Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 9235808" data-attributes="member: 42582">[USER=71699]@clearstream[/USER] I understand that you are treating <a href="https://imbrattabit.wordpress.com/2019/12/09/what-does-it-take-to-be-a-neotrad-role-playing-game/" target="_blank">this blog</a> as a useful guide to neo-trad as an approach to design.Here is the core of it:In 2015, Tomas Härenstam speaking about his Mutant: Year Zero roleplaying game, defined it “neotrad” game for the first time. “it’s got the production values, ease of use and plentiful campaign material of a traditional RPG, combined with the kind of clever and thematic rules design usually found in the indie games”, he said. . . . what it takes to be a “neotrad” role-playing game? I tried to summarize some of the recognizable elements that can help to define an RPG as neotrad: *Asymmetric gameplay. The game master doesn’t roll dices for png actions (she can still roll for random effects) so she can focus on managing the scene rather on calculations. The players roll dices to react to png actions (such as attacks) so the playing characters and their players are kept in the spotlight all over the session. *Clear agency for PCs. Players Characters are created with a specific mission or assignment, or other meaningful tasks to fulfill in the game. They are not simply created as part of the fictional world, they have a close link with the game itself. *Shared party creation. The gaming party is not created on players’ initiative only, there are specific rules to create bonds, connections and strong motivations that held the people together. In this way contrasts and arguments between PCs are limited by a common destiny. *Chekhov’s gun. “If you have a pistol, then it should be fired” it means that mechanics should not appear just to give unlikely options or false promises. Once a rule has been designed, there should be a fair probability that it comes into play in every session. In this way, players can be sure that everything they learned is useful and the GM has not to memorize useless rules. This is also true for the character sheet, it should report only skills or traits that are effectively used by players. *Bounded bookkeeping. Limited use of tables (from critics to equipment), long lists or other means that require browsing the handbook too often. This saves time and keeps the players’ attention alive. *Wide GM Support. Like Modern RPGs, neotrad don’t underestimate the GM job and give her all the means to manage the rules (with a fair number of samples) as well as the players at the table. Also, rarely a neotrad game uses the battle grid, relying more on abstract “zones” and other means to manage the fictional positioning. *No rule zero, or golden rule. Self-explanatory. There are other interesting elements to consider like a playable setting (it’s not as pleonastic as it seems), the inclusion of techniques like the failing forward and a fiction first approach, but these elements are not so relevant from a neotrad perspective.What I see here is, basically, the prising apart of the "Hickman revolution" as an approach to RPGing from the wargaming rules that Hickman was using, and that have tended to dominate mainstream RPG design since.We can see this if we look at the dot points:*Asymmetric game play makes perfect sense in Dragonlance, or even Ravenloft (if we focus on the thematic aspect rather than the wargame-y can we beat a Vampire in his castle? aspect). The GM is not playing a side; the GM's role is framing scenes and presenting the story. *PC agency and shared PC creation: the party in DL is, obviously, not a random assemblage. They are related as brothers, friends, mentors, etc (and Tanis is also related to a key villain). And they have not just a place in the fiction, but a position in relation to the play of the game (ie saving the world from the dragon armies). *Chekov's gun, bounded bookkeeping and GM support: DL doesn't need rules for the difference between a halberd and a glaive-guisarme (in one of the original books the author uses "hauberk" when they mean "halberd"; mediaeval weaponry is not a thing this story cares about); it doesn't need generic random encounter rules, given that the whole point is for the GM to move the PCs through the plotted encounters; etc, etc, etc. *Once the players and GM are provided with proper rules as per my previous dot point, "rule zero"/"the golden rule" obviously is unnecessary.In GNS-ish terms, this design is adopting techniques superior to those that Hickman had available to him, in order to support high concept sim play. Some of those techniques seem to come from, or at least show some similarity to, PbtA (asymmetry; the approach to PC agency and creation; much of the approach to rules), but the GMing principles, and the role of prep, seem to be quite different and have much more in common with trad play. That is, it's sim, not narrativism.</blockquote>

Verification