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
NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
[rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.
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: 9715140" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>Nor are many of the words that the players speak, like "I [as my PC] turn around." No in the fiction hears those words spoken.</p><p></p><p>As I posted not far upthread, this is a recurring source of confusion and tension in RPGing, when the GM asks the player "Did you really say that?"</p><p></p><p>The stuff that is represented might be part of the fiction, sure. The act of representation typically isn't, though - as per the example of the player saying, as their PC, "I turn around".</p><p></p><p>What is part of the fiction is <em>the turning around</em>, not the act of saying "I turn around".</p><p></p><p>Here I think we part ways. Because I agree that, speaking accurately, the mechanics are not diegetic. But isn't "diegetic narrative" a tautology? Or very close to one at least.</p><p></p><p>I think I agree with this. But then I want to restate your points about the climb check - which basically I agree with - like this: the climb check isn't representational. And so it does not introduce elements into the narrative (that is, into the diegesis). As per my post somewhere not too far upthread, it's like the film cutting from the character getting ready to climb, to a scene where the sweating, red-faced character pulls themself over the top of the cliff (success) or to a scene of the character tumbling down the cliff to their doom (failure).</p><p></p><p>This is why I liked your map and puzzle square examples: because these are ones where we don't even need to talk about representation. What the players are doing (poring over the map or the puzzle) is exactly what the characters are doing.</p><p></p><p>But if we talk about representation, we at least need the mechanics to map to descriptions of processes or events. The Rolemaster Move/Manoeuvre table does a bit of this - eg, here are some of the failure entries, in increasing degree of seriousness:</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px">Fail to act</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">Freeze for 2 rounds</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">Fall. Sprain ankle. You are -30. +15 hits</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">Fall. Knock yourself out. You are out for 30 rounds. +10 hits</p><p></p><p>This still doesn't tell us exactly what went wrong for the character, but it does provide descriptions of whether they choked at the outset, or tumbled down the cliff.</p><p></p><p>TL;DR - I don't think we are disagreeing that much over the basic points at issue.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 9715140, member: 42582"] Nor are many of the words that the players speak, like "I [as my PC] turn around." No in the fiction hears those words spoken. As I posted not far upthread, this is a recurring source of confusion and tension in RPGing, when the GM asks the player "Did you really say that?" The stuff that is represented might be part of the fiction, sure. The act of representation typically isn't, though - as per the example of the player saying, as their PC, "I turn around". What is part of the fiction is [I]the turning around[/I], not the act of saying "I turn around". Here I think we part ways. Because I agree that, speaking accurately, the mechanics are not diegetic. But isn't "diegetic narrative" a tautology? Or very close to one at least. I think I agree with this. But then I want to restate your points about the climb check - which basically I agree with - like this: the climb check isn't representational. And so it does not introduce elements into the narrative (that is, into the diegesis). As per my post somewhere not too far upthread, it's like the film cutting from the character getting ready to climb, to a scene where the sweating, red-faced character pulls themself over the top of the cliff (success) or to a scene of the character tumbling down the cliff to their doom (failure). This is why I liked your map and puzzle square examples: because these are ones where we don't even need to talk about representation. What the players are doing (poring over the map or the puzzle) is exactly what the characters are doing. But if we talk about representation, we at least need the mechanics to map to descriptions of processes or events. The Rolemaster Move/Manoeuvre table does a bit of this - eg, here are some of the failure entries, in increasing degree of seriousness: [indent]Fail to act Freeze for 2 rounds Fall. Sprain ankle. You are -30. +15 hits Fall. Knock yourself out. You are out for 30 rounds. +10 hits[/indent] This still doesn't tell us exactly what went wrong for the character, but it does provide descriptions of whether they choked at the outset, or tumbled down the cliff. TL;DR - I don't think we are disagreeing that much over the basic points at issue. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
[rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.
Top