacting with the spell that causes madness... not madness that allows one to interact with the spell.


Yep... exactly. It's the truth that drives you mad, not madness that allows you to interact with the truth.



Okay let's put the term rationality to the side and use San as it is presented in the DMG (as this is what we are really discussing)... it is the minds ability to stay level headed and not be broken by the unearthly things that they see or comprehend. DO you think being stronger in this ability would or would not allow one to interact with the mythos better or worse?

EDIT: Remember sanity and madness are 2 separate but inter-related things.

Yes, you can be a sane madman by 5e's rules! ROFLMAO! Sorry, it is just pretty much not a good rule. I mean, there's something there, but it just doesn't make that much sense fictionally and definitely isn't serving Mythos tropes all that well. I'm sure we COULD create a SAN/Madness system that worked, but it would require more changes in the game. Is it really worth it? Probably not. What is there may work, or be tweakable to work, for some use cases. If you want to go further than that, probably 5e is not the right game to do it in.

 

[Imaro]

There's nothing in the stories anywhere that even suggests that a higher level of sanity is beneficial to understanding what's going on. Sanity is a cost in Lovecraft stories, it's not a tool that helps ypu understand what's going on better.

Sanity as presented in the DMG (as your ability not to break when confronted with the mythos)... not your personal definition... could help you understand better.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Sure, I don't really disagree with this, most of what you're saying is just irrelevant to what I've been saying. My original point is that I don't find DW a particularly "unconstrained" game, I find it pretty constrained as a DM.

Of course it is, no one has made any statement to the contrary. Where and what they constraints are, though, is different from D&D. D&D is also a pretty constrained game. Most people are so used to the shackles, though, that they don't even notice. The most common reaction I see to the suggestion ypu don't have to do it like D&D does is incredulity and denial. "You can't just do it like that! That's not even an RPG!"

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Yes, you can be a sane madman by 5e's rules! ROFLMAO! Sorry, it is just pretty much not a good rule. I mean, there's something there, but it just doesn't make that much sense fictionally and definitely isn't serving Mythos tropes all that well. I'm sure we COULD create a SAN/Madness system that worked, but it would require more changes in the game. Is it really worth it? Probably not. What is there may work, or be tweakable to work, for some use cases. If you want to go further than that, probably 5e is not the right game to do it in.

It's really easy dude I showed how to do it in like three paragraphs upthread. You just separate SAN and ALN (Alienation), make it mandatory that they always total to 20. SAN is used for saves, Alienation is used for ability checks.

 

[Imaro]

Yes, you can be a sane madman by 5e's rules! ROFLMAO! Sorry, it is just pretty much not a good rule. I mean, there's something there, but it just doesn't make that much sense fictionally and definitely isn't serving Mythos tropes all that well. I'm sure we COULD create a SAN/Madness system that worked, but it would require more changes in the game. Is it really worth it? Probably not. What is there may work, or be tweakable to work, for some use cases. If you want to go further than that, probably 5e is not the right game to do it in.

Well the good thing is it doesn't dictate what "sane" is. Sanity is an ability but we don't know what sane vs insane is. Instead we have a sliding scale of your ability not to break when confronted by the mythos and that very much could help you dela with the mythos... I keep seeing people interject their own definitions of sanity as opposed to using it as defined in the DMG and I think it's creating confusion.

Sanity per the DMG isn't how sane you are it's your resistance to how badly the mythos affects you when you encounter it. In other words when you look on the blaspemous book do you fall down into a heap sobbing, shake it off as slightly disturbing or loose some of that ability to resist the worst effects of being confronted by the mythos. .