Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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
How much control do DMs need?
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="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 8999802" data-attributes="member: 6790260"><p>I mean, I really tried to get on top of exactly that thing above, spending rather a long paragraph talking about how the rules one uses to play and the style one pursues are genuinely separate and need to be understood as such.</p><p></p><p></p><p>If we are speaking about individual, highly specific situations, yes, exactly this result comes out. But is that relevant for TTRPGs?</p><p></p><p>One of the big draws of the medium is that it can do an enormous variety of things. Even games I have referred to upthread as relatively narrow—such as Monsterhearts and Masks—are open to a staggering variety of stories. If they weren't, the (sub)genres on which they're based (<em>bildungsroman</em> by way of "supernatural romance" and "superhero comics" respectively) wouldn't be <em>absolutely stuffed</em> with the things. That freedom means one needs to be prepared for a variety of situations. "I genuinely need to do only one, singular and specific thing, which requires a specific tool," is exactly the opposite of considering a <em>variety</em> of situations.</p><p></p><p>Or, to appropriate your analogy: <em>both of these toolboxes are bad</em>. The first one is bad because it lacks a very commonly-used tool (screwdriver), the latter is bad because it literally only has one single tool, even if that tool is quite commonly useful for a typical suburban family. One would, in fact, expect that both of these tool sets, if sold as such, would be considered inadequate. Every toolset needs, as a matter of business, to aim for the fewest tools they can justify (because that saves money) while still being diverse—one might even say flexible—enough to meet customers' needs.</p><p></p><p>A grout removal tool is pretty specific, as are some of the others. Not like a saw, hammer, crescent-wrench, some screwdrivers (preferably flathead, Phillips-head, and at least one or two more), some kind of sharp implement (e.g. utility knife), etc. These are things likely to be useful in a variety of common contexts--and thus things likely to be useful in a tool set. (A <em>jigsaw</em> specifically might be too much, but a compact hacksaw would make sense and be easy to store.) Such a toolbox would be "flexible," in the sense of handling a lot of different circumstances.</p><p></p><p>A knife is a flexible tool. It can do an awful lot of things. It is not a perfect tool for every possible circumstance, which may mean creating a new tool is warranted. A knife may be useful for doing such a thing.</p><p></p><p>That said, an issue with the analogy is that each tool really does only one physical thing: hitting stuff, twisting fasteners, cutting through materials, twisting other kinds of fasteners, etc., and the end-user cannot meaningfully change this without going out and buying more tools. In theory you <em>can</em> use your tools to make better or more specific tools, that's how new tools came to be in the first place, but it's an <em>enormous</em> amount of work. Not so for TTRPG stuff. Even for 3e, (in)famous for trying to have prodigious discrete rules, many rules cover multiple kinds of situations. It becomes quite possible to build a <em>reasonably</em> comprehensive set of rules-tools, and to make a tool that sweetly and simply creates <em>new</em> tools. (Or...less sweetly and simply.)</p><p></p><p></p><p>I would say no—because it doesn't do anything at all. To again borrow your toolbox analogy, that's like saying that box C which contains <em>nothing whatsoever</em> is more flexible than either of the boxes provided, which is ridiculous.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Surely not. Several people in this very thread have talked about re-applying the existing rules, without change, to situations other than the ones intended. E.g. Fate's Aspects have been brought up as flexible. I myself have cited DW and 4e as containing flexible structures, not because you can rewrite them, but because an individual tool or set of tools is capable of covering a plethora of situations. "Defy Danger" is the most commonly-used move in Dungeon World specifically <em>because</em> it is supremely flexible. Skill Challenges are flexible, able to apply to a huge swathe of relevant situations. 13A Montages. Etc.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 8999802, member: 6790260"] I mean, I really tried to get on top of exactly that thing above, spending rather a long paragraph talking about how the rules one uses to play and the style one pursues are genuinely separate and need to be understood as such. If we are speaking about individual, highly specific situations, yes, exactly this result comes out. But is that relevant for TTRPGs? One of the big draws of the medium is that it can do an enormous variety of things. Even games I have referred to upthread as relatively narrow—such as Monsterhearts and Masks—are open to a staggering variety of stories. If they weren't, the (sub)genres on which they're based ([I]bildungsroman[/I] by way of "supernatural romance" and "superhero comics" respectively) wouldn't be [I]absolutely stuffed[/I] with the things. That freedom means one needs to be prepared for a variety of situations. "I genuinely need to do only one, singular and specific thing, which requires a specific tool," is exactly the opposite of considering a [I]variety[/I] of situations. Or, to appropriate your analogy: [I]both of these toolboxes are bad[/I]. The first one is bad because it lacks a very commonly-used tool (screwdriver), the latter is bad because it literally only has one single tool, even if that tool is quite commonly useful for a typical suburban family. One would, in fact, expect that both of these tool sets, if sold as such, would be considered inadequate. Every toolset needs, as a matter of business, to aim for the fewest tools they can justify (because that saves money) while still being diverse—one might even say flexible—enough to meet customers' needs. A grout removal tool is pretty specific, as are some of the others. Not like a saw, hammer, crescent-wrench, some screwdrivers (preferably flathead, Phillips-head, and at least one or two more), some kind of sharp implement (e.g. utility knife), etc. These are things likely to be useful in a variety of common contexts--and thus things likely to be useful in a tool set. (A [I]jigsaw[/I] specifically might be too much, but a compact hacksaw would make sense and be easy to store.) Such a toolbox would be "flexible," in the sense of handling a lot of different circumstances. A knife is a flexible tool. It can do an awful lot of things. It is not a perfect tool for every possible circumstance, which may mean creating a new tool is warranted. A knife may be useful for doing such a thing. That said, an issue with the analogy is that each tool really does only one physical thing: hitting stuff, twisting fasteners, cutting through materials, twisting other kinds of fasteners, etc., and the end-user cannot meaningfully change this without going out and buying more tools. In theory you [I]can[/I] use your tools to make better or more specific tools, that's how new tools came to be in the first place, but it's an [I]enormous[/I] amount of work. Not so for TTRPG stuff. Even for 3e, (in)famous for trying to have prodigious discrete rules, many rules cover multiple kinds of situations. It becomes quite possible to build a [I]reasonably[/I] comprehensive set of rules-tools, and to make a tool that sweetly and simply creates [I]new[/I] tools. (Or...less sweetly and simply.) I would say no—because it doesn't do anything at all. To again borrow your toolbox analogy, that's like saying that box C which contains [I]nothing whatsoever[/I] is more flexible than either of the boxes provided, which is ridiculous. Surely not. Several people in this very thread have talked about re-applying the existing rules, without change, to situations other than the ones intended. E.g. Fate's Aspects have been brought up as flexible. I myself have cited DW and 4e as containing flexible structures, not because you can rewrite them, but because an individual tool or set of tools is capable of covering a plethora of situations. "Defy Danger" is the most commonly-used move in Dungeon World specifically [I]because[/I] it is supremely flexible. Skill Challenges are flexible, able to apply to a huge swathe of relevant situations. 13A Montages. Etc. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
How much control do DMs need?
Top