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
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
How Do You Get Your Players To Stay On An Adventure Path?
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="Celebrim" data-source="post: 6725797" data-attributes="member: 4937"><p>To a large extent I'm happy to agree with this - even though it is technically wrong - simply because it does no harm to my point. Anything you create without prior preparation is improvisation, regardless of the technique you employ. (Indeed, the stuff you create outside of a session is still improvisation, differing only in that it is not done under time pressure.) But for now I can let this claim stand, because none of the systems I described can depend on pure randomization. You still have to produce the orc's castle or the dragon's lair on demand. You don't have a random generator for everything. And if you'd actually used the random dungeon generator in the appendices you'd know that it doesn't work without some degree of DM guidance and judgment. The thing can generate nonsense results, spatially impossible results, and requires judgment calls on how to treat all sorts of possible results (chasms, rivers, etc.). The DMG actually tells users to apply their judgment. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This is just wrong on so many many different levels I don't know where to be. First of all, there is no 'pattern'. The dungeon board is arbitrary and the result of whim. You can't define a dungeon as meeting any sort of pattern. It can be random or nonrandom. It's not confined by anything but the DM's judgment. When you compare it to Mastermind, the real difference is easy to see. Sure, the positions of the colors on a particular puzzle are random and arbitrary and the result of whim as well. But each is equivalent. No particular pattern is special. D&D by constrast inherently produces 'boards' that are special and different from all others. They are not equivalent. Each board is inherently unfair or at the least nothing constrains a board to be fair except again, DM judgment. D&D is closer in this regard to Calvinball than it is to Mastermind. The DM not only makes up the board, but the pieces of the board, the rules that apply to those pieces, and the laws that govern all interactions on it. This is particularly true of 1e, where there were few or no metarules regarding anything, resulting in adventures were every single room had unknowable rules unique to the room governing how the room worked. A good example of this would C1: Hidden Shrine of Toamochan. </p><p></p><p>And yet, for all the copious notes, there is simply not enough notes in the module to remotely decide how to resolve player propositions about interacting with the 'board' without resorting to improvisation. Nor will answers be found in the 1e DMG to questions of how much it reduces the chance of drowning to try to throw a rope to a drowning man. It's not there. It's a requirement of being a DM to be able to make stuff up. It's unavoidable, because the game isn't definable within a narrow set of rules and no set of rules could ever be complete enough to describe the game. How the heck do you think this game is decipherable when the rules set is infinite?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Not every single game involves a pattern to decipher. Game strategy can't be equated to a mechanical deciphering of code, because few games are so mechanistic. I notice you have a remarkable fondness for choosing games that lack any random factor. Tic-Tac-Toe, Chess, and Mastermind are examples of mechanical games, which lose their savor precisely when they become analyzable. D&D is not a mechanical game. The randomness of the game defies any attempt to deduce a pattern from it. It's not merely a case of being a wargame with a random element to resolution, like say Bloodbowl, where we can apply statistical logic to every element of the game. D&D is far too freeform for that. D&D is not a strategy game. It is a game that may occasionally have a strategy minigame, but its never confined only its strategy minigames. The DM is free to improvise into the game any sort of minigame of his choosing, according to whatever rules come into his head. Indeed, improvisation is precisely what separates D&D from a tactical wargame. Improvisation in the middle of a wargame is the creative act that birthed the RPG. The exciting notion that the game could go beyond mere 'code breaking' as you name it, and become a story is what caused the board wargamers to give up the dreary plains of Poland and become excited dare we say fanatically role-players from almost the moment that this shocking revelation occurred to them.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Either way would be improvisation. The DM must make stuff up through some process. And the DM is not limited in what he makes up. If he wants to have a room filled with living candy plants and a dragon that breathes soap bubbles or a room that is a pastiche of the Wizard of Oz, or an inescapable death trap, it may not be good judgment by the DM but he's within his rights.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>How in the world do you think dungeon maps get created if not arbitrarily making something up? </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Gygax himself disagrees with that claim in the 1e DMG. The DM is most certainly not only and ever a referee, but per the rules is much more than that.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>My meaning of improvisation requires only a dictionary. Your meaning of improvisation is increasingly reliant on nonsense and contradiction. Explain how the map can be extended without application of DM judgment and choice? I can certainly see how application of the rules can be done without bias in most cases, assuming of course there are rules covering the situation, which isn't normally the case in 1e or OD&D, but there is no way that its possible to create the game world without bias. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>For someone who is quick to claim something is false, you sure have a way of stringing together a bunch of obviously false statements that betray just how limited your gaming experience is. Even were we to except your utterly ludicrous claim that storytelling isn't part of D&D (ever played I6, UK1, DL1, I3-I5, etc.), and even if we were to accept your ludicrous claim that storytelling wasn't what drove D&D from the beginning (do you know anything at all about the Blackmoor campaign?), White Wolf was rather late to the story focused gaming table, already occupied by games like C&S, Pendragon, and even to a large extent Top Secret and Marvel Super Heroes for crying out loud. There are plenty of academic sources that make it very clear that from the inception of the idea of the RPG, the idea that the game was telling a story and could be used as a collaborative story telling medium has been a part of the game. And your idea that the DM is creating nothing with no more story meaning than the pins in a game of Mastermind is ludicrous. D&D content isn't a couple random colored pins - but a setting, with characters, with motives, ands with events. </p><p></p><p>And storytelling as a culture has been around since at least the time man invented fire.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>D&D has no code. No rules for constructing this coded board you think exists actually exist, and to the extent that you could construct such rules they would create a game obviously and inherently inferior to D&D precisely because the attraction of having a DM is that the DM has the power to create non-mechanistically and escape any limitations of a code. People don't play D&D because its code breaking. They play it because it isn't. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Sure they can. Any DM worth his pizza can between sessions construct a board such that actions are forced. The question is not whether he can do so, but whether he ought to do so. And there is no science to that. No rules can tell the DM whether or not his board is too linear or too broad. He has to use his judgment.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 6725797, member: 4937"] To a large extent I'm happy to agree with this - even though it is technically wrong - simply because it does no harm to my point. Anything you create without prior preparation is improvisation, regardless of the technique you employ. (Indeed, the stuff you create outside of a session is still improvisation, differing only in that it is not done under time pressure.) But for now I can let this claim stand, because none of the systems I described can depend on pure randomization. You still have to produce the orc's castle or the dragon's lair on demand. You don't have a random generator for everything. And if you'd actually used the random dungeon generator in the appendices you'd know that it doesn't work without some degree of DM guidance and judgment. The thing can generate nonsense results, spatially impossible results, and requires judgment calls on how to treat all sorts of possible results (chasms, rivers, etc.). The DMG actually tells users to apply their judgment. This is just wrong on so many many different levels I don't know where to be. First of all, there is no 'pattern'. The dungeon board is arbitrary and the result of whim. You can't define a dungeon as meeting any sort of pattern. It can be random or nonrandom. It's not confined by anything but the DM's judgment. When you compare it to Mastermind, the real difference is easy to see. Sure, the positions of the colors on a particular puzzle are random and arbitrary and the result of whim as well. But each is equivalent. No particular pattern is special. D&D by constrast inherently produces 'boards' that are special and different from all others. They are not equivalent. Each board is inherently unfair or at the least nothing constrains a board to be fair except again, DM judgment. D&D is closer in this regard to Calvinball than it is to Mastermind. The DM not only makes up the board, but the pieces of the board, the rules that apply to those pieces, and the laws that govern all interactions on it. This is particularly true of 1e, where there were few or no metarules regarding anything, resulting in adventures were every single room had unknowable rules unique to the room governing how the room worked. A good example of this would C1: Hidden Shrine of Toamochan. And yet, for all the copious notes, there is simply not enough notes in the module to remotely decide how to resolve player propositions about interacting with the 'board' without resorting to improvisation. Nor will answers be found in the 1e DMG to questions of how much it reduces the chance of drowning to try to throw a rope to a drowning man. It's not there. It's a requirement of being a DM to be able to make stuff up. It's unavoidable, because the game isn't definable within a narrow set of rules and no set of rules could ever be complete enough to describe the game. How the heck do you think this game is decipherable when the rules set is infinite? Not every single game involves a pattern to decipher. Game strategy can't be equated to a mechanical deciphering of code, because few games are so mechanistic. I notice you have a remarkable fondness for choosing games that lack any random factor. Tic-Tac-Toe, Chess, and Mastermind are examples of mechanical games, which lose their savor precisely when they become analyzable. D&D is not a mechanical game. The randomness of the game defies any attempt to deduce a pattern from it. It's not merely a case of being a wargame with a random element to resolution, like say Bloodbowl, where we can apply statistical logic to every element of the game. D&D is far too freeform for that. D&D is not a strategy game. It is a game that may occasionally have a strategy minigame, but its never confined only its strategy minigames. The DM is free to improvise into the game any sort of minigame of his choosing, according to whatever rules come into his head. Indeed, improvisation is precisely what separates D&D from a tactical wargame. Improvisation in the middle of a wargame is the creative act that birthed the RPG. The exciting notion that the game could go beyond mere 'code breaking' as you name it, and become a story is what caused the board wargamers to give up the dreary plains of Poland and become excited dare we say fanatically role-players from almost the moment that this shocking revelation occurred to them. Either way would be improvisation. The DM must make stuff up through some process. And the DM is not limited in what he makes up. If he wants to have a room filled with living candy plants and a dragon that breathes soap bubbles or a room that is a pastiche of the Wizard of Oz, or an inescapable death trap, it may not be good judgment by the DM but he's within his rights. How in the world do you think dungeon maps get created if not arbitrarily making something up? Gygax himself disagrees with that claim in the 1e DMG. The DM is most certainly not only and ever a referee, but per the rules is much more than that. My meaning of improvisation requires only a dictionary. Your meaning of improvisation is increasingly reliant on nonsense and contradiction. Explain how the map can be extended without application of DM judgment and choice? I can certainly see how application of the rules can be done without bias in most cases, assuming of course there are rules covering the situation, which isn't normally the case in 1e or OD&D, but there is no way that its possible to create the game world without bias. For someone who is quick to claim something is false, you sure have a way of stringing together a bunch of obviously false statements that betray just how limited your gaming experience is. Even were we to except your utterly ludicrous claim that storytelling isn't part of D&D (ever played I6, UK1, DL1, I3-I5, etc.), and even if we were to accept your ludicrous claim that storytelling wasn't what drove D&D from the beginning (do you know anything at all about the Blackmoor campaign?), White Wolf was rather late to the story focused gaming table, already occupied by games like C&S, Pendragon, and even to a large extent Top Secret and Marvel Super Heroes for crying out loud. There are plenty of academic sources that make it very clear that from the inception of the idea of the RPG, the idea that the game was telling a story and could be used as a collaborative story telling medium has been a part of the game. And your idea that the DM is creating nothing with no more story meaning than the pins in a game of Mastermind is ludicrous. D&D content isn't a couple random colored pins - but a setting, with characters, with motives, ands with events. And storytelling as a culture has been around since at least the time man invented fire. D&D has no code. No rules for constructing this coded board you think exists actually exist, and to the extent that you could construct such rules they would create a game obviously and inherently inferior to D&D precisely because the attraction of having a DM is that the DM has the power to create non-mechanistically and escape any limitations of a code. People don't play D&D because its code breaking. They play it because it isn't. Sure they can. Any DM worth his pizza can between sessions construct a board such that actions are forced. The question is not whether he can do so, but whether he ought to do so. And there is no science to that. No rules can tell the DM whether or not his board is too linear or too broad. He has to use his judgment. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
How Do You Get Your Players To Stay On An Adventure Path?
Top