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 LIVE! 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
Failing Forward
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="Maxperson" data-source="post: 6821731" data-attributes="member: 23751"><p>Right. That's why I said there were two definitions being used, not that you used both of them. You use the second definition I provided as the examples in the above paragraphs show. What I am saying is that fail forward as shown in your examples works perfectly in a pre-authored setting. Schrodinger's mace can happen in a pre-authored setting with zero difficulty. The climb outcome happening the way you just described is also doable with zero difficulty. Fail forward is not system dependent.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I'm talking about the outcome. The result of "Dark elf as antagonist." is identical in both playstyles. To the PCs there is no difference at all. It's irrelevant to the outcome whether or not the dark elf was pre-authored.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I understand all of that. I'm just saying that it's easier to railroad when nothing is pre-authored than when it is. Nothing prevents the DM from bringing his pre-desired outcomes about whenever a player fails a roll.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>No. I'm 100% that it happens. That nobody on your side has mentioned it here doesn't change that. Also, while it's easier to do with your playstyle, it's also harder to prove, so the percentage of people who catch on to the railroad will be much smaller.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Railroading is 100% a DM caused and 0% a system caused, though. Pre-authoring was irrelevant to all of those examples.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes you can. I guarantee you that if I run that sort of game, I can cause failures to go the way I want them to go in a railroad type fashion. You can't run that sort of game properly and railroad, but neither can you run a pre-authored content game properly and railroad.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>No I haven't, but I am very familiar with fail forward at this point. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Does the player get to tell the DM how to challenge that conviction? If the answer is no, then it's the DM's desire that is coming into play. The DM can paint the brother in an iffy light, or he can outright destroy the brother in ways that would cause the PC to not be able to view him as a hero any longer. Whatever the DM desires happens to the PC, regardless of what the player wants.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Pre-authoring is a established fact that can affect the game in the future. It doesn't matter whether it was established unilaterally by the DM, or though shared game play like you use. Once the fact is established, it becomes pre-authored content for future game play.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Well, I said light constraint, not no constraint. What I mean by that is that it doesn't really limit you very much. If I pre-author angel feathers to remove curses, that doesn't mean that I can't author them on the fly to do other things. For that matter, nothing says that there can't be a special anger feather that does not remove curses. There are exceptions to every rule, so pre-authorship does very little to actually constrain the DM.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Once you author in finding black arrows and no mace in the tower, those are now authored facts. Those authored facts will affect future game play as pre-authored content. Those facts happened and have the same limited constraint as any other pre-authored content.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>If the players are trying to somewhere other than misty lake, then constantly moving towards it is railroading. I also agree, railroading is silly and boring. That applies to any style of game play that isn't built around railroading, though.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>All of them can be run well with a variety of game styles. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Fail forward is success or success with a cost. No edition of D&D actively pushes back against that. 5e, which you say is less friendly towards it, goes out of its way to suggest that people can use it.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Or else he doesn't and uses fail forward. In every edition of D&D, the rules are just guidelines that the DM can add to, subtract from, or change as he desires. That means that if the DM wants to use fail forward in D&D, it will work flawlessly as the DM just makes it work flawlessly.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>D&D is designed to be malleable and for the DM to mold it to his playstyle.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>That's a Strawman. I didn't say they couldn't run a game competently. I said that if what you say is true about what they said, they don't know how to run a sandbox game properly. Sandbox games when run properly don't have to work the way they say. You can do sandbox AND story if you want to.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Maxperson, post: 6821731, member: 23751"] Right. That's why I said there were two definitions being used, not that you used both of them. You use the second definition I provided as the examples in the above paragraphs show. What I am saying is that fail forward as shown in your examples works perfectly in a pre-authored setting. Schrodinger's mace can happen in a pre-authored setting with zero difficulty. The climb outcome happening the way you just described is also doable with zero difficulty. Fail forward is not system dependent. I'm talking about the outcome. The result of "Dark elf as antagonist." is identical in both playstyles. To the PCs there is no difference at all. It's irrelevant to the outcome whether or not the dark elf was pre-authored. I understand all of that. I'm just saying that it's easier to railroad when nothing is pre-authored than when it is. Nothing prevents the DM from bringing his pre-desired outcomes about whenever a player fails a roll. No. I'm 100% that it happens. That nobody on your side has mentioned it here doesn't change that. Also, while it's easier to do with your playstyle, it's also harder to prove, so the percentage of people who catch on to the railroad will be much smaller. Railroading is 100% a DM caused and 0% a system caused, though. Pre-authoring was irrelevant to all of those examples. Yes you can. I guarantee you that if I run that sort of game, I can cause failures to go the way I want them to go in a railroad type fashion. You can't run that sort of game properly and railroad, but neither can you run a pre-authored content game properly and railroad. No I haven't, but I am very familiar with fail forward at this point. Does the player get to tell the DM how to challenge that conviction? If the answer is no, then it's the DM's desire that is coming into play. The DM can paint the brother in an iffy light, or he can outright destroy the brother in ways that would cause the PC to not be able to view him as a hero any longer. Whatever the DM desires happens to the PC, regardless of what the player wants. Pre-authoring is a established fact that can affect the game in the future. It doesn't matter whether it was established unilaterally by the DM, or though shared game play like you use. Once the fact is established, it becomes pre-authored content for future game play. Well, I said light constraint, not no constraint. What I mean by that is that it doesn't really limit you very much. If I pre-author angel feathers to remove curses, that doesn't mean that I can't author them on the fly to do other things. For that matter, nothing says that there can't be a special anger feather that does not remove curses. There are exceptions to every rule, so pre-authorship does very little to actually constrain the DM. Once you author in finding black arrows and no mace in the tower, those are now authored facts. Those authored facts will affect future game play as pre-authored content. Those facts happened and have the same limited constraint as any other pre-authored content. If the players are trying to somewhere other than misty lake, then constantly moving towards it is railroading. I also agree, railroading is silly and boring. That applies to any style of game play that isn't built around railroading, though. All of them can be run well with a variety of game styles. Fail forward is success or success with a cost. No edition of D&D actively pushes back against that. 5e, which you say is less friendly towards it, goes out of its way to suggest that people can use it. Or else he doesn't and uses fail forward. In every edition of D&D, the rules are just guidelines that the DM can add to, subtract from, or change as he desires. That means that if the DM wants to use fail forward in D&D, it will work flawlessly as the DM just makes it work flawlessly. D&D is designed to be malleable and for the DM to mold it to his playstyle. That's a Strawman. I didn't say they couldn't run a game competently. I said that if what you say is true about what they said, they don't know how to run a sandbox game properly. Sandbox games when run properly don't have to work the way they say. You can do sandbox AND story if you want to. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Failing Forward
Top