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
*TTRPGs General
Introducing Complications Without Forcing Players to Play the "Mother May I?" Game
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="Bedrockgames" data-source="post: 7557664" data-attributes="member: 85555"><p>Not sure why this is all that important as I wasn't attacking or even trying to characterize these games. I was just defending the style you identified as not having mechanics for GM judgements about these matters (frankly I find that a very broad description). I am honestly not sure how broadly or narrowly you are applying this concept, but I think even a game like 3rd edition D&D has this to some degree. Savage Worlds might even have it in the way things like bennies get used (and I love Savage Worlds). Any game with a comprehensive system of skills arguably has it to some degree as well (because those can become the levers that the GM needs to go to when players explore). Games that definitely don't have it would be more like classic D&D or other systems where these areas were left open. I would argue AD&D for example is defacto open in this way (there are mechanics you can find for certain things, but the GM is under no obligation to use them and the mechanics are often opaque enough or obscure enough that many never even used them). I personally noticed a very big difference in the transition from 2E to 3E, where a lot of what had been handled by players actively prodding, interacting with and exploring the setting, suddenly could be boiled down to a roll. Which often had the result of doing what we are talking about here. Still though, 3E is largely a traditional game. So I don't see it as a purely indie versus traditional RPG thing (unless you are strictly taking about games where the GM doesn't have the ability to create content when the players declare their actions and must interface with some kind of subsystem or clearly laid out procedure). I see it more as a matter of stemming from concepts like comprehensive rules systems, a desire for something like 'players rights' to be present in the game, etc. </p><p></p><p>But I played Hill Folk not too long ago and that seemed to be structured in a way that fit having mechanics for handling GM judgements, in that players could assert things and that would make them somewhat real (I don't own the book so I am just going by how the sessions we played were run). I quite liked the game, and I found that rule worked well for creating drama in a way that was immersive. I had no problem with it at all. If I were trying to do a campaign that felt like I Claudius for example, that is a system I might take and attach to my regular game in order to amp up the dramatic tension. Games like Blades in the Dark and Dungeon World seem to have features of this as well. I am less familiar with them. If you have some examples you want to raise, by all means go ahead and I will weigh in. </p><p></p><p>Again though, I don't have any issue with these games. And I don't think they are less RPG-liked than a more traditional RPG. I just think games that don't have mechanics for GM adjudicating what is behind door number 1, play to a strength of the RPG medium that I really like (in a way that I really like). But, and this is really important, I am always wary of building RPG design principles out of these kinds of arguments where we identity our reasons for liking or disliking something out of a heated discussion. All I know is I like these kinds of games. You have pushed me to explain why they are good, so I have given the best explanation I can. I am not interested in creating good principles of play or design out of that, because my reasons might not be fully explored or they could be half baked explanations. I wouldn't want to paint myself into a corner based on a discussion with Pemerton on En World. </p><p></p><p>For me it really depends on what kind of game I am trying to run whether I would want this sort of thing. For my bread and butter, long term, weekly games, I prefer what I was defending (and what you labeled Mother May I). For more episodic play I am much more open to other types of systems).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Bedrockgames, post: 7557664, member: 85555"] Not sure why this is all that important as I wasn't attacking or even trying to characterize these games. I was just defending the style you identified as not having mechanics for GM judgements about these matters (frankly I find that a very broad description). I am honestly not sure how broadly or narrowly you are applying this concept, but I think even a game like 3rd edition D&D has this to some degree. Savage Worlds might even have it in the way things like bennies get used (and I love Savage Worlds). Any game with a comprehensive system of skills arguably has it to some degree as well (because those can become the levers that the GM needs to go to when players explore). Games that definitely don't have it would be more like classic D&D or other systems where these areas were left open. I would argue AD&D for example is defacto open in this way (there are mechanics you can find for certain things, but the GM is under no obligation to use them and the mechanics are often opaque enough or obscure enough that many never even used them). I personally noticed a very big difference in the transition from 2E to 3E, where a lot of what had been handled by players actively prodding, interacting with and exploring the setting, suddenly could be boiled down to a roll. Which often had the result of doing what we are talking about here. Still though, 3E is largely a traditional game. So I don't see it as a purely indie versus traditional RPG thing (unless you are strictly taking about games where the GM doesn't have the ability to create content when the players declare their actions and must interface with some kind of subsystem or clearly laid out procedure). I see it more as a matter of stemming from concepts like comprehensive rules systems, a desire for something like 'players rights' to be present in the game, etc. But I played Hill Folk not too long ago and that seemed to be structured in a way that fit having mechanics for handling GM judgements, in that players could assert things and that would make them somewhat real (I don't own the book so I am just going by how the sessions we played were run). I quite liked the game, and I found that rule worked well for creating drama in a way that was immersive. I had no problem with it at all. If I were trying to do a campaign that felt like I Claudius for example, that is a system I might take and attach to my regular game in order to amp up the dramatic tension. Games like Blades in the Dark and Dungeon World seem to have features of this as well. I am less familiar with them. If you have some examples you want to raise, by all means go ahead and I will weigh in. Again though, I don't have any issue with these games. And I don't think they are less RPG-liked than a more traditional RPG. I just think games that don't have mechanics for GM adjudicating what is behind door number 1, play to a strength of the RPG medium that I really like (in a way that I really like). But, and this is really important, I am always wary of building RPG design principles out of these kinds of arguments where we identity our reasons for liking or disliking something out of a heated discussion. All I know is I like these kinds of games. You have pushed me to explain why they are good, so I have given the best explanation I can. I am not interested in creating good principles of play or design out of that, because my reasons might not be fully explored or they could be half baked explanations. I wouldn't want to paint myself into a corner based on a discussion with Pemerton on En World. For me it really depends on what kind of game I am trying to run whether I would want this sort of thing. For my bread and butter, long term, weekly games, I prefer what I was defending (and what you labeled Mother May I). For more episodic play I am much more open to other types of systems). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Introducing Complications Without Forcing Players to Play the "Mother May I?" Game
Top