D&D General Story Now, Skilled Play, and Elephants

[Ovinomancer]

It wasn't a trap, I just wanted to check we were referring to the same thing. And I believe we are talking about the whole system, no exclusions. In another thread about "skilled play" I read posts such as the following (forgive lack of more context, these have been long threads) -


Rolling an athletics check would surely be using the system and capable of efficiently leading to achievement of goals. The sentiment was mirrored in different ways by other posters. So something is going on there. Some distinction between using an available mechanic efficiently and effectively, and withholding from using those same mechanics because it would not be "skillful" to do so (even - or possibly especially - if they efficiently lead to achievement of goals!).

I'm reminded of Bernard Suits who said that


What I felt is that under "skilled play" there are rules in play prohibiting use of more efficient means (available mechanics) in favour of less efficient, to make "skilled play" possible. The rules in question are not in the game system, they are brought to the table by the players.

You used the system no matter how you play, so using the system cannot be skilled play by itself. There's a reason my short definition is leveraging the system to achieve player goals. This directly gets to using the system in the best manner possible for a specific end. For instance, in Monopoly, I may try to get a property of every color on the board, and that's using the system. As a winning strategy, though, it will fail to obtaining the titular Monopolies and jacking up the rent. Skilled play here is about making good choices on properties, making good deals with other players, and knowing when and how much to improve the properties you have. Now, Monopoly is not a game that lends itself to a lot of skilled play because it's system is mostly based on the random and unmodifiable die rolls, so skilled play is more in effectively engaging the metagame. I point this out because different RPGs offer different systems that are more or less susceptible to skilled play. Take Fiasco, for instance. Skilled play here is very ephemeral, and all at the meta level -- you need to play your scenes in a way that will earn the die color you want from your fellow players while be conscious of the fact that they also want to achieve their goals which require having dice. There's no real mechanics you can engage during most of play, but you can still do some skilled play. Contrasted with B/X, where there's lots of interlocking mechanics that you can manipulate through play to mitigate or enhance desired outcomes.

As I noted above, the thing that most detracts from skilled play in RPGs is how often and where the GM applies Force. Force obviates skilled play when it is deployed.

Also, skilled play is not a universal good, nor something everyone does or should desire. It's an approach to play, and not, in any way, better or worse than others except in individual preference.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Ah, maybe not the best post to pull out as we went into this sort of thing. In the case that - literally - kicking the door down is perfectly effective, then is it skillful to just make the ability check? Nothing further needed?

At the time, and now, that is what I was getting at. Do you recall the discussion of passwall? That using it might not be "skilled play" even if it was literally the most efficient way to achieve your goals.

Like I said in the other thread, I do think that SP can both bypass and leverage mechanics, as appropriate.

I don't recall that part of the discussion specifically, but SP is more than just efficiency. It's a particular approach to the game.

Fireballing a group of orcs isn't SP in any meaningful sense. Luring the orcs into a tar pit and then fireballing them arguably is SP. That's true even if the orcs had such low HP that they all died in both cases (rendering the latter example overkill).

 

[clearstream]

Like I said in the other thread, I do think that SP can both bypass and leverage mechanics, as appropriate.

I don't recall that part of the discussion specifically, but SP is more than just efficiency. It's a particular approach to the game.

Fireballing a group of orcs isn't SP in any meaningful sense. Luring the orcs into a tar pit and then fireballing them arguably is SP. That's true even if the orcs had such low HP that they all died in both cases (rendering the latter example overkill).

That's exactly what I am interested in. That SP is more than just efficiently achieving your goals: it's a particular approach to the game.

What can you say about that approach?

 

[clearstream]

You used the system no matter how you play, so using the system cannot be skilled play by itself. There's a reason my short definition is leveraging the system to achieve player goals. This directly gets to using the system in the best manner possible for a specific end.

That is what I was describing.

For instance, in Monopoly, I may try to get a property of every color on the board, and that's using the system.

That's an interesting example. A player could have a goal of getting a property of every colour, and play skillfully toward that.

As I noted above, the thing that most detracts from skilled play in RPGs is how often and where the GM applies Force. Force obviates skilled play when it is deployed.

I think principles like rule of cool and being a fan of the players can obviate skill, or at least set it in a different place so that one group might not count the play of the other group skillful. Force is just a more overt case.

 

[Fanaelialae]

That's exactly what I am interested in. That SP is more than just efficiently achieving your goals: it's a particular approach to the game.

What can you say about that approach?

I don't really consider myself an authority on the subject. I don't think I've tried to define it before. It's more something I have some capacity to recognize when I see it.

That said, I would say that it's often about stacking the odds in your favor.

It's focused on the skill of what the player chooses to have their character do and how, rather than skill derived from mechanical mastery of the game. Moreso choices that are decoupled from mechanics, though I don't see that as a necessity. Those choices typically need to have some possibility of significant consequences - choosing to have your character order another ale normally won't be SP, despite being decoupled from mechanics.

Asymmetrical strategies frequently fall under SP. Things like the aforementioned luring the orcs into a tar pit before fireballing them. You're not playing fair; you're not giving the orcs a fighting chance. The intention in that scenario is clearly to win with as little risk as possible.

 

[MarkB]

Like I said in the other thread, I do think that SP can both bypass and leverage mechanics, as appropriate.

I don't recall that part of the discussion specifically, but SP is more than just efficiency. It's a particular approach to the game.

Fireballing a group of orcs isn't SP in any meaningful sense. Luring the orcs into a tar pit and then fireballing them arguably is SP. That's true even if the orcs had such low HP that they all died in both cases (rendering the latter example overkill).

Although, in the latter case, hitting the pit with a firebolt or a lit torch would be more skilled if you were aware their HP were low, as you're expending fewer resources to achieve the desired result.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Although, in the latter case, hitting the pit with a firebolt or a lit torch would be more skilled if you were aware their HP were low, as you're expending fewer resources to achieve the desired result.

Sure, but it doesn't cease to be SP just because it's overkill. In fact, I would say that overkill is sort of a trademark of SP. Carefully checking for traps on the floors, walls, and ceilings even when there was never a trap to find. Which isn't to say that overkill is necessary to SP, just that I've found there to be an discernable correlation.

That said, I agree. Concluding that a fireball is overkill and using a firebolt would be an example of more skilled SP.

 

[FrogReaver]

Sure, but it doesn't cease to be SP just because it's overkill. In fact, I would say that overkill is sort of a trademark of SP. Carefully checking for traps on the floors, walls, and ceilings even when there was never a trap to find. Which isn't to say that overkill is necessary to SP, just that I've found there to be an discernable correlation.

That said, I agree. Concluding that a fireball is overkill and using a firebolt would be an example of more skilled SP.

I’d go a step further. Using a fireball when any other significantly less resource intensive tactic will suffice is unskilled play.

 

[Fanaelialae]

I’d go a step further. Using a fireball when any other significantly less resource intensive tactic will suffice is unskilled play.

I disagree. By that definition, completely searching an area for traps when there are none to find would also be unskilled play. Since you are probably wasting meaningful resources doing so (torches, time, etc). Which would mean that a lot of skilled play would actually be unskilled play, which I don't think follows.

I don't think that making a suboptimal choice disqualifies one from participating in the style of play termed skilled play. Players will usually be acting on imperfect knowledge, meaning that suboptimal decisions are bound to happen. I think that as long as the players were trying to make the best decision with the knowledge they had, it still qualifies as skilled play. Maybe not quite as skilled as if they'd made the optimal decision, but c'est la vie.

 

[Ovinomancer]

I disagree, in part, with @Fanaelialae. Possibly due to the example chosen, or the need to be complex or overengineered in solution. If the straight fireball suffices, then using it rather than a more complicated ploy has to be judged in a wider context. If luring the orcs into tar takes time, and risks additional complications due to that time, then it's quite possible that doing so is less skilled play than using the same resource decisively to begin with. The example is too underdeveloped to be able to tell.

The thing that I think stands out, though, is that this seems to indicate that a more complicated solution is more indicative of skilled play. I disagree. I think there is a style of play that this may be true, though, and that that style of play is relatable especially to tales of early D&D, and that you can see some of this in the modules of the time, but that this is limited in use to that approach to play in general and not as a useful addition to the definition of skilled play in general. Having complex plans that overengineer success can actually be a failing strategy, so it cannot be part of the definition of skilled play.