D&D General Supposing D&D is gamist, what does that mean?

[soviet]

So what I'm hearing is that Sim folks are less likely to be disappointed

My experience of these kinds of threads is very much the opposite

 

[soviet]

I've started worrying less about doing the smart play and just going for the most fun or spectacular play. I recently took the Toughness feat just to give myself even more insulation against consequences when I pick craziness over tactics.

It's still not the kind of play I really want, but I might as well get my enjoyment where I can rather than waiting for a train that never comes.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I dunno. I personally don't think to hit that win-and-reward cycle, it can be in or metagame rewards and still do the job. At the end of the day, its about the player getting that little zing, after all, for his success, and he can either be doing that because his character got a boost or because of the appreciation of his fellow players for his skill in play. The former is just a more reliable zing as long as people care about their characters at all (and even token players do to some extent).

Sure, but if there's nothing at all in game that says 'reward', how reliable is it? How much can we say that the game itself is even a part of it? I mean, if 'gamism' is just "I enjoy this part of the game and get a thrill out of doing this thing that isn't easy to pull off" is there ANY play (I'm sure there is SOME SOMEWHERE) that doesn't hit that at least part of the time? I think I want a bit higher bar, like there is some real intention there. Someone said "we're putting this into the game to create a situation where you need to really exercise some skill to succeed." At that point why wouldn't you also provide SOME sort of token that signifies that success?

I also think that games which don't really provide these kinds of built in reward systems show it. Traveller is a great example of a game, very classic, rather successful, but it never even held a candle in that dept to D&D. Why? What do you get in Traveller for success in game? I mean, there's plenty of things in that game which can be quite hard to do, very many options for skilled tactical play for instance. Yet, there's not really a reward system. Canonically your character's stats, and even skills, don't really ever advance. You MIGHT or MIGHT NOT achieve some sort of loot, its not like there's any formalization of how that might work (and most GMs are content to keep the PCs down to a limited amount of 'stuff'). Honestly, of all the dozens of Traveller campaigns I ran in the past 45 years, every one eventually fizzled out (or the PCs got TPKed). There just is no real 'progress' in that game. Yes, it has been popular and successful, but D&D is a $100 million+ per year empire, Traveller is a couple of small game developers and a guy selling CDs of reprints of old stuff online.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

They certainly aren’t very disruptive in story now games even if achieved. But there’s still the basic genre, setting and background the players have entering this fictional world and if something too implausible happens in relation to those then that can detract from the game for certain players.

It could, but OTOH if it is really a 'Zero Myth' kind of a thing, then the board will be erased at the end of the day and the next game will start over with a clean slate, or maybe like in my fantasy campaign world none of it is taken too extremely seriously and the next game will be in another region, or 100 years later, or just ignore whatever happened in the last one.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Perhaps this shows my cynicism about people on both ends of a typical game table, but from where I sit that's not as strong a statement as I suspect you think it is.

I look at it this way, I'm not obliged to play in games where idiots are present . Yes, they existed in the past, probably still do, but no game system can do more than give you some ways to handle them that may or may not work. Sometimes a boot in the keister is the only solution! lol.

 

[soviet]

I look at it this way, I'm not obliged to play in games where idiots are present

How dare you


;-)

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

You obviously need to start to pick fights against insane odds like my players seem to be doing!

We did have one fun battle, which was that dragon that was in Phandelver (which I guess you were NOT supposed to actually fight with). We cheated and my transmuter was able to permanently trap the monster in a weird ancient fortress that the GM had created for some totally other reason (it had a shield around it that nobody except one of the PCs could open, once the dragon went in that was that, so the wizard lured him in, no more dragon). It was hard, I don't recall the details of how we managed to do it, but I do remember it required arranging for several PCs at different locations to coordinate via signals, and some of us had to keep the Dragon occupied for a couple rounds (I think one character bit it there). That was hard, but not too many other fights we had in 5e really were hard in the sense of requiring a lot of cleverness to win. It was really just all down to some mild resource management and whatnot. I think you CAN certainly make challenging encounters, but the game isn't all that geared for it.

 

[Campbell]

When it comes to reward systems in challenge oriented play I think the most important ones are the ones that actually impact success when it comes to overcoming challenges. Like how in Pathfinder Second Edition having knowledge of particular monsters or really having a handle on action economy and timing of effects within a round can have such a demonstrable impact on player success. Having a significant gap between floor and ceiling are what allows those play of the game type moments that really make play feel rewarding.

 

[pemerton]

The text is nearly identical: I've underlined the salient difference. Both texts are silent on the truth or otherwise of information acquired. Can you therefore post the text that you will find earlier in the book on procedures and handling of information?

The 1977 text doesn't talk about "information" at all - it talks about facts: the name of an official willing to provide a certain illicit service; the location of guns for sale of dubious provenance.

The 1977 rule do not have any version of the stuff you quoted from 1981 Book 0, nor any version of the similar sort of stuff from The Traveller Book. I regard those changes in the 1981 version as reflective of the broader shift in RPGing towards GM-curated experiences.

 

[FrogReaver]

The 1977 text doesn't talk about "information" at all - it talks about facts: the name of an official willing to provide a certain illicit service; the location of guns for sale of dubious provenance.

The 1977 rule do not have any version of the stuff you quoted from 1981 Book 0, nor any version of the similar sort of stuff from The Traveller Book. I regard those changes in the 1981 version as reflective of the broader shift in RPGing towards GM-curated experiences.

Maybe @clearstream quoted an inaccurate source, but the source he cited does use the word 'information'

1977

Spoiler: 1977 Streetwise

The individual is acquainted with the ways of local subcultures (which tend to be the same everywhere in human society), and thus is capable of dealing with strangers without alienating them. (This is not to be considered the same as alien contact, although the referee may so allow).

Close-knit sub-cultures (such as some portions of the lower classes, and trade groups such as workers, the underworld, etc) generally reject contact with strangers or unknown elements. Streetwise expertise allows contact for the purposes of obtaining information, hiring persons, purchasing contraband or stolen goods, etc.

The referee should set the throw required to obtain any item specified by the players (for example, the name of an official willing to issue li-censes without hassle = 5+, the location of high quality guns at a low price = 9+). DMs based on streetwise should be allowed at +1 per level. No expertise DM = −5.

1981

Spoiler: 1981 Streetwise

The individual is acquainted with the ways of local subcultures (which tend to be the same everywhere in human society), and thus is capable of dealing with strangers without alienating them. This skill is not the same as alien contact experience.

Close-knit subcultures (such as some portions of the lower classes, trade groups such as workers, and the underworld) generally reject contact with strangers or unknown elements. Streetwise expertise allows contact for the purposes of obtaining information, hiring persons, purchasing or selling contraband or stolen goods, and other shady or borderline activities.

Referee: After establishing throws for various activities desired by the characters (such as the name of an official willing to issue licenses without hassle: 5+; the location of high quality guns at low prices: 9+), allow streetwise as a DM. If streetwise is not used, impose a DM of -5.

The text is nearly identical: I've underlined the salient difference. Both texts are silent on the truth or otherwise of information acquired. Can you therefore post the text that you will find earlier in the book on procedures and handling of information?

Quote for all to see