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
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Looking for Advanced Role-Playing Content
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: 7411619" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>Dead Gods and APs are not "no myth". The Dragonlance modules are not "no myth". As best I can tell from reading people's posts, most RPGing done by ENworlders is not "no myth".</p><p></p><p>Here is "no myth", as per <a href="https://inky.org/rpg/no-myth.html" target="_blank">the website I linked to</a> under the heading "practical techniques"; I've grouped some points together because they are really elaborations of the same basic point, and I've replaced one infelicitous instance of "PC" with "player":</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px">* Nothing about the world or the storyline is sacred. There is no preset plot; there are preset genre expectations.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">* The GM should handle all PC actions by agreeing that they succeed, or working out a conflict with the [player] that they can roll dice for. Every die roll should be significant. Every die roll should have a goal and/or something at stake.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">* Boring bits can (and should) be fast-forwarded through. Time should be spent on situations in direct proportion to how interesting they are.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">* Players should try things.</p><p></p><p>The above techniques are not things that are done in all RPGing. Nor are they consistent with all RPG systems. Just to pick some easy examples - all classic D&D rulebooks, 2nd ed AD&D rulebooks, all RM rulebooks, and the Classic Traveller rulebooks contain rules and advice that directly contradict "no myth" techniques in multiple ways: classic D&D has "sacred" dungeon elements; RM and CT generalise this to a lot of world elements; 2nd ed AD&D advocates pre-set plot; none advocates "scene framing" and, as per my post not far upthread, most have rules for handling the passage of ingame time that are inconsistent with "no myth" pacing techniques; none advocates "say 'yes' or roll the dice", and the only one of those systems that is easily driftable in that direction is CT. (Classic D&D spellcasting, in particular, is a long way from "say 'yes' or roll the dice", because the player never has to roll the dice!)</p><p></p><p>Not remotely. As per the second of my four dot points above, the essence of "no myth" is "say 'yes' or roll the dice". That is about as close to an anithesis of GM sovereignty that one can get while staying within the confines of something that is easily recognisable as RPGing.</p><p></p><p>I posted in your thread, and have replied to your subsequent posts, because it seemed like it might be interesting. I have nearly 20 years experience GMing Rolemaster, which I think is undoubtedly an "advanced" game of the sort you are interested in (even if you happen not to like it's general - though not universal - use of percentile dice).</p><p></p><p>RM's approach to PC build, to action resolution, to initiative (across the dozen or so published initiative variants for the system), to encounters (including encountter tables which I think are of the general sort you are interested in), to buying and selling (which includes rules reflecting facts of economic geography plus other contributors to supply and demand), all seem to fit your concept of "advanced" RPGing. Even though I haven't GMed RM now for nearly 10 years, I'm still very happy to talk about it, and similar systems (though I don't know eg GURPS, Harnmaster as well as I know RM).</p><p></p><p>I'm also happy to talk about ways in which other systems differ from RM or AD&D - including mechanically complex systems like BW which could (on a casual read) be misatekn for something like a RM or RQ variant.</p><p></p><p>But it won't be a very productive discussion if yu aren't going to take seriously ideas about other ways of RPGing that differ quite a bit from the default approach of AD&D, RM and the like.</p><p></p><p>I think if one had to identify, right now, a single most advanced trend in RPG design, PbtA might be the strongest candidate.</p><p></p><p>To get a <em>complete</em> negation og AD&D I think you have to go to a systyem like HeroQuest revised - no lists; pure free-descriptor PC building; total synthesis of the setting of difficulties and the needs of pacing; totally uniform resolution mechanics across all spheres of action declaratoin; etc - but I'm not sure it is as "advanced" as PbtA. Compared to PbtA (of which admittedly my experience is modest) I find Cortex+ Heroic, which is closer to HQrev than PbtA is, can generate heavy demands on a GM to make its system generate clear fiction-grounded complications with teeth. I think that HQrev would make this even harder. (But would certainly exhibit the free-flowing, open ended aspects that are the great strength of Cortex+ Heroic as a system.)</p><p></p><p>I think these demands on the GM - the fact that, in a sense, the system doesn't "play itself" right out of the bos - distinguishes these more fully-AD&D-negating systems from ones like BW, DitV and PbtA, and reduces their claim to be "advanced".</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 7411619, member: 42582"] Dead Gods and APs are not "no myth". The Dragonlance modules are not "no myth". As best I can tell from reading people's posts, most RPGing done by ENworlders is not "no myth". Here is "no myth", as per [url=https://inky.org/rpg/no-myth.html]the website I linked to[/url] under the heading "practical techniques"; I've grouped some points together because they are really elaborations of the same basic point, and I've replaced one infelicitous instance of "PC" with "player": [indent]* Nothing about the world or the storyline is sacred. There is no preset plot; there are preset genre expectations. * The GM should handle all PC actions by agreeing that they succeed, or working out a conflict with the [player] that they can roll dice for. Every die roll should be significant. Every die roll should have a goal and/or something at stake. * Boring bits can (and should) be fast-forwarded through. Time should be spent on situations in direct proportion to how interesting they are. * Players should try things.[/indent] The above techniques are not things that are done in all RPGing. Nor are they consistent with all RPG systems. Just to pick some easy examples - all classic D&D rulebooks, 2nd ed AD&D rulebooks, all RM rulebooks, and the Classic Traveller rulebooks contain rules and advice that directly contradict "no myth" techniques in multiple ways: classic D&D has "sacred" dungeon elements; RM and CT generalise this to a lot of world elements; 2nd ed AD&D advocates pre-set plot; none advocates "scene framing" and, as per my post not far upthread, most have rules for handling the passage of ingame time that are inconsistent with "no myth" pacing techniques; none advocates "say 'yes' or roll the dice", and the only one of those systems that is easily driftable in that direction is CT. (Classic D&D spellcasting, in particular, is a long way from "say 'yes' or roll the dice", because the player never has to roll the dice!) Not remotely. As per the second of my four dot points above, the essence of "no myth" is "say 'yes' or roll the dice". That is about as close to an anithesis of GM sovereignty that one can get while staying within the confines of something that is easily recognisable as RPGing. I posted in your thread, and have replied to your subsequent posts, because it seemed like it might be interesting. I have nearly 20 years experience GMing Rolemaster, which I think is undoubtedly an "advanced" game of the sort you are interested in (even if you happen not to like it's general - though not universal - use of percentile dice). RM's approach to PC build, to action resolution, to initiative (across the dozen or so published initiative variants for the system), to encounters (including encountter tables which I think are of the general sort you are interested in), to buying and selling (which includes rules reflecting facts of economic geography plus other contributors to supply and demand), all seem to fit your concept of "advanced" RPGing. Even though I haven't GMed RM now for nearly 10 years, I'm still very happy to talk about it, and similar systems (though I don't know eg GURPS, Harnmaster as well as I know RM). I'm also happy to talk about ways in which other systems differ from RM or AD&D - including mechanically complex systems like BW which could (on a casual read) be misatekn for something like a RM or RQ variant. But it won't be a very productive discussion if yu aren't going to take seriously ideas about other ways of RPGing that differ quite a bit from the default approach of AD&D, RM and the like. I think if one had to identify, right now, a single most advanced trend in RPG design, PbtA might be the strongest candidate. To get a [i]complete[/i] negation og AD&D I think you have to go to a systyem like HeroQuest revised - no lists; pure free-descriptor PC building; total synthesis of the setting of difficulties and the needs of pacing; totally uniform resolution mechanics across all spheres of action declaratoin; etc - but I'm not sure it is as "advanced" as PbtA. Compared to PbtA (of which admittedly my experience is modest) I find Cortex+ Heroic, which is closer to HQrev than PbtA is, can generate heavy demands on a GM to make its system generate clear fiction-grounded complications with teeth. I think that HQrev would make this even harder. (But would certainly exhibit the free-flowing, open ended aspects that are the great strength of Cortex+ Heroic as a system.) I think these demands on the GM - the fact that, in a sense, the system doesn't "play itself" right out of the bos - distinguishes these more fully-AD&D-negating systems from ones like BW, DitV and PbtA, and reduces their claim to be "advanced". [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Looking for Advanced Role-Playing Content
Top