Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="loverdrive" data-source="post: 8963107" data-attributes="member: 7027139">Oh, certainly it isn't the best approach. It's just one I'm most enamored with.I'm a radical at heart, and I prefer jumping all the way in and then backing up (down? I'm not sure how this verb is constructed) a few steps rather than incrementally move forward.Yeah, pretty much, but D&D combat is both boring and slow, which makes it way too cumbersome as an outcome generation mechanism, and invidiual blow-to-blow resolution gives binary outcomes with set in stone results.The benefits of going all the way are twofold, as I see it:First, it allows for creating designs that would be impossible or cumbersome from fiction. Translation to fiction, though, must be as straightforward as possible (so, if D&D combat had an "outcome table", where depending on, say, times a PC got knocked into 0 HP, the rough outline of an outcome is provided).As an example, let's imagine a Wild West game derived from mine LOVECRAFT IS DEAD:<ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">There are two players, each representing a certain aspect of a single Gunslinger character. Let's say, Justice and Vengeance.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">They alternate in establishing a fictional situation, informed by a prompt (e.g.: Betrayal, Corruption) given by the system.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">After the situation is established, they play a mini-game where they have to press a button the moment the bell rings for a high noon (representing two halves of the Gunslinger having a metaphorical wild west duel inside her head)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Whoever wins, narrates how the Gunslinger acts, driven by the player's aspect and what outcome it leads to.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Repeat from step 1, building upon previous scenes.</li> </ol>Here, nothing gets translated from fiction into the mechanics, and there's no viable way to make such translation anyway, but the system still acts as an oracle and feeds into the collaborative storytelling process.Second, it allows for more free expression, as I talked about before: when everything has an equal chance of success, you might as well do something cool, something that you wouldn't do if there was a mechanically better option.Maybe. I view "20 Strength" and "Strong as a mountain" as practically interchangeable when it comes to conveying meaning.But, using this "character sheet" to change how things are resolved kinda defeats the purpose: you'll still end up with plenty of situations where doing something tried and true will be more effective than doing something cool. The point is to give control to the player, so they can use their judgement of what will work and what won't.At that point you might as well go for a more robust system.</blockquote>

Verification