Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="loverdrive" data-source="post: 8962707" data-attributes="member: 7027139">I've pondered about decoupling outcomes from the fictional situation quite a bit, but never really had an opportunity to crystalize it into words, and it seems reasonaly relevant to the thread, so why not do it here.I've come to a conclusion that I, contrary to what I thought, actually don't give a single quack about leveraging fictional positioning. From micro-details to ubiquitous things like &quot;my character is good at fighting and this is a fight&quot;, I sincerely don't care.I prefer for all actions to have the exact same probability of success, as this allows for greater flexibility in character expression — if you don't have to worry whether [X] will work, you can role play freely.I, honestly, feel kinda dumb — this is completely obvious, but it occured to me only recently.More than that, the basic flow of any RPG looks like:<ol>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">Player states what they want to happen</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">A rough outline of an outcome is decided using the rules</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">Someone describes what happened &quot;on-screen&quot;, filling in any missing necessary details</li>
</ol>First, a whole bunch of &quot;game&quot; can be packaged into step 2. Of course, when it's just rolling dice, meaningful gameplay must be created elsewhere, but even something as simple as bidding in Undying already works great. Now I'm working on an RPG that uses a fighting minigame for that purpose, and I'm generally happy with the results (well, the fighting minigame at this moment sucks, but still)Second, the outline being rough gives an opportunity to resolve any situation while maintaining consistency, and, again, gives more freedom for expression. If it's not &quot;you succeed at the task at hand and the new fiction must reflect that&quot;, but &quot;you end up in a more favourable position than before&quot;, it's much easier to work with.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="loverdrive, post: 8962707, member: 7027139"] I've pondered about decoupling outcomes from the fictional situation quite a bit, but never really had an opportunity to crystalize it into words, and it seems reasonaly relevant to the thread, so why not do it here. I've come to a conclusion that I, contrary to what I thought, actually don't give a single quack about leveraging fictional positioning. From micro-details to ubiquitous things like "my character is good at fighting and this is a fight", I sincerely don't care. I prefer for all actions to have the exact same probability of success, as this allows for greater flexibility in character expression — if you don't have to worry whether [X] will work, you can role play freely. I, honestly, feel kinda dumb — this is completely obvious, but it occured to me only recently. More than that, the basic flow of any RPG looks like: [LIST=1] [*]Player states what they want to happen [*]A rough outline of an outcome is decided using the rules [*]Someone describes what happened "on-screen", filling in any missing necessary details [/LIST] First, a whole bunch of "game" can be packaged into step 2. Of course, when it's just rolling dice, meaningful gameplay must be created elsewhere, but even something as simple as bidding in Undying already works great. Now I'm working on an RPG that uses a fighting minigame for that purpose, and I'm generally happy with the results (well, the fighting minigame at this moment sucks, but still) Second, the outline being [I]rough[/I] gives an opportunity to resolve any situation while maintaining consistency, and, again, gives more freedom for expression. If it's not "you succeed at the task at hand and the new fiction must reflect that", but "you end up in a more favourable position than before", it's much easier to work with. [/QUOTE]

Verification