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
"Hot" take: Aesthetically-pleasing rules are highly overvalued
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="Monayuris" data-source="post: 8112363" data-attributes="member: 6859536"><p>I reject your assertion that this style of play is as you state in the bold text.</p><p></p><p>This style of play supports a core construct where the GM is a fair and neutral arbiter of the rules. In the early days of D&D and in some modern clones the GM is often referred to as a <em>referee</em> or <em>judge</em>. This implies an impartial approach. Listen to the intentions of the player and make a fair ruling based on the context of the situation in the game.</p><p></p><p>There are of course bad referees and even more awful judges out there, but that is an individual issue, not a condemnation of the construct as a whole.</p><p></p><p>This approach supports the idea of "a more 'narrative' fashion" where the player presents an idea based on the narrative of the game and the GM presents a choice (sets the stakes of a potential action, if you will) based more on the narrative situation in the game as opposed to the direction of a hard-coded rule.</p><p></p><p>Your assertion that 'GM rulings' is tantamount to oppositional play is false. </p><p></p><p>I will grant that GM rulings may result in situations where the ruling overrides the rules of the game. But there is a clear direction in this case as every role-playing game I have ever read or played (including 4e) clearly puts overriding the rules within the scope of duties of the GM. </p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't understand the issue with framing and related mechanisms.</p><p></p><p>The player asks "Can I attempt an action?"</p><p>The GM responds "Yes, but if you succeed <some 'thing' will happen> but if you fail <some other 'thing' will happen>. What do you want to do?"</p><p>The player then considers the options and if needed asks more questions.</p><p></p><p>This is a very clear framing mechanism and is one that is utilized in many modern 'story-based' games and concepts (the concept of "Yes, and" or "Yes, but", etc). This is a perfectly valid method of framing game-play as an alternative to a more heavily ruled / qualified system.</p><p></p><p>If you feel that leads to 'political' gaming of the DM or mercy of the DM or pressure to limit players by the DM, that is more of a personal bias than an objective fact. It is fine if that is your bias, but it should be framed as such.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Monayuris, post: 8112363, member: 6859536"] I reject your assertion that this style of play is as you state in the bold text. This style of play supports a core construct where the GM is a fair and neutral arbiter of the rules. In the early days of D&D and in some modern clones the GM is often referred to as a [I]referee[/I] or [I]judge[/I]. This implies an impartial approach. Listen to the intentions of the player and make a fair ruling based on the context of the situation in the game. There are of course bad referees and even more awful judges out there, but that is an individual issue, not a condemnation of the construct as a whole. This approach supports the idea of "a more 'narrative' fashion" where the player presents an idea based on the narrative of the game and the GM presents a choice (sets the stakes of a potential action, if you will) based more on the narrative situation in the game as opposed to the direction of a hard-coded rule. Your assertion that 'GM rulings' is tantamount to oppositional play is false. I will grant that GM rulings may result in situations where the ruling overrides the rules of the game. But there is a clear direction in this case as every role-playing game I have ever read or played (including 4e) clearly puts overriding the rules within the scope of duties of the GM. I don't understand the issue with framing and related mechanisms. The player asks "Can I attempt an action?" The GM responds "Yes, but if you succeed <some 'thing' will happen> but if you fail <some other 'thing' will happen>. What do you want to do?" The player then considers the options and if needed asks more questions. This is a very clear framing mechanism and is one that is utilized in many modern 'story-based' games and concepts (the concept of "Yes, and" or "Yes, but", etc). This is a perfectly valid method of framing game-play as an alternative to a more heavily ruled / qualified system. If you feel that leads to 'political' gaming of the DM or mercy of the DM or pressure to limit players by the DM, that is more of a personal bias than an objective fact. It is fine if that is your bias, but it should be framed as such. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
"Hot" take: Aesthetically-pleasing rules are highly overvalued
Top