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
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
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="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 7618665" data-attributes="member: 6785785"><p>I meant the game system being played. As you go on to point out, this view would not work well with all games, like Fiasco. I was thinking more along the lines of what we'd consider traditional games in the vein of D&D, where there's a clearly established turn order and all that goes with it. In a game like that, I've noticed that need to keep things moving as both a player and DM. I absolutely love when players add a bit beyond "I stab the orc" and other basic action descriptions, but it's a fine line between what adds to the game and what becomes self-indulgent noise. </p><p></p><p>I've been playing a lot of Blades in the Dark lately, and it does not have an initiative system, and all its action resolution works the same, from social interaction to combat, and I think that's a big part of its appeal. Try to convince a guard you're authorized to pass a checkpoint? Try to sneak past him? Try to quietly murder him? It's all resolved using the same mechanics. The game also expects more narration on the part of the players than D&D expects. I still want to keep the game moving, but that feeling isn't as strong as it is with D&D. D&D can take time because of the nature of the way combat works with "attack- HP loss- repeat" so I think anything that significantly slows that process down rather than speeding it up seems like a negative. So I think the shift in focus is just enough to ease some of that feeling.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Sure....sometimes it can be worthwhile, or it can be something that adds to the game by giving the GM or another player something to build upon. I have no problem with that at all....quite the opposite, really. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yeah, combat and social interaction having different mechanics can cause some murkiness about the amount of time or effort needed for such scenes. And these scenes you've offered as examples are very much in line with what I'm thinking of in relation to the thread topic. Most people have offered examples of creatures encountered and important locations.....and I think such things will by default demand a bit more from the GM in terms of narration. But this kind of "downtime back in town" kind of scenes....I'd simply narrate them each with a couple sentences, and maybe a couple of die rolls to see how successful things went if the player had a specific goal in mind. "You find the smithy....is there some item you want forged? Okay, roll a Charisma check, and you get advantage because of your standing in town." That kind of thing. </p><p></p><p>The only way I'd go into more depth with the scene is if the smith was important in some way, or if the reason for visiting the smith was of importance to the character. So if he wanted his father's sword reforged, a stated goal of the character, and the smith in question was said to be the one person who could do that....okay, then let's expand a bit. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I think this is an interesting point, and again, there's a fine line. </p><p></p><p>I like players who invest in their characters. I like when they bring material to the game for me as a DM to use in the game....when they exist as part of the world, with connections and goals and drives. I think that's vital to immersive play. </p><p></p><p>Ideally, all the players will be interested in all the characters, so when focusing on one character, it won't be an issue for the players of the other characters. But to expect the same level of care as everyone has for their own character is a bit unrealistic, generally speaking. </p><p></p><p>So the way in which those connections and goals and drives are established or displayed is the issue. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I think that such interactions can be summarized in many cases. Rather than the DM adopting the role of mayor with the player as the sorlock and each speaking in character at depth, I think a quick summary of the interaction can serve the purpose just as much. Rather than trying to figure a way to creatively "display" something personal about the sorlock, just have the player say it. </p><p></p><p>For example, "The sorlock is always most comfortable dealin with other people of means and standing, so I'll seek an audience with the mayor and see if there's any news he'll share with me". The DM can then summarize the results of the visit, maybe calling for a roll or two if it makes sense. In my opinion, this helps keep things focused, helps keep the other players invested in what's happening, and establishes something very clearly about the PC that may have not been obvious in a more drawn out interaction. </p><p></p><p>Again, I'm not saying this is always the way to handle it, and that there's never a reason for a scene to be played out in full....but when it's more specific to an individual character rather than the group, I tend to use that approach in all but the most important of scenes. Or, potentially important scenes, is probably the better way to put it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="hawkeyefan, post: 7618665, member: 6785785"] I meant the game system being played. As you go on to point out, this view would not work well with all games, like Fiasco. I was thinking more along the lines of what we'd consider traditional games in the vein of D&D, where there's a clearly established turn order and all that goes with it. In a game like that, I've noticed that need to keep things moving as both a player and DM. I absolutely love when players add a bit beyond "I stab the orc" and other basic action descriptions, but it's a fine line between what adds to the game and what becomes self-indulgent noise. I've been playing a lot of Blades in the Dark lately, and it does not have an initiative system, and all its action resolution works the same, from social interaction to combat, and I think that's a big part of its appeal. Try to convince a guard you're authorized to pass a checkpoint? Try to sneak past him? Try to quietly murder him? It's all resolved using the same mechanics. The game also expects more narration on the part of the players than D&D expects. I still want to keep the game moving, but that feeling isn't as strong as it is with D&D. D&D can take time because of the nature of the way combat works with "attack- HP loss- repeat" so I think anything that significantly slows that process down rather than speeding it up seems like a negative. So I think the shift in focus is just enough to ease some of that feeling. Sure....sometimes it can be worthwhile, or it can be something that adds to the game by giving the GM or another player something to build upon. I have no problem with that at all....quite the opposite, really. Yeah, combat and social interaction having different mechanics can cause some murkiness about the amount of time or effort needed for such scenes. And these scenes you've offered as examples are very much in line with what I'm thinking of in relation to the thread topic. Most people have offered examples of creatures encountered and important locations.....and I think such things will by default demand a bit more from the GM in terms of narration. But this kind of "downtime back in town" kind of scenes....I'd simply narrate them each with a couple sentences, and maybe a couple of die rolls to see how successful things went if the player had a specific goal in mind. "You find the smithy....is there some item you want forged? Okay, roll a Charisma check, and you get advantage because of your standing in town." That kind of thing. The only way I'd go into more depth with the scene is if the smith was important in some way, or if the reason for visiting the smith was of importance to the character. So if he wanted his father's sword reforged, a stated goal of the character, and the smith in question was said to be the one person who could do that....okay, then let's expand a bit. I think this is an interesting point, and again, there's a fine line. I like players who invest in their characters. I like when they bring material to the game for me as a DM to use in the game....when they exist as part of the world, with connections and goals and drives. I think that's vital to immersive play. Ideally, all the players will be interested in all the characters, so when focusing on one character, it won't be an issue for the players of the other characters. But to expect the same level of care as everyone has for their own character is a bit unrealistic, generally speaking. So the way in which those connections and goals and drives are established or displayed is the issue. I think that such interactions can be summarized in many cases. Rather than the DM adopting the role of mayor with the player as the sorlock and each speaking in character at depth, I think a quick summary of the interaction can serve the purpose just as much. Rather than trying to figure a way to creatively "display" something personal about the sorlock, just have the player say it. For example, "The sorlock is always most comfortable dealin with other people of means and standing, so I'll seek an audience with the mayor and see if there's any news he'll share with me". The DM can then summarize the results of the visit, maybe calling for a roll or two if it makes sense. In my opinion, this helps keep things focused, helps keep the other players invested in what's happening, and establishes something very clearly about the PC that may have not been obvious in a more drawn out interaction. Again, I'm not saying this is always the way to handle it, and that there's never a reason for a scene to be played out in full....but when it's more specific to an individual character rather than the group, I tend to use that approach in all but the most important of scenes. Or, potentially important scenes, is probably the better way to put it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
Top