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 LIVE! 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: 8644999" data-attributes="member: 6696971"><p>Ok so, by my 7:35 AM insomnia-ridden cognitive horsepower (which is low, granted), this post you've constructed is IMMINENTLY more clear and relatable than your prior response to me (where it seems the ball didn't get moved down the field at all and, perhaps, backwards).</p><p></p><p>So very good post first; /cheers.</p><p></p><p>Few quick thoughts that you can respond to at your descretion:</p><p></p><p>1) I'm sure you're trying to stay away from "principled" system with "opinionated" above. Fair enough, but I don't think opinionated does the work needed. But we can quibble over that. We could sub "potato" for "opinionated" and "taco" for "vague" and it wouldn't matter to me. I feel I have a general understanding of this post I've quoted so I'll leave it there.</p><p></p><p>2) I like your construct above ("like" here meaning "I think it carries within and transmits information that is mostly true"). What I'll say on the "opinionated" column is that I think there are a few missing features. I would say they are:</p><p></p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">deeply encoded</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">procedurally strict</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">transparent and table-facing</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">authority distributed (by contrast)</li> </ul><p></p><p>Now you take the inverse for "vague":</p><p></p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">lightly encoded</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">procedurally malleable</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">hazy and GM-facing</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">authority concentrated</li> </ul><p></p><p>3) So let me make clear that I am not of the opinion that the 5e GM is not constrained. Its just that the constraint is (a) located in very different places than other games (more intensively systemitized games or your "opinionated" group), (b) the constraint (by intention) does quite different work, and (c) all of the features (see my 4 above) create a very divergent cognitive workspace for both GMs running those games and players playing those games (eg when GMing 5e, the "initial constellation" of my decision-space is vastly larger than the same "initial constellation" when GMing Dogs in the Vineyard and it brings in a lot of different subsets of "moves" that are immediately winnowed in my Dogs in the Vineyard GMing decision-space before I even start the "winnowing process").</p><p></p><p>So, to that end, here are ways that a 5e GM is principally constrained (by best practices for the game) that are not in play when GMing Dogs in the Vineyard:</p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><strong>be consistent in your rulings</strong> <em>(Dogs has pretty much no rulings)</em></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><strong>the rules aren't in charge of the fun, you are with your inventing, adventure/story writing, storytelling, improvising, acting, and refereeing</strong> <em>(in Dogs, the rules are in charge of the fun...and there is no adventure/story writing, no storytelling, and I'm in no way obliged toward performative theatrical rendering of NPCs)</em></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><strong>invent compelling plots and make the world and adventure flow around the adventurers so they feel they're part of a fantastic story and world</strong> <em>(in Dogs there is no plot + sub "conflict" for world and adventure + it doesn't flow around the adventurers and they aren't "part of a fantastic story"...there is no story and the Dogs are the actual nexus of play...you create a Town based on them, not the inverse)</em></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><strong>invest prep time outside of the game to exercise your creativity to invent compelling plots, create new NPCs, craft encounters, and think of clever ways to foreshadow story events yet to come.</strong> (<em>while Dogs will have some prep, its vastly more simplified, you're not foreshadowing story events to come because there are no "story events to come", you're not inventing compelling plots because there is no plot...however, like 5e, you are creating NPCs and conflicts - which is similar, though not the same, to "craft encounters"</em>)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><strong>know your players so you can choose a style of play and a flavor of fantasy that keeps them interested, immersed in the world you've created, tailoring adventures to their preferences as much as possible so they can do awesome things</strong> (i<em>n Dogs you're running the game itself...its not tailored to preferences or personality archetypes or a menu of flavors of fantasy, and you're not creating "a world.")</em></li> </ul><p></p><p>So there are 5 ways that a 5e GM are principally constrained where a Dogs in the Vineyard GM is fundamentally not constrained. And there are multiple reasons for that, much of it is the reality that these games are DNA-deep different beasts (which goes back to the 4 diverging features above and several other things discussed in this thread).</p><p></p><p>So there are a lot of "do's" that the 5e GM is responsible for that aren't a part of Dogs GMing. If you don't do these things as a 5e GM, you're falling short of the apex expectations for GMing the game. Not so in Dogs because not only are they not "do's", those 5e "do's" are often "do NOT" or, like in the case of performative theatrics/acting, its completely offloaded from system (at your discretion or at the request of the other participants + if you feel so obliged).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Manbearcat, post: 8644999, member: 6696971"] Ok so, by my 7:35 AM insomnia-ridden cognitive horsepower (which is low, granted), this post you've constructed is IMMINENTLY more clear and relatable than your prior response to me (where it seems the ball didn't get moved down the field at all and, perhaps, backwards). So very good post first; /cheers. Few quick thoughts that you can respond to at your descretion: 1) I'm sure you're trying to stay away from "principled" system with "opinionated" above. Fair enough, but I don't think opinionated does the work needed. But we can quibble over that. We could sub "potato" for "opinionated" and "taco" for "vague" and it wouldn't matter to me. I feel I have a general understanding of this post I've quoted so I'll leave it there. 2) I like your construct above ("like" here meaning "I think it carries within and transmits information that is mostly true"). What I'll say on the "opinionated" column is that I think there are a few missing features. I would say they are: [LIST] [*]deeply encoded [*]procedurally strict [*]transparent and table-facing [*]authority distributed (by contrast) [/LIST] Now you take the inverse for "vague": [LIST] [*]lightly encoded [*]procedurally malleable [*]hazy and GM-facing [*]authority concentrated [/LIST] 3) So let me make clear that I am not of the opinion that the 5e GM is not constrained. Its just that the constraint is (a) located in very different places than other games (more intensively systemitized games or your "opinionated" group), (b) the constraint (by intention) does quite different work, and (c) all of the features (see my 4 above) create a very divergent cognitive workspace for both GMs running those games and players playing those games (eg when GMing 5e, the "initial constellation" of my decision-space is vastly larger than the same "initial constellation" when GMing Dogs in the Vineyard and it brings in a lot of different subsets of "moves" that are immediately winnowed in my Dogs in the Vineyard GMing decision-space before I even start the "winnowing process"). So, to that end, here are ways that a 5e GM is principally constrained (by best practices for the game) that are not in play when GMing Dogs in the Vineyard: [LIST] [*][B]be consistent in your rulings[/B] [I](Dogs has pretty much no rulings)[/I] [*][B]the rules aren't in charge of the fun, you are with your inventing, adventure/story writing, storytelling, improvising, acting, and refereeing[/B] [I](in Dogs, the rules are in charge of the fun...and there is no adventure/story writing, no storytelling, and I'm in no way obliged toward performative theatrical rendering of NPCs)[/I] [*][B]invent compelling plots and make the world and adventure flow around the adventurers so they feel they're part of a fantastic story and world[/B] [I](in Dogs there is no plot + sub "conflict" for world and adventure + it doesn't flow around the adventurers and they aren't "part of a fantastic story"...there is no story and the Dogs are the actual nexus of play...you create a Town based on them, not the inverse)[/I] [*][B]invest prep time outside of the game to exercise your creativity to invent compelling plots, create new NPCs, craft encounters, and think of clever ways to foreshadow story events yet to come.[/B] ([I]while Dogs will have some prep, its vastly more simplified, you're not foreshadowing story events to come because there are no "story events to come", you're not inventing compelling plots because there is no plot...however, like 5e, you are creating NPCs and conflicts - which is similar, though not the same, to "craft encounters"[/I]) [*][B]know your players so you can choose a style of play and a flavor of fantasy that keeps them interested, immersed in the world you've created, tailoring adventures to their preferences as much as possible so they can do awesome things[/B] (i[I]n Dogs you're running the game itself...its not tailored to preferences or personality archetypes or a menu of flavors of fantasy, and you're not creating "a world.")[/I] [/LIST] So there are 5 ways that a 5e GM are principally constrained where a Dogs in the Vineyard GM is fundamentally not constrained. And there are multiple reasons for that, much of it is the reality that these games are DNA-deep different beasts (which goes back to the 4 diverging features above and several other things discussed in this thread). So there are a lot of "do's" that the 5e GM is responsible for that aren't a part of Dogs GMing. If you don't do these things as a 5e GM, you're falling short of the apex expectations for GMing the game. Not so in Dogs because not only are they not "do's", those 5e "do's" are often "do NOT" or, like in the case of performative theatrics/acting, its completely offloaded from system (at your discretion or at the request of the other participants + if you feel so obliged). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Supposing D&D is gamist, what does that mean?
Top