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
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
Presentation vs design... vs philosophy
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: 7937659" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>Some of this is conjecture on a fairly thin evidence base.</p><p></p><p>But surely it's relevant that the 4e DMG has a secion called House Rules. that advises GMs on how to go about changing rules and testing those rules.</p><p></p><p>Moldvay Basic suggests resolving actions for which there are no specific resolution rules by making a d20-based stat check, or making a percentage roll. It doesn't suggest using a coin toss, or an arm wrestle between participants.</p><p></p><p>Gygax's DMG suggests a percentage roll. Again, no coin tosses or arm wrestles are suggested.</p><p></p><p>Are these failures to empower? Every game has it's own internal logic. And every RPG has some sort of logic to its resolution system. For 4e, in the context of resolving improvised attack actions, <em>why would a GM need to fight page 42</em>? It offers 6 options for damage (low, medium and high for normal and limited sorts of action).</p><p></p><p>It implicitly canvasses conditions/effects (the worked example includes a 1 sq push together with damage) but doesn't give good advice on these. That was subsequently rectified by a column on the WotC website (by wrecan).</p><p></p><p>It mentions +/-2. This is the same as the modifier for partial concealment/cover. An astute GM will notice that the modifier for total concealment/cover is -5, and hence might infer that when circumstances are not just <em>especially (un)favourable</em> (the wording on p 42) but <em>overwhelmingly (un)favourable</em> (my wording) the modifier should be +/-5. (This would be somewhat comparable to advantage/disadvantage in 5e D&D.) Page 42 would have been more complete had it mentioned this, although perhaps the designers thought it was a good feature of design not to prod GMs too strongly in the direction of such big modifiers.</p><p></p><p>From these guidelines, a thoughtful GM or player can work out the broad parameters and tolerances of the system. That the system has parameters and tolerances doesn't seem to be a weakness of it. Every system has such things.</p><p></p><p>Perhaps one doesn't like a system where the parameters are so clearly stated. I don't really see how <em>empowerment</em> helps explain what is going on there, though.</p><p></p><p>I'm also reminded here of arguments put in earlier threads that the maximum DC a GM in 5e D&D can set is 30, because that's what's mentioned on the DC chart. Whether right or wrong, that such arguments are run suggests that a GM who wants to set a DC above 30 (or below 5?) has to "fight" the DC chart. Does that mean that 5e doesn't <em>empower </em>either? The implication of these arguments seems to be that the most empowering form of RPG would be one with no resolution mechanics at all - that tells the participants, or the GM, to just decide what happens. If that's what is being said, it would be clearer to get it out there in the open.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 7937659, member: 42582"] Some of this is conjecture on a fairly thin evidence base. But surely it's relevant that the 4e DMG has a secion called House Rules. that advises GMs on how to go about changing rules and testing those rules. Moldvay Basic suggests resolving actions for which there are no specific resolution rules by making a d20-based stat check, or making a percentage roll. It doesn't suggest using a coin toss, or an arm wrestle between participants. Gygax's DMG suggests a percentage roll. Again, no coin tosses or arm wrestles are suggested. Are these failures to empower? Every game has it's own internal logic. And every RPG has some sort of logic to its resolution system. For 4e, in the context of resolving improvised attack actions, [I]why would a GM need to fight page 42[/I]? It offers 6 options for damage (low, medium and high for normal and limited sorts of action). It implicitly canvasses conditions/effects (the worked example includes a 1 sq push together with damage) but doesn't give good advice on these. That was subsequently rectified by a column on the WotC website (by wrecan). It mentions +/-2. This is the same as the modifier for partial concealment/cover. An astute GM will notice that the modifier for total concealment/cover is -5, and hence might infer that when circumstances are not just [I]especially (un)favourable[/I] (the wording on p 42) but [I]overwhelmingly (un)favourable[/I] (my wording) the modifier should be +/-5. (This would be somewhat comparable to advantage/disadvantage in 5e D&D.) Page 42 would have been more complete had it mentioned this, although perhaps the designers thought it was a good feature of design not to prod GMs too strongly in the direction of such big modifiers. From these guidelines, a thoughtful GM or player can work out the broad parameters and tolerances of the system. That the system has parameters and tolerances doesn't seem to be a weakness of it. Every system has such things. Perhaps one doesn't like a system where the parameters are so clearly stated. I don't really see how [I]empowerment[/I] helps explain what is going on there, though. I'm also reminded here of arguments put in earlier threads that the maximum DC a GM in 5e D&D can set is 30, because that's what's mentioned on the DC chart. Whether right or wrong, that such arguments are run suggests that a GM who wants to set a DC above 30 (or below 5?) has to "fight" the DC chart. Does that mean that 5e doesn't [I]empower [/I]either? The implication of these arguments seems to be that the most empowering form of RPG would be one with no resolution mechanics at all - that tells the participants, or the GM, to just decide what happens. If that's what is being said, it would be clearer to get it out there in the open. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
Presentation vs design... vs philosophy
Top