Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 9722054" data-attributes="member: 71699">So far I'm finding it fits very much in the space of neotrad.Our GM comes to it from GMing Avatar (PbtA). Two players come to it from D&amp;D and one from MotW. I come to it from my own wide-ranging tastes. We're commencing a coop Ironsworn campaign on the side with some of the same players (both of the D&amp;D players). I mention all that because I feel like we're not drifting it toward trad... we're doing what the game demands. Such actual plays as I've listened to, to see what others may be doing, reinforce this impression.The GM/player relationship is quite traditional. I noticed that game text like Campaign Frames keeps players in actor and audience mode, without suggesting authorship, even while reminding of Fronts. Or similarly that the things players can do with hope that I've thus far seen are diegetic. Class abilities are more like D&amp;D class features than PbtA moves. The class+ancestry+community structure mirrors 5e mutatis mutandis, with community features carrying out the job that D&amp;D backgrounds do, just with more efficiency/constructive ambiguity (scopes aren't broken out into a separate skills list.) The handling of adversaries of course reminds of 4e.There's undeniably a great many mechanics inherited from PbtA and its offshoots (and while many are more important, &quot;The Inciting Incident&quot; made me smile). I think we'll continue to see that trend in new releases.What excites me the most however is to try to identify where there have been innovations through synthesis. Which one would expect to bear fruit as neotrad evolves.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="clearstream, post: 9722054, member: 71699"] So far I'm finding it fits very much in the space of [B]neotrad[/B]. Our GM comes to it from GMing Avatar (PbtA). Two players come to it from D&D and one from MotW. I come to it from my own wide-ranging tastes. We're commencing a coop Ironsworn campaign on the side with some of the same players (both of the D&D players). I mention all that because I feel like we're not drifting it toward trad... we're doing what the game demands. Such actual plays as I've listened to, to see what others may be doing, reinforce this impression. The GM/player relationship is quite traditional. I noticed that game text like Campaign Frames keeps players in actor and audience mode, without suggesting authorship, even while reminding of Fronts. Or similarly that the things players can do with hope that I've thus far seen are diegetic. Class abilities are more like D&D class features than PbtA moves. The class+ancestry+community structure mirrors 5e [I]mutatis mutandis[/I], with community features carrying out the job that D&D backgrounds do, just with more efficiency/constructive ambiguity (scopes aren't broken out into a separate skills list.) The handling of adversaries of course reminds of 4e. There's undeniably a great many mechanics inherited from PbtA and its offshoots (and while many are more important, "The Inciting Incident" made me smile). I think we'll continue to see that trend in new releases. What excites me the most however is to try to identify where there have been innovations through synthesis. Which one would expect to bear fruit as neotrad evolves. [/QUOTE]

Verification