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.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Old School : Tucker's Kobolds and Trained Jellies
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: 5845233" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>OK, but that's different from what I said. For example, those details can be - and in many systems often are - relevant to determining the difficulty of a check. In both B/X D&D and in AD&D, for example, the likelihood of a pursuing monster giving up the chase is influenced by the dropping of food and/or treasure. The fact that the evasion check is, in the last analysis, boiled down to a die roll doesn't mean that the fiction didn't matter. In that sort of game, for example, dropping rations shouldn't <em>just</em> be a mechanical matter of changing an entry on a character sheet (although it will involve such a change). In an exploration-oriented game of that sort it should also affect the fictional situation of the PC.</p><p></p><p>That is true, but seems orthogonal to Hussar's post and your response.</p><p></p><p>In Unearthed Arcana, jump distances for thief acrobats are listed in feet, as I recall, but for barbarians are listed as a range of feet, presumably to be resolved via die roll (at least in some cases). The player of a barbarian whose PC comes to a pit can first try and judge it's width (many GMs allows this information to be known automatically), and then work out the likelihood of a successful jump. This doesn't mean that the fiction has become irrelevant to the action resolution. It has framed the parameters of the die roll required.</p><p></p><p>A thief climbing a wall is similar. I am prepared to assert that only a tiny fraction of wall climbs in AD&D games have been resolved not by die roll, but by the GM describing the holds on the surface and the player of the thief describing how his/her PC traverses those holds.</p><p> </p><p>I have a personal view on how such mechanics should be analysed.</p><p></p><p>They are not action resolution mechanics at all. They are scene-revising mechanics. By calling for the skill check, in effect what the player is doing is saying "I don't like the scene in which I don't know what's in this room. I want to roll a die, and if I win then I want you to reframe the scene as one in which I see the concealed things in the room."</p><p></p><p>I don't have a strong view on whether it is good or bad to include such mechanics in the game, but I think the starting point for answering that question is to properly understand what their function is.</p><p> </p><p>My reading of it is a bit different. Players still (apparently) want the tropes of being dungeon explorers, but actually playing through the game of dungeon exploration bores them silly. Therefore they like reframing mechanics like Perception checks.</p><p></p><p>3E's social mechanics are, I think, best analysed the same way. A Diplomacy check isn't action resolution; it's a chance for the player to have the scene reframed as one in which an opposed or unhelpful NPC instead is a friendly and helpful NPC. (I suspect the motivation for this is partly that roleplaying interaction is seen by some players as boring, and partly because many players don't like freeform roleplaying of interaction encounters and so, having no familiarity with decent mechanics for handling such things, opt for the "scene-rewriting" mechanics instead.)</p><p></p><p>I think the prospects of large numbers of players suddenly becoming enthusiastic for exploring streams looking for cylinders are dim. I also think the prospects of getting decent social encounter resolution mechanics from the D&Dnext project are dim. I therefore suspect that the mechancis that irritate you are likely to remain - if they're not printed as official rules, the players who rely upon them as scene-framing tools will have to reintroduce them!</p><p></p><p>But anyway, all of that is (in my view) quite orthogonal to the question of whether dice-based action resolution mechanics undermine the place of the fiction. C&S, RQ, GURPS, RM, Traveller, etc - nearly all the games of the first post-D&D generation - have extensive mechanical systems based on (i) identify the fictional obstacle to be overcome, (ii) determine the die roll required, (iii) make the die roll, (iv) extrapolate back to the fiction. And to the best of my knowledge it's never been suggested that those mechanics undermine the character of those games as RPGs in which the players play the game by engaging with the gameworld.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 5845233, member: 42582"] OK, but that's different from what I said. For example, those details can be - and in many systems often are - relevant to determining the difficulty of a check. In both B/X D&D and in AD&D, for example, the likelihood of a pursuing monster giving up the chase is influenced by the dropping of food and/or treasure. The fact that the evasion check is, in the last analysis, boiled down to a die roll doesn't mean that the fiction didn't matter. In that sort of game, for example, dropping rations shouldn't [I]just[/I] be a mechanical matter of changing an entry on a character sheet (although it will involve such a change). In an exploration-oriented game of that sort it should also affect the fictional situation of the PC. That is true, but seems orthogonal to Hussar's post and your response. In Unearthed Arcana, jump distances for thief acrobats are listed in feet, as I recall, but for barbarians are listed as a range of feet, presumably to be resolved via die roll (at least in some cases). The player of a barbarian whose PC comes to a pit can first try and judge it's width (many GMs allows this information to be known automatically), and then work out the likelihood of a successful jump. This doesn't mean that the fiction has become irrelevant to the action resolution. It has framed the parameters of the die roll required. A thief climbing a wall is similar. I am prepared to assert that only a tiny fraction of wall climbs in AD&D games have been resolved not by die roll, but by the GM describing the holds on the surface and the player of the thief describing how his/her PC traverses those holds. I have a personal view on how such mechanics should be analysed. They are not action resolution mechanics at all. They are scene-revising mechanics. By calling for the skill check, in effect what the player is doing is saying "I don't like the scene in which I don't know what's in this room. I want to roll a die, and if I win then I want you to reframe the scene as one in which I see the concealed things in the room." I don't have a strong view on whether it is good or bad to include such mechanics in the game, but I think the starting point for answering that question is to properly understand what their function is. My reading of it is a bit different. Players still (apparently) want the tropes of being dungeon explorers, but actually playing through the game of dungeon exploration bores them silly. Therefore they like reframing mechanics like Perception checks. 3E's social mechanics are, I think, best analysed the same way. A Diplomacy check isn't action resolution; it's a chance for the player to have the scene reframed as one in which an opposed or unhelpful NPC instead is a friendly and helpful NPC. (I suspect the motivation for this is partly that roleplaying interaction is seen by some players as boring, and partly because many players don't like freeform roleplaying of interaction encounters and so, having no familiarity with decent mechanics for handling such things, opt for the "scene-rewriting" mechanics instead.) I think the prospects of large numbers of players suddenly becoming enthusiastic for exploring streams looking for cylinders are dim. I also think the prospects of getting decent social encounter resolution mechanics from the D&Dnext project are dim. I therefore suspect that the mechancis that irritate you are likely to remain - if they're not printed as official rules, the players who rely upon them as scene-framing tools will have to reintroduce them! But anyway, all of that is (in my view) quite orthogonal to the question of whether dice-based action resolution mechanics undermine the place of the fiction. C&S, RQ, GURPS, RM, Traveller, etc - nearly all the games of the first post-D&D generation - have extensive mechanical systems based on (i) identify the fictional obstacle to be overcome, (ii) determine the die roll required, (iii) make the die roll, (iv) extrapolate back to the fiction. And to the best of my knowledge it's never been suggested that those mechanics undermine the character of those games as RPGs in which the players play the game by engaging with the gameworld. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Old School : Tucker's Kobolds and Trained Jellies
Top