Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 9209671" data-attributes="member: 71699">Let's use the term predefined versus unspecified modeling then. Encumbrance is predefined and specific: it's shaped to capture lifting, carrying etc (to the extent it succeeds in its goals as a model.) Roll isn't like that: further below I will put the difference in your termsIf the player succeeds on their Athletics check, others agree not to say they failed to jump the obstacle. Thus, negotiation on that score is constrained by roll.Coming back to the earlier point, the following "models" can be constrasted<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">takes a predefined range of inputs and yields results that have predefined meanings assigned to them</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">takes an open-ended range of inputs and yields results that have meanings defined during play</li> </ul>There can be a spectrum of models between those poles. What I'm saying about [roll] is that we leverage its open-endedness and assign meanings to its results to drive our process of play. It sits at the heart of TTRPG not because of its specificity (although it certainly can and very often is prespecified), but because of its inspecificity.Hence my thinking about putatively heroic play. It is not normally heroic to pick up a d20 and roll it upon the table (nor is it skillful, for that matter, as to exercise any skill in that act would be to cheat!) What then makes the worlds our characters find themselves in "heroic" (or challenging, testing, whatever adjectives one likes)?What does that come down to, if not the possibility of being forced to say what we do not wish to say? We can more often invoke (or avoid invoking) a model with predefined inputs/outputs when we desire to. That puts us in an awkward position, because if we genuinely do not wish to say the things it means, then surely we would not invoke it! [Roll] neatly settles that conundrum.Sure, but why is randomisation important?!</blockquote>

Verification