Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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
*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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Supposing D&D is gamist, what does that mean?
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="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 8636795" data-attributes="member: 6696971"><p>[USER=42582]@pemerton[/USER] wrote a response to this that I agree with. Over the years I've talked about this subject a lot (what is sufficient to constitute "system" and "a game"). I don't know if you were involved in those conversations. I thought so, but perhaps not. So what I wrote above was not intended to be analysis. As I said, I've belabored this issue to the ground in the past. It was basically an assertion of what I feel is self-evident.</p><p></p><p>But I'll give a go at some analysis by way of creating a game.</p><p></p><p>I'm going to call this game<strong> "(Not) Apocalypse World."</strong></p><p></p><p>Procedurally, lets do this. Take damn near everything out.</p><p></p><p>Take out the structure of play (including the move loop and conversation structure and Threat creation and deployment), every facet of the Agenda but one, the Principles, the Best Practices, the Playbooks, Gear and Crap, Harm and Healing, all of the moves and the structure for making custom moves.</p><p></p><p>All that stuff. Now keep the following:</p><p></p><p><em>• Make (Not) Apocalypse World seem real.</em></p><p><em></em></p><p><em>• Always say what the rules demand (we've got one rule - see below).</em></p><p><em></em></p><p><em>• Apocalypse World divvies the conversation up in a strict and pretty traditional way. The players’ job is to say what their characters say and</em></p><p><em>undertake to do, first and exclusively; to say what their characters think, feel and remember, also exclusively; and to answer your questions</em></p><p><em>about their characters’ lives and surroundings. Your job as MC is to say everything else.</em></p><p></p><p>That's it.</p><p></p><p>Those are your "rules." This is your "system." We've taken Apocalypse World and we've stripped out <em>everything that makes it Apocalypse World. </em></p><p></p><p>Looks terrible right? I agree. I would never, ever, ever run this. Its a razor's edge from Calvinball and the odds of it degenerating to Calvinball are not small.</p><p></p><p>But its still constitutes "system"...it just so happens that "system's say" is entirely "GM's (unbridled...unconstrained...unstructured...not principally informed) say." Doesn't this game look an awful lot like a complex, intricate system with all kinds of PC build and action resolution widgets and interactions that caveats hard with a "oh yeah...the GM can ignore or change rules/outcomes at their discretion if they feel like it leads to a better game"...except it dispenses with the illusion that all of that other stuff (PC build and action resolution etc) brings about actual, verifiable, insured-against-(overt or covert)veto, capacity to evolve the gamestate in a manner desired by the non-GM participant?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Manbearcat, post: 8636795, member: 6696971"] [USER=42582]@pemerton[/USER] wrote a response to this that I agree with. Over the years I've talked about this subject a lot (what is sufficient to constitute "system" and "a game"). I don't know if you were involved in those conversations. I thought so, but perhaps not. So what I wrote above was not intended to be analysis. As I said, I've belabored this issue to the ground in the past. It was basically an assertion of what I feel is self-evident. But I'll give a go at some analysis by way of creating a game. I'm going to call this game[B] "(Not) Apocalypse World."[/B] Procedurally, lets do this. Take damn near everything out. Take out the structure of play (including the move loop and conversation structure and Threat creation and deployment), every facet of the Agenda but one, the Principles, the Best Practices, the Playbooks, Gear and Crap, Harm and Healing, all of the moves and the structure for making custom moves. All that stuff. Now keep the following: [I]• Make (Not) Apocalypse World seem real. • Always say what the rules demand (we've got one rule - see below). • Apocalypse World divvies the conversation up in a strict and pretty traditional way. The players’ job is to say what their characters say and undertake to do, first and exclusively; to say what their characters think, feel and remember, also exclusively; and to answer your questions about their characters’ lives and surroundings. Your job as MC is to say everything else.[/I] That's it. Those are your "rules." This is your "system." We've taken Apocalypse World and we've stripped out [I]everything that makes it Apocalypse World. [/I] Looks terrible right? I agree. I would never, ever, ever run this. Its a razor's edge from Calvinball and the odds of it degenerating to Calvinball are not small. But its still constitutes "system"...it just so happens that "system's say" is entirely "GM's (unbridled...unconstrained...unstructured...not principally informed) say." Doesn't this game look an awful lot like a complex, intricate system with all kinds of PC build and action resolution widgets and interactions that caveats hard with a "oh yeah...the GM can ignore or change rules/outcomes at their discretion if they feel like it leads to a better game"...except it dispenses with the illusion that all of that other stuff (PC build and action resolution etc) brings about actual, verifiable, insured-against-(overt or covert)veto, capacity to evolve the gamestate in a manner desired by the non-GM participant? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Supposing D&D is gamist, what does that mean?
Top