Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="loverdrive" data-source="post: 8992756" data-attributes="member: 7027139">The limitation of a videogame is that the rules should be possible to handle by a computer, so the "hard rules" must be written for a machine with lightning-fast computation speed and inhuman precision, but with nonexistent creative potential.In tabletop space, "hard rules" can be written in a way to leverage the human being with brain and soul.Take a look at Yoko Ono's Conversation Piece from Grapefruit (which, by the way, predates D&D by over a decade):[ATTACH=full]282017[/ATTACH]It's not a hyper-detailed boardgame, it fits on a postcard or just in my memory banks. A computer will never be able to evaluate the rules.It still has the designer's hand influencing the process, playing it means playing Yoko Ono's game, not yours.No, it isn't true for any asymmetrical roleplaying game. It is true for D&D and games more-or-less like it: Pathfinder, Vampire, Shadowrun, whatever.Apocalypse World (or Monsterhearts, both are PbtA games similar in their design, I just happen to have AW book handy), just like D&D has a player who is responsible for everything except the PCs. Unlike D&D, Apocalypse World has "hard rules" on what the GM (called MC) has to say. She has to pursue the Agenda and adhere to the Principles. A good MC follows the rules closely, a bad MC breaks them (intentionally or not).Compare and contrast to D&D, where the difference between a good and bad DM is the ability to know when to disregard the rules.Apocalypse World, just like D&D doesn't have one singular canonical setting. Unlike D&D, Apocalypse World states clearly and bluntly what your setting has to have in order to work with the game: it must be post-apocalyptic, apocalypse must have happened relatively recently (around 50 years ago), and it must be a dog-eat-dog world of constant scarcity. Other than that, it's up to you: maybe it's nuclear summer, maybe it's freezing nuclear winter, maybe it's a Tiberium infestation, or, maybe, it's a magical catacylsm and elves and dwarves now dwell in the ruins of the old world.Compare and contrast to D&D that suggests a magical academy with dorms, exams and stuff as one of the official settings.Apocalypse World is guaranteed to be Apocalypse World, and whether you enjoy the experience or not depends on your preferences. If you didn't enjoy my AW campaign, you wouldn't enjoy any of them (assuming that every MC follows the rules). If you did, the same applies to any other.MC in Apocalypse World isn't a game designer. She is another player with an asymmetrical role, and while details and the story of each AW campaign will be different, their essence will always be the same. MC, just like the rest of the players, is nothing but a vessel for Bakers' vision.DM in D&D makes the whole game. Your campaign will be different from mine. Because D&D is an unfinished game, it lacks the most important part of any RPG that has a dedicated game master: it lacks rules for the one single canonical way to run it, carefully crafted by the designers to be experienced by the players.[HR][/HR]I'm not talking about the division of power between the players and the GM.I'm talking about the division of power between the GM and the designer. WotC chose to not have any power, to make the DM to do all the work, so they can sell their books to diametrically different people.The entirety of the rules of D&D answer a completely meaningless question: "can a character roll high in this situation, set up by the DM, adjudicated by the DM, with the results ultimately decided by the DM".IIRC you are familiar with Warhammer, so I'm gonna use it as an example.Situation A: you are playing a normal, symmetrical game of Wh40k with your buddy Bob using an agreed upon amount of points. Whether you win or lose depends on you. On your ability to make good decisions and exploit mistakes made by your opponent (assuming the game is balanced, and no codex has an overwhelming advantage over the other).Situation B: you are playing a normal game of Wh40k, while Bob can just pull out any model and place it on the table. Whether you win or lose doesn't depend on you, you are at complete mercy of Bob. All the rules on how much shots a boltgun makes are completely meaningless. It doesn't matter, as the only determining factor is Bob's willingness to place units you've destroyed back on the table.Situation C: you are playing a specific scenario, e.g. where Iron Hands are defending a strategical objective from waves upon waves of orks. Bob has an agreed upon budget of points he can use every turn, and while he can choose what units to field, he can't just pull out a Stompa out of his backside, as he is restricted by budget. Whether you win or lose (or, if there is no victory conditions, how long you'll be able to hold the objective) once again depends on you. It once again does matter how many shots a boltgun makes.</blockquote>

Verification