D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

[Faolyn]

I would say that there is significant crossover in the way some people run D&D (mostly younger gamers I've come across) and Monster of the Week play. But that's fairly distinct from more classic approaches to D&D and running Apocalypse World as directed. There really isn't a single form of Powered by the Apocalypse though.

In Root, there's Plead With A PC, in which you get to ask another PC to do something, and if they agree, they clear 1-exhausiton.

In Masks, there's Provoke Someone. If used on a PC, you can either add a Team to the Pool if they agree, or cause them to mark a condition if they refuse (or both, if you roll a 10+).

In Chasing Adventure, there's Compel. If used on a PC, it's similar to Masks (you will Favor them if they agree; if they refuse, they have disadvantage forward and you no longer Favor them), but if you fail the roll, they get to ask you two questions as if they had used the Scrutinize move on you.

In Bedlam Hall, there's Direct The Staff. They must follow your orders or lose Prestige, but if you roll 7-9, then they get to choose from several different benefits. Note that in this game, you're members of a household staff where there's a distinct ranking system in place.

So there's a few more PbtA's for the pile.

 

[Faolyn]

Do you realize you are telling me I wouldn't have any problem with Narrstivist GM restrictions if I understood them better? Do you understand how unbelievably arrogant and "holier than thou" that statement is?

Besides, when you codify things you put up walls. I don't want those walls in my games. I prefer advice and suggestion.

I'm not saying that at all. What I'm saying is that there are no actual walls that don't also exist in D&D.

 

[Faolyn]

reading the bolded am i understanding this correctly, so what happens if the manipulator succeeds but the target PC doesn't choose to be manipulated? is there some penalty or otherwise consequence?

They don't get the XP and +1, but aren't otherwise punished or hindered.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Yeah, lots of folks like to use hit points as an excuse to completely abandon any desire for simulation as delusional, or at best wrong-headed. No one ever seems to understand just how insulting that is, or recognize any kind of spectrum.

Notice the phrase "too strident" in what I posted. I can understand people who consider things like armor class or hit points the price of doing business in using D&D. But at that point objecting to far less glaring style support or simplification mechanics ought to be acknowledged as "I haven't had to deal with this before and I don't see a good reason to do so now" not "But that's gamist!" The former actually expresses a position, the latter just comes across as hypocritical.

 

[Faolyn]

I'm sure it's quite welcome...to players of the game in which they appear.

So why is it unwelcome to you? What exactly on those lists would actually prevent you from running the way you like to run? What on those lists are you not already doing as a GM?

 

[Enrahim]

So:

As a GM, you're (generic you're) going to act certain ways.

But also, you don't want to see those ways written down.

This makes no sense.

OK, look at the GM role, principles, agenda, etc., from Dungeon World.



Just about every single thing here is something that's done in standard D&D, with the possible exceptions of "Ask questions and use the answers" and "Be a fan of the characters." And only a couple of these "push the narrative," and none of them do so in a way that's not used in typical D&D.

So why is it that actually listing these things in a way that is useful, not just to new players but to veterans, is unwelcome?

So I can openly run dungeon world exactly the same way I run D&D without anyone coming shouting at me for doing it wrong?

 

[Thomas Shey]

I wasn't talking about Traveller or Pendragon. Although considering how old both those games are, it's no wonder they didn't think about player consent.

In the case of Pendragon, I suspect Stafford would view it that people who didn't want to engage with what he was doing fundamentally wanted to be playing a different game. Engaging with what the Virtues and Flaws made you do was, best I can tell, what he considered the important part of the game play, so if you didn't want to do that, you were fundamentally playing the wrong game.

 

[CreamCloud0]

They don't get the XP and +1, but aren't otherwise punished or hindered.

and the manipulator doesn't get anything in compensation either? for the manipulee brushing off their success?

 

[Thomas Shey]

and the manipulator doesn't get anything in compensation either? for the manipulee brushing off their success?

Its a carrot, not a stick.

 

[Micah Sweet]

So why is it unwelcome to you? What exactly on those lists would actually prevent you from running the way you like to run? What on those lists are you not already doing as a GM?

I'd have to look at the lists again (I don't own these games), but anything emphasizing narrative beats and making everything about the PCs and their interests is potentially problematic for my play.