Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Grendel_Khan" data-source="post: 8672125" data-attributes="member: 7028554">I'm similarly iffy on the Monsterhearts move you mentioned, though probably for different reasons--I don't think game designers are trying to simulate human (much less supernatural human) psychology with those kinds of mechanics, but rather trying to add meaningful mechanics to PC-to-PC interactions, and make those doable in a game with fewer hurt feelings or awkwardness. I'm just not into those kinds of moves because they're a little navel-gazey to me. I'm a pretentious GM, but not that pretentious. But I think that example is very different from the ones I gave, which aren't proscribing how someone has to respond to another PC, or to anything. They're just XP rewards, and the PCs have tons of leeway re: how they get them. And like I mentioned, it's supposed to be the player who decides if they get the reward--all hail precious player agency!But also the games I mentioned aren't interested in realism. Brindlewood Bay is a game that's not only steeped in a combination of unrealistic genres (cozy mysteries and cosmic horror) but has a core mechanic that lets you turn a failure into a success after the roll, and after the player has seen the related consequence, effectively rewinding their own death or worse for a do-over. And Blades in the Dark is gritty and all, but it's a setting filled with ghosts and demons, and mechanics that also let you avoid or mitigate consequences once you know the full impact, turning a ruined reputation into troubling rumors, or a dead ally into a wounded one.Realism isn't the goal in either case, but especially not psychological realism. Any player-nudging mechanics they have are about reinforcing genre and premise.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Grendel_Khan, post: 8672125, member: 7028554"] I'm similarly iffy on the Monsterhearts move you mentioned, though probably for different reasons--I don't think game designers are trying to simulate human (much less supernatural human) psychology with those kinds of mechanics, but rather trying to add meaningful mechanics to PC-to-PC interactions, and make those doable in a game with fewer hurt feelings or awkwardness. I'm just not into those kinds of moves because they're a little navel-gazey to me. I'm a pretentious GM, but not [I]that[/I] pretentious. But I think that example is very different from the ones I gave, which aren't proscribing how someone has to respond to another PC, or to anything. They're just XP rewards, and the PCs have tons of leeway re: how they get them. And like I mentioned, it's supposed to be the player who decides if they get the reward--all hail precious player agency! But also the games I mentioned aren't interested in realism. Brindlewood Bay is a game that's not only steeped in a combination of unrealistic genres (cozy mysteries and cosmic horror) but has a core mechanic that lets you turn a failure into a success after the roll, and after the player has seen the related consequence, effectively rewinding their own death or worse for a do-over. And Blades in the Dark is gritty and all, but it's a setting filled with ghosts and demons, and mechanics that also let you avoid or mitigate consequences once you know the full impact, turning a ruined reputation into troubling rumors, or a dead ally into a wounded one. Realism isn't the goal in either case, but especially not psychological realism. Any player-nudging mechanics they have are about reinforcing genre and premise. [/QUOTE]

Verification