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
*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
*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
Roles - do they work?
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="resistor" data-source="post: 4664666" data-attributes="member: 9142"><p>I'm going to harp on the torch-as-magical-light issue for a moment.</p><p></p><p>While it's certainly a valid means to achieve an effect, it makes me wonder: if we're coming to the point where the simulative mechanics have absolutely nothing to do with what we're using them to simulate, why bother with them at all?</p><p></p><p>To be a little clearer, if the answer to everything if "Well, you can take this mechanic for achieve X, and refluff/retool/warp it to fit Y," then could it be that we have the wrong mechanical divisions to start with?</p><p></p><p>I can think of at least two other ways to approach the problem: effects-based simulation mechanics, and narrative mechanics, neither of which have this problem.</p><p></p><p>Effects-based mechanics, like seen in M&M (and, I would say, creeping in d20 Modern with the attribute-based classes), use mechanics to model end results, not means. An M&M character might have a power to let him fly, without saying anything about how or why he can fly. Personally, I think d20 Modern channels some of the same philosophy (if not the implementation details) with the generic classes: a character is strong/fast independent of whether he's a martial artist or a swashbuckler.</p><p></p><p>The other option is fully narrative systems. To go to the extreme, you have something like Amber Diceless or The Pool, in which the mechanics don't try to model the game world at all, but just serve as an arbitration mechanism to decide which player gets to decide what happens next (at least when they disagree).</p><p></p><p>------</p><p></p><p>At any rate, where I'm going with this is that I think we need to accept that different people have different creative agendas in the game.</p><p></p><p>For some, it's just an arbitration mechanism to tell a cool story, and for them refluffing/reworking/warping the mechanics to reflect what they want may be fine.</p><p></p><p>For others, it's a mechanism for simulating a fantasy world, and for them having mechanics that aren't rooted in the simulation may break their sense of immersion.</p><p></p><p>And for yet others, it's a tactical combat game, and none of it really matters as long as the combat system is fun and (relatively) balanced.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="resistor, post: 4664666, member: 9142"] I'm going to harp on the torch-as-magical-light issue for a moment. While it's certainly a valid means to achieve an effect, it makes me wonder: if we're coming to the point where the simulative mechanics have absolutely nothing to do with what we're using them to simulate, why bother with them at all? To be a little clearer, if the answer to everything if "Well, you can take this mechanic for achieve X, and refluff/retool/warp it to fit Y," then could it be that we have the wrong mechanical divisions to start with? I can think of at least two other ways to approach the problem: effects-based simulation mechanics, and narrative mechanics, neither of which have this problem. Effects-based mechanics, like seen in M&M (and, I would say, creeping in d20 Modern with the attribute-based classes), use mechanics to model end results, not means. An M&M character might have a power to let him fly, without saying anything about how or why he can fly. Personally, I think d20 Modern channels some of the same philosophy (if not the implementation details) with the generic classes: a character is strong/fast independent of whether he's a martial artist or a swashbuckler. The other option is fully narrative systems. To go to the extreme, you have something like Amber Diceless or The Pool, in which the mechanics don't try to model the game world at all, but just serve as an arbitration mechanism to decide which player gets to decide what happens next (at least when they disagree). ------ At any rate, where I'm going with this is that I think we need to accept that different people have different creative agendas in the game. For some, it's just an arbitration mechanism to tell a cool story, and for them refluffing/reworking/warping the mechanics to reflect what they want may be fine. For others, it's a mechanism for simulating a fantasy world, and for them having mechanics that aren't rooted in the simulation may break their sense of immersion. And for yet others, it's a tactical combat game, and none of it really matters as long as the combat system is fun and (relatively) balanced. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Roles - do they work?
Top