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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
L&L The Next Phase
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="pemerton" data-source="post: 6188229" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>I agree with you that, in an RPG which makes numbers central to its action resolution mechanics, the maths is fundamental. But my agreement is grounded in a particular approach to RPGing - namely, that the action resolution mechanics are <em>the</em> pre-eminent mode for the players to have their impact upon the gameworld, and that once the action resolution mechanics are in play its the GM's job to adjudicate them but not to suspend or disregard them. I don't know where I learned this approach to RPG play - I guess from Moldvay Basic, although I don't think it's expressly stated in that ruleset, and maybe also from Traveller with its many subsystems for skills and other things - but I know that I consolidated it over years of playing Rolemaster. And then brought it to, and further developed it over the course of, my 4e play.</p><p></p><p>But I think that many players, many GMs and many groups don't approach the game in that way. They are the audience for the sidebars on pages 1 and 3 of the most recent playtest DM guidelines, about ignoring the dice and setting DCs ad hoc and ex post facto . And for those players the maths is not fundamental, I think. What's important to them, as best I can tell from the outside of that outlook, is that the PC build rules should lead to character's whose numbers, on the page, convey the right flavour (so my barbarian should be naked but still numerically tougher than a mage; my fighter should have a high weapon damage number; etc); and the action resolution rules don't really have to do much other than convey a flavourful sense of effort on the part of a PC. The work that I (and I think you) would like the maths to do, they are happy to achieve via GM fiat at various points of action resolution, and perhaps even PC build.</p><p></p><p>I played a C&T-using game back in the late 90s, but my memory is pretty hazy, I never read the rules at the time, and I have a feeling my GM got OAs wrong.</p><p></p><p>I picked up a copy cheaply a year or three ago, and read it earlier this year. I didn't do the maths on the crit system and so have no idea how it would work out in play. Otherwise there was nothing too inspiring. I certainly think it's a mistake to look at 4e and see nothing but the precision of a wargame grid as the difference between its combat resolution and Next's "theatre of the mind". Other fantasy games - d20 and non-d20 - show that you can have 4e-style visceral combat, in which PC build sets the framework of resources that will then feed into significant choices (significant both in mechanical and story terms) within the context of action resolution, without requiring a grid.</p><p></p><p>In other words, I'm agreeing with [MENTION=56051]Raith5[/MENTION] upthread.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 6188229, member: 42582"] I agree with you that, in an RPG which makes numbers central to its action resolution mechanics, the maths is fundamental. But my agreement is grounded in a particular approach to RPGing - namely, that the action resolution mechanics are [I]the[/I] pre-eminent mode for the players to have their impact upon the gameworld, and that once the action resolution mechanics are in play its the GM's job to adjudicate them but not to suspend or disregard them. I don't know where I learned this approach to RPG play - I guess from Moldvay Basic, although I don't think it's expressly stated in that ruleset, and maybe also from Traveller with its many subsystems for skills and other things - but I know that I consolidated it over years of playing Rolemaster. And then brought it to, and further developed it over the course of, my 4e play. But I think that many players, many GMs and many groups don't approach the game in that way. They are the audience for the sidebars on pages 1 and 3 of the most recent playtest DM guidelines, about ignoring the dice and setting DCs ad hoc and ex post facto . And for those players the maths is not fundamental, I think. What's important to them, as best I can tell from the outside of that outlook, is that the PC build rules should lead to character's whose numbers, on the page, convey the right flavour (so my barbarian should be naked but still numerically tougher than a mage; my fighter should have a high weapon damage number; etc); and the action resolution rules don't really have to do much other than convey a flavourful sense of effort on the part of a PC. The work that I (and I think you) would like the maths to do, they are happy to achieve via GM fiat at various points of action resolution, and perhaps even PC build. I played a C&T-using game back in the late 90s, but my memory is pretty hazy, I never read the rules at the time, and I have a feeling my GM got OAs wrong. I picked up a copy cheaply a year or three ago, and read it earlier this year. I didn't do the maths on the crit system and so have no idea how it would work out in play. Otherwise there was nothing too inspiring. I certainly think it's a mistake to look at 4e and see nothing but the precision of a wargame grid as the difference between its combat resolution and Next's "theatre of the mind". Other fantasy games - d20 and non-d20 - show that you can have 4e-style visceral combat, in which PC build sets the framework of resources that will then feed into significant choices (significant both in mechanical and story terms) within the context of action resolution, without requiring a grid. In other words, I'm agreeing with [MENTION=56051]Raith5[/MENTION] upthread. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
L&L The Next Phase
Top