Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8214776" data-attributes="member: 42582">My reasoning doesn't contradict [USER=16814]@Ovinomancer[/USER]'s but is a bit different, or takes a slightly different perspective.It begins with this question: what is the meaning of the d20 roll? And the follow-up question that arises once the dice have been rolled and the consequence narrated: what [in the fiction] caused the consequence to occur?The more that the game adopts a &quot;rules as physics&quot; orientation; the more that the d20 is taken to reflect or &quot;model&quot; the vagaries of luck and fortune; the more the GM establishes the fiction that surrounds all this based on his/her priorities and sense of the fiction rather than in a player/character-centred way; then the less the game will have a sense of providence at work, and the more it will seem like a world of cold, soul-less causation. (In literary terms this is the world of REH's Conan, with perhaps Hour of the Dragon as an exception.)4e is the version of D&amp;D that departs the most from the approach of the previous paragraph: the rules are for establishing outcomes and consequences, but they aren't treated as a model or &quot;physics&quot;; and the game places more emphasis on player/character-centred narration, whether coming from the GM or directly from the player. Which creates much more scope for the outcomes to be framed by the player (with the cooperation/support of the GM) as the workings of providence.Here's a practical example (though the mechanic at issue in this particular example is not a d20 roll but an effect duration):In a rules-as-physics-type game this wouldn't make sense, because it is part of the causal logic of the effect itself that means the polymorphed paladin turns back into a human.Whereas the approach of 4e permits the player to establish the narration that he did around those events: turning back into a human is a manifestation of divinity at work.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 8214776, member: 42582"] My reasoning doesn't contradict [USER=16814]@Ovinomancer[/USER]'s but is a bit different, or takes a slightly different perspective. It begins with this question: [I]what is the meaning of the d20 roll?[/I] And the follow-up question that arises once the dice have been rolled and the consequence narrated: [I]what [in the fiction] caused the consequence to occur?[/I] The more that the game adopts a "rules as physics" orientation; the more that the d20 is taken to reflect or "model" the vagaries of luck and fortune; the more the GM establishes the fiction that surrounds all this based on his/her priorities and sense of the fiction rather than in a player/character-centred way; then the less the game will have a sense of providence at work, and the more it will seem like a world of cold, soul-less causation. (In literary terms this is the world of REH's Conan, with perhaps Hour of the Dragon as an exception.) 4e is the version of D&D that departs the most from the approach of the previous paragraph: the rules are for establishing outcomes and consequences, but they aren't treated as a model or "physics"; and the game places more emphasis on player/character-centred narration, whether coming from the GM or directly from the player. Which creates much more scope for the outcomes to be framed by the player (with the cooperation/support of the GM) as the workings of providence. Here's a practical example (though the mechanic at issue in this particular example is not a d20 roll but an effect duration): In a rules-as-physics-type game this wouldn't make sense, because it is part of the causal logic of the effect itself that means the polymorphed paladin turns back into a human. Whereas the approach of 4e permits the player to establish the narration that he did around those events: turning back into a human is a manifestation of divinity at work. [/QUOTE]

Verification