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
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Drifting games, genre limitations, and fruitful voids
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="DMZ2112" data-source="post: 8941790" data-attributes="member: 78752"><p>[SPOILER="Honest question: is NTBFW a move?"]I know the game describes it as such, but is it an action in the same vein as "go aggro," or is it just always on, something your character <em>is</em> versus something they <em>do? </em></p><p></p><p>In Blades in the Dark, the equivalent ability for Cutters has to be initiated by the character taking 2 Stress. It's also described as an action itself ("engage a small gang on equal footing in close combat"). Is there an equivalent idea in play in AW, here?</p><p></p><p>Looking at the Gunlugger playbook, only one of their "moves" (F**k this naughty word) actually looks like a move to me (i.e., an active-voice present-tense verb with an associated roll), and the others just appear to be always-on mods. Battle-hardened and Battlefield Instincts modify existing basic moves, and the rest don't appear to be actions at all. [/SPOILER]</p><p></p><p>This is entirely self-educational, as it doesn't really impact my point at all. I really like character-based "moves," in D&D and elsewhere. Choices about their character <em>should</em> both increase and decrease a player's options within the scenario, that's the point of having a character. That's interesting, and I have no trouble with it.</p><p></p><p>What I do have trouble with is a system having a list of nine basic moves (or 12 actions, to use the Blades example) to which everyone has access and which by necessity define all activity within the scenario (custom moves aside; I've already addressed that issue from my perspective). Controlling the scenario in this way, and for every participant, feels extremely artificial to me.</p><p></p><p></p><p>And it's this idea of genre emulation that is really at the core of my problem. I ran a D&D5 campaign from 2014-2019 that was mostly heroic fantasy, sure, but at intervals it was also:</p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">a horror game,</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">a detective game not unlike Gumshoe,</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">an eldritch mystery game not unlike Call of Cthulhu,</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">a game of political intrigue not unlike Vampire: the Masquerade, and</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">a game of building a criminal empire not unlike Blades in the Dark</li> </ul><p></p><p>--all without me modifying the rules. Now, I drew upon my knowledge of how these other games operated, certainly, but I felt constrained in terms of house rules, as the whole table was essentially new tabletop gamers. We got a little more adventurous later on, but for the most part I cleaved very closely to the core rules of the game.</p><p></p><p>Now, did D&D do any of these things as well as a dedicated system would have? Absolutely not. But could any of these dedicated systems be used to do this in turn? ...Maybe WoD. WoD covers some big swings in concept.</p><p></p><p>There's a ton of power in the PbtA format, it just asks the table to give up too much for my tastes.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I get this second point from fans of storygames (that's shorthand, not judgment) or refugees from D&D all the time, but it is a bad faith take. Bad D&D is bad D&D just like bad PbtA is bad PbtA or bad Fate is bad Fate, and I've suffered through all of these things.</p><p></p><p>Yes, a bad dungeon master is a failed novelist, and there are way more bad dungeon masters than there are bad gamemasters for other systems -- it's a matter of pure statistics -- but a good dungeon master doesn't bogart the fiction. There's nothing intrinsic to D&D that says the players have to be disenfranchised in this way.</p><p></p><p>Even Gygax understood this, I think, when he wrote in the 1st Edition DMG:</p><p></p><p></p><p>But even if I'm misinterpreting him there, narrativist D&D was in full swing by the release of Dragonlance in 1984. If a plurality of more vocal dungeon masters have chosen to disregard this premise of the game, it shouldn't reflect poorly on the rest of us or on the game itself.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Just for context, I played a little V:tM in my teens during the '90s, and a little more in the 2000s, but I'm still not sure if you are saying that PbtA exists because V:tM sucked (ha ha) or PbtA exists because V:tM deserved to be iterated upon. I could honestly go either way.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Hi, Pemerton. Nice to speak with you again. I hope you've been well. I missed your "long posts." <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>It sounds to me like what you are doing here is giving AW credit for not adjudicating mundane minutiae, and while I'd agree that's commendable, it's hardly unique. It's not that D&D (any edition) doesn't do this, it just does it by omission, which is apparently sufficient. As evidence, I'd note that you call out by name a number of games that insist on the adjudication of minutiae, and I'd agree that they, among others of their ilk, are at best open to substantial criticism and at worst relegated to the ash heap of history.</p><p></p><p>But to offer a counterpoint, there is a school of AW thought that states a player in AW shouldn't "declare whatever action they like for their PC," or at least that the "limits of genre and fiction" are more stringent than you are allowing for.</p><p></p><p>Just to provide corroboration, because I'm admittedly not part of this community, I feel like Justin Alexander<em> defends the validity of PbtA</em> by making many of the points I've made above in the below Twitter threads, which I stumbled across while researching AW custom moves. I'm not going to retread, but as a summary:</p><p></p><p></p><p>[MEDIA=twitter]1281034984371957760[/MEDIA]</p><p>[MEDIA=twitter]1281266114924670976[/MEDIA]</p><p></p><p></p><p>I do want to restate that I'm really only talking about my own opinions and preferences, here, and what works for me. I'm not trying to denigrate PbtA, or FitD, or the playstyle or preferences of anyone who enjoy them. It's a diverse hobby, and I think that's great. My experiences with PbtA have been unfortunately disappointing, and while my experiences with FitD have been better, making that format work for me still takes a lot of effort.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="DMZ2112, post: 8941790, member: 78752"] [SPOILER="Honest question: is NTBFW a move?"]I know the game describes it as such, but is it an action in the same vein as "go aggro," or is it just always on, something your character [I]is[/I] versus something they [I]do? [/I] In Blades in the Dark, the equivalent ability for Cutters has to be initiated by the character taking 2 Stress. It's also described as an action itself ("engage a small gang on equal footing in close combat"). Is there an equivalent idea in play in AW, here? Looking at the Gunlugger playbook, only one of their "moves" (F**k this naughty word) actually looks like a move to me (i.e., an active-voice present-tense verb with an associated roll), and the others just appear to be always-on mods. Battle-hardened and Battlefield Instincts modify existing basic moves, and the rest don't appear to be actions at all. [/SPOILER] This is entirely self-educational, as it doesn't really impact my point at all. I really like character-based "moves," in D&D and elsewhere. Choices about their character [I]should[/I] both increase and decrease a player's options within the scenario, that's the point of having a character. That's interesting, and I have no trouble with it. What I do have trouble with is a system having a list of nine basic moves (or 12 actions, to use the Blades example) to which everyone has access and which by necessity define all activity within the scenario (custom moves aside; I've already addressed that issue from my perspective). Controlling the scenario in this way, and for every participant, feels extremely artificial to me. And it's this idea of genre emulation that is really at the core of my problem. I ran a D&D5 campaign from 2014-2019 that was mostly heroic fantasy, sure, but at intervals it was also: [LIST] [*]a horror game, [*]a detective game not unlike Gumshoe, [*]an eldritch mystery game not unlike Call of Cthulhu, [*]a game of political intrigue not unlike Vampire: the Masquerade, and [*]a game of building a criminal empire not unlike Blades in the Dark [/LIST] --all without me modifying the rules. Now, I drew upon my knowledge of how these other games operated, certainly, but I felt constrained in terms of house rules, as the whole table was essentially new tabletop gamers. We got a little more adventurous later on, but for the most part I cleaved very closely to the core rules of the game. Now, did D&D do any of these things as well as a dedicated system would have? Absolutely not. But could any of these dedicated systems be used to do this in turn? ...Maybe WoD. WoD covers some big swings in concept. There's a ton of power in the PbtA format, it just asks the table to give up too much for my tastes. I get this second point from fans of storygames (that's shorthand, not judgment) or refugees from D&D all the time, but it is a bad faith take. Bad D&D is bad D&D just like bad PbtA is bad PbtA or bad Fate is bad Fate, and I've suffered through all of these things. Yes, a bad dungeon master is a failed novelist, and there are way more bad dungeon masters than there are bad gamemasters for other systems -- it's a matter of pure statistics -- but a good dungeon master doesn't bogart the fiction. There's nothing intrinsic to D&D that says the players have to be disenfranchised in this way. Even Gygax understood this, I think, when he wrote in the 1st Edition DMG: But even if I'm misinterpreting him there, narrativist D&D was in full swing by the release of Dragonlance in 1984. If a plurality of more vocal dungeon masters have chosen to disregard this premise of the game, it shouldn't reflect poorly on the rest of us or on the game itself. Just for context, I played a little V:tM in my teens during the '90s, and a little more in the 2000s, but I'm still not sure if you are saying that PbtA exists because V:tM sucked (ha ha) or PbtA exists because V:tM deserved to be iterated upon. I could honestly go either way. Hi, Pemerton. Nice to speak with you again. I hope you've been well. I missed your "long posts." :) It sounds to me like what you are doing here is giving AW credit for not adjudicating mundane minutiae, and while I'd agree that's commendable, it's hardly unique. It's not that D&D (any edition) doesn't do this, it just does it by omission, which is apparently sufficient. As evidence, I'd note that you call out by name a number of games that insist on the adjudication of minutiae, and I'd agree that they, among others of their ilk, are at best open to substantial criticism and at worst relegated to the ash heap of history. But to offer a counterpoint, there is a school of AW thought that states a player in AW shouldn't "declare whatever action they like for their PC," or at least that the "limits of genre and fiction" are more stringent than you are allowing for. Just to provide corroboration, because I'm admittedly not part of this community, I feel like Justin Alexander[I] defends the validity of PbtA[/I] by making many of the points I've made above in the below Twitter threads, which I stumbled across while researching AW custom moves. I'm not going to retread, but as a summary: [MEDIA=twitter]1281034984371957760[/MEDIA] [MEDIA=twitter]1281266114924670976[/MEDIA] I do want to restate that I'm really only talking about my own opinions and preferences, here, and what works for me. I'm not trying to denigrate PbtA, or FitD, or the playstyle or preferences of anyone who enjoy them. It's a diverse hobby, and I think that's great. My experiences with PbtA have been unfortunately disappointing, and while my experiences with FitD have been better, making that format work for me still takes a lot of effort. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Drifting games, genre limitations, and fruitful voids
Top