Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 8727059" data-attributes="member: 4937">I don't want to turn this into a bashing PbtA session, but as an example of what you are talking about it works pretty well.&nbsp; When you say, &quot;albeit usually more simplistically than D&amp;D&quot;, you should be asking yourself, &quot;Ok, so where did all that extra complexity go?&nbsp; How does a system get away with treating something that D&amp;D doesn't treat with remotely enough complexity with even less complexity than D&amp;D?&quot;&nbsp; And the answer in PbtA is that moves an enormous amount of complexity that would otherwise be in the rules&nbsp; of a game into the table contract of a game.&nbsp; Instead of the rules forming a contract between the players and the GM, PbtA asks the players to negotiate on a regular basis the contracts that govern play.&nbsp; This is especially true of PbtA when the Moves move away from hack and slash and toward governing social dynamics.&nbsp;&nbsp; PbtA also relies heavily on the GM improvising things on the fly, again heavily relying on table contracts to negotiate that.&nbsp; In other words, PbtA takes a lot of complexity out of the game and instead moves it to the metagame.&nbsp;&nbsp; I suspect that a lot of people who take issue with the GM being able to tell them what to do by having an NPC make a skill check would also take issue with the entire premise and structure of Monsterhearts, for example.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 8727059, member: 4937"] I don't want to turn this into a bashing PbtA session, but as an example of what you are talking about it works pretty well. When you say, "albeit usually more simplistically than D&D", you should be asking yourself, "Ok, so where did all that extra complexity go? How does a system get away with treating something that D&D doesn't treat with remotely enough complexity with even less complexity than D&D?" And the answer in PbtA is that moves an enormous amount of complexity that would otherwise be in the rules of a game into the table contract of a game. Instead of the rules forming a contract between the players and the GM, PbtA asks the players to negotiate on a regular basis the contracts that govern play. This is especially true of PbtA when the Moves move away from hack and slash and toward governing social dynamics. PbtA also relies heavily on the GM improvising things on the fly, again heavily relying on table contracts to negotiate that. In other words, PbtA takes a lot of complexity out of the game and instead moves it to the metagame. I suspect that a lot of people who take issue with the GM being able to tell them what to do by having an NPC make a skill check would also take issue with the entire premise and structure of Monsterhearts, for example. [/QUOTE]

Verification