Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6100015" data-attributes="member: 42582">I don't see a hugely strong resemblance, especially once we go beyond simple tropes ("What scrapes will our heroes get themselves out of this week?") and into actual gameplay.For instance, it is a default assumption in D&D that the content of the module is secret from the players. And there's a good reason for this - part of the challenge of play is a result of being surprised by the GM's challenges. Whereas <a href="http://www.burningwheel.org/wiki/images/3/36/BurningTHAC0.pdf" target="_blank">Burning THACO</a> gives the following advice for dungeon-bashing BW play (at p 11):I recommend discarding any of the old notions that the players should be completely surprised by what's coming. Show the players the cover of the module you're running. Read them the back cover blurb. If it has an intro section, consider reading that to them. You don't have to reveal every twist and secret; just give them a broad overview. In other words, if the module is about delving into the Lost Temple of Whatsit to recover the Orb of Destiny that was stolen by Whosit during the reign of Thatguy, etc., tell the players! Then all of them should write at least one belief that takes them on the quest.And this isn't just a stylistic thing. In classic D&D, knowledge is key - and by using it you can circumvent challenges and get the treasure, which is where the real action is. So rationing knowledege is a GM responsibility, and trying to acquire it is a player strategy (which Gygax and Lewis Pulsipher both discussed at length in early D&D texts).Whereas in BW, telegraphing the stakes is more important - once they're known to the players, then the players have a reason to engage despite the fact that the challenges are horrible. (The canonical mode of monster building in the BW Monster Burner involves player feedback on GM monster designs. Think about how out of place this would be in Gygaxian dungeon play!)The reasons that BW plays differently in this respect have been set out by Crazy Jerome and me above. The version of D&D that comes closest to this, of those I'm familiar with, is 4e - because it has resolution mechanics (especially in combat, but skill challenges also display a similar character) which makes telegraphing the stakes a way of engendering engagement and upping the pressure. (This is part of, though only part of, what people are getting at when they describe 4e as "combat as sport".)That's kind of like saying "Take RM combat, but strip out the crit and wound mechanics in favour of hp attrition, and you'd have something pretty close to D&D."The simultaneous secret declaration of 3 "volleys" (which may be anywhere from 1 to 6+ actions) at a time is a key part of the game. It's how you can win in melee even if you're weak, for instance: because you outsmart them and strike when they're not defending.</blockquote>

Verification