NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 8632843" data-attributes="member: 6696971">Just grabbing all of these right quick because what I'm about to type (well, typed prior, so I'm basically reiterating) is about conflict of agendas or incoherent toggling of agendas between moments of action resolution or even intra-action resolution itself!The issue that a lot of D&D has had (and I've written about it quite a bit) is exactly this wobbly serving and reification of 3 different priorities simultaneously.  I did a thread that got en-murder-nated by ENWorld's collapse back in 2016.  It was a 5e thread entitled "DC 30...DC 35?"  Some of the folks engaged here engaged in that thread and they will recall the issues that it exposed with the complete incoherency of handling various issues inherent to 5e's GM-directed noncombat action resolution mediation.  The 3 different priorities have been touched on above:* An aspiration to a Gamism agenda.* An aspiration to a High Concept Simulation agenda.* An aspiration to a Process Simulation agenda.The collision of all of this and the (IMO) failure-state that would arise would be a manifestation of some of the following instances:1) GM is using Genre Emulation to inform all 3 of situation framing or DC handling or consequence rendering when the players are expecting Gamism-observing or Process Simulation-observing situation framing or DC handling or consequence rendering.2) GM is using Process Simulation to inform all 3 of situation framing or DC handling or consequence rendering when the players are expecting Genre Emulation-observing or Gamism-observing situation framing or DC handling or consequence rendering.3) GM is using Gamism to inform all 3 of situation framing or DC handling or consequence rendering when the players are expecting Genre Emulation-observing or Process Simulation-observing situation framing or DC handling or consequence rendering.4) GM uses any 3 of Gamism, Genre Emulation, and Process Simulation to inform situation framing...but then uses one of the other 2 to inform DC handling...but then uses the remaining one to inform consequence rendering.5) GM handles creatures' noncombat action resolution differently than they handle PCs' noncombat action resolution because they're trying to achieve one or the other of Gamism, Genre Emulation, or Process Simulation (this often takes the form of rather incoherently rebaselining DCs - Easy/Medium/Hard in natural language reflects the baseline of the common adventurer vs the common monster of this type vs the typical adventure of this Tier of play - based on whatever agenda strikes the GM in the moment).6) GM handles all the dynamics surrounding Long Rest Recharge based on Genre Emulation this time (its cool to let big damn heroes flex their guns in the climax and the story needs it), based on Gamism another time (you've got to earn it), based on Process Simulation another time (it doesn't make internal causality sense to even have a Long Rest Recharge by a thing here).7)  GM handles big time, story perturbing wins based on Genre Emulation this time (I need this lieutenant to be alive for story/climax reasons so of course they narrowly escape!), based on Gamism another time (you've earned it...the lieutenant is dead), based on Process Simulation another time (it makes sense for the rank and file to quickly resolve the hierarchy vacuum so a new and more different lieutenant rises up to take the place of the last lieutenant...basically muting your earned victory).8) GM is inconsistent in their handling of any of the instantiation of play above (one time they do it this way, another time, they do it another way).</blockquote>

Verification