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
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Story Now, Skilled Play, and Elephants
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="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 8297532" data-attributes="member: 16814"><p>No. Skilled play is not fiat enforcing outcomes, nor matter which side of the screen. This is because it doesn't really matter what the input is, the output is the same. </p><p></p><p>I get that you want the quote marks to mean something, but I don't see it. And, on this topic, I believe I was the first to point at B/X play as enabling skilled play. I do not see any distinction or specialness to OSR skilled play that warrants the quotation marks. It's just skilled play in that game.</p><p></p><p>Well, you keep bringing up the use of skill checks (or checks in general) as a differentiating point for skilled play. It occurred to me there might be confusing, as checks are a common touchstone in your arguments.</p><p></p><p>This is just engaging a different mechanic -- asking the GM to decide in your favor. The issue with this as skilled play in 5e is that this kind of adjudication is susceptible to GM Force, and it's difficult to detect. It's absolutely possible that the GM is adhering to strong principles for adjudication and deems that this action clearly would work with what's established (both in play and in notes). On the other hand, I don't think this is a common way to play 5e, meaning that each ask will be up to the GM who will likely be considering the betterment of the story as an input. And, to be 100% clear, there is absolutely nothing wrong with this approach -- it's one I very much use when I'm running 5e. Its just not conducive to skilled play.</p><p></p><p>If the GM is doing a clear job of principled adjudication, then, yes, this is a route for skilled play. Iserith champions this approach, and he very much has a principled approach. (I didn't @ him because he's currently blocking me so it doesn't really matter.) However, Iserith also receives quite a lot of pushback on these forums when he champions this approach. It isn't necessary, though. Even if every interaction is a check, then the players can still leverage the system to improve chances because they understand how adjudication will work.</p><p></p><p>Ultimately, this is a key necessity -- the players must be aware of how things will be adjudicated and that adjudication must be consistent in order to deploy skilled play. There is no specific method of adjudication that is required.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ovinomancer, post: 8297532, member: 16814"] No. Skilled play is not fiat enforcing outcomes, nor matter which side of the screen. This is because it doesn't really matter what the input is, the output is the same. I get that you want the quote marks to mean something, but I don't see it. And, on this topic, I believe I was the first to point at B/X play as enabling skilled play. I do not see any distinction or specialness to OSR skilled play that warrants the quotation marks. It's just skilled play in that game. Well, you keep bringing up the use of skill checks (or checks in general) as a differentiating point for skilled play. It occurred to me there might be confusing, as checks are a common touchstone in your arguments. This is just engaging a different mechanic -- asking the GM to decide in your favor. The issue with this as skilled play in 5e is that this kind of adjudication is susceptible to GM Force, and it's difficult to detect. It's absolutely possible that the GM is adhering to strong principles for adjudication and deems that this action clearly would work with what's established (both in play and in notes). On the other hand, I don't think this is a common way to play 5e, meaning that each ask will be up to the GM who will likely be considering the betterment of the story as an input. And, to be 100% clear, there is absolutely nothing wrong with this approach -- it's one I very much use when I'm running 5e. Its just not conducive to skilled play. If the GM is doing a clear job of principled adjudication, then, yes, this is a route for skilled play. Iserith champions this approach, and he very much has a principled approach. (I didn't @ him because he's currently blocking me so it doesn't really matter.) However, Iserith also receives quite a lot of pushback on these forums when he champions this approach. It isn't necessary, though. Even if every interaction is a check, then the players can still leverage the system to improve chances because they understand how adjudication will work. Ultimately, this is a key necessity -- the players must be aware of how things will be adjudicated and that adjudication must be consistent in order to deploy skilled play. There is no specific method of adjudication that is required. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Story Now, Skilled Play, and Elephants
Top