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
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
"Prescription" and RPGing procedures
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="Bedrockgames" data-source="post: 8804632" data-attributes="member: 85555"><p>I'm not sure if we are still debating about scene distinctions or not, but I would say in some games it is more about when you transition from one state to the next, rather than conceiving of the game in terms of formal scenes. The less formalized this process is, the less I see it as thinking in terms of scenes. Esoterorists for instance very much conceives of play as going from one scene to the next (and not as much in terms of going from place to place for example). For Esoterrorists that works well. But it isn't going to work in every type of game or be the way every game or every GM conceives of these moments and transitions. </p><p></p><p>I am not well versed in AW, so I can't really speak to its fluidity. But by fluid I meant arising naturally in the conversation, not having a set way of doing things, but working them out however the group does, due to its particular dynamic if that makes sense. Also, not having any particular way of doing it in mind, at least not at a conscious level. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I think it depends on what aspect of play we are talking about. But I think when the rulebook doesn't speak to it, it basically leaves it to the table to negotiate and figure out on its own. I don't know that it leads to one style over another (that is largely going to boil down to what the styles of the people playing are). And again all I am saying is there is room for games that leave those spaces open. I am not saying every game, or even most games, should. </p><p></p><p>On drift, that is always something that happens. There does seem to be a difference between how the book is written and how it tends to get used in practice (and sometimes you end up with a few variations that predominate). You saw this with social skills in 3E. As written they were not that powerful if I remember (and it is possible I am confusing this with another system as it has been quite bit). But my memory is if you use stuff like Bluff and Diplomacy as written, they are actually pretty constrained mechanics. But almost no one used them as written so they tended to have a lot more oomph at the table. I think there is a lot of reasons for why this happens. </p><p></p><p>And again, I not saying a prescriptive approach is bad (I think it can be quite good). There are some areas I find prescriptive causes me to freeze up a little (for example managing the flow of a 'scene' is an area that I generally feel more comfortable allowing to unfold intuitively----but that is just my taste, I'm not saying its a better preference). But there are also places I want more clarity around this stuff.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Bedrockgames, post: 8804632, member: 85555"] I'm not sure if we are still debating about scene distinctions or not, but I would say in some games it is more about when you transition from one state to the next, rather than conceiving of the game in terms of formal scenes. The less formalized this process is, the less I see it as thinking in terms of scenes. Esoterorists for instance very much conceives of play as going from one scene to the next (and not as much in terms of going from place to place for example). For Esoterrorists that works well. But it isn't going to work in every type of game or be the way every game or every GM conceives of these moments and transitions. I am not well versed in AW, so I can't really speak to its fluidity. But by fluid I meant arising naturally in the conversation, not having a set way of doing things, but working them out however the group does, due to its particular dynamic if that makes sense. Also, not having any particular way of doing it in mind, at least not at a conscious level. I think it depends on what aspect of play we are talking about. But I think when the rulebook doesn't speak to it, it basically leaves it to the table to negotiate and figure out on its own. I don't know that it leads to one style over another (that is largely going to boil down to what the styles of the people playing are). And again all I am saying is there is room for games that leave those spaces open. I am not saying every game, or even most games, should. On drift, that is always something that happens. There does seem to be a difference between how the book is written and how it tends to get used in practice (and sometimes you end up with a few variations that predominate). You saw this with social skills in 3E. As written they were not that powerful if I remember (and it is possible I am confusing this with another system as it has been quite bit). But my memory is if you use stuff like Bluff and Diplomacy as written, they are actually pretty constrained mechanics. But almost no one used them as written so they tended to have a lot more oomph at the table. I think there is a lot of reasons for why this happens. And again, I not saying a prescriptive approach is bad (I think it can be quite good). There are some areas I find prescriptive causes me to freeze up a little (for example managing the flow of a 'scene' is an area that I generally feel more comfortable allowing to unfold intuitively----but that is just my taste, I'm not saying its a better preference). But there are also places I want more clarity around this stuff. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
"Prescription" and RPGing procedures
Top