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="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 8645462" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p>Well, IIRC, the 'shortage of oil' thing came up because Awanye failed a resources check to buy oil. [USER=6696971]@Manbearcat[/USER] was then given the usual choice, a twist or a condition. Now, he's GOT to utilize the stuff that comes from the PCs, belief, goal, creed, instinct, and friends/enemies primarily. I don't recall the exact mechanical details of this specific interaction, but the upshot was that we were getting our oil, but with a complication, which was that this shifty guy had to be dealt with. This addressed Jakob's belief/creed and the previous history with Bear and the hand removal was leveraged to provide the fiction. The twist threatened to turn into a condition, and then it further threatened to turn into an immediate problem about how to dispose of the situation once we grabbed the guy. Two obs were overcome, resulting in the situation being back-burnered and left to maybe next time we are in Strond.</p><p></p><p>Likewise we ran into a complication (another twist) at the point where we exited the town, due to not being able to pass our resource tests for lifecycle costs. This turned into another series of tests where [USER=6696971]@Manbearcat[/USER] put pressure on one of our friends, the Ghost Mother. We were able to cut down the consequences to a condition for Awanye, and some fictional change in state for the Ghost Mother. It might also eventually create some relationship with a priest, but I'm not sure how that will play out, the precedence rules are a factor there.</p><p></p><p></p><p>What difference does any of this make? I am completely puzzled by why this is going on and on. Of course rules don't enforce themselves, DUH! Participants in the game decide what rules they are using or not using in their own game. When I play Monopoly maybe I do funny things with the money from 'fines', maybe I don't, it will be up to all the people playing to decide. What the criteria for that are, that's also up to the participants, but its probably implicit and something like "because it will be more fun" with some kind of additional refinement perhaps, like "because it adds a bit more luck to the game" or whatever. Given that this sort of thing is simply THERE in all games, why debate about it? </p><p></p><p>What CAN be debated is what the game text itself does or does not do which may affect people's ideas about what they want to use and why, and maybe how.</p><p></p><p>I think it is far less 'strictly limitless' than you assert. Its true that the GM in TB2 could probably devise almost any fiction that accomplished certain goals that the system specifies. Maybe the shifty fence with the oil could have been something totally different, but it would HAVE to address elements of the character sheet of the PC involved, that is mandated by the rules, and is a CENTRAL element.</p><p></p><p>I don't see where 5e really erects those constraints. It seems more like "DM, do what you want, though you should consider this or that." vs games like TB2 that are much stronger in evoking specific principles and tying them directly to very concrete mechanics.</p><p></p><p>Isn't this just self-evident? Again, I'm not understanding why were burning thread space on this.</p><p></p><p>Sure, its a pretty small change though, IMHO. House rules certainly count as 'customization' of the rules, but we still follow THOSE rules, and they fit with the rest of the game in the same way as the RAW rule.</p><p></p><p>I think [USER=6696971]@Manbearcat[/USER]'s point is that some things really are NOT opt-out if you want to play anything like the game as designed. If you make such a change the character of the game will change considerably and all of a sudden your shorthand is invalid. When someone says "lets play Dungeon World" I have a PRETTY GOOD idea of what that will be. If it turns out to be something quite a bit different, then the game is likely to fail. It may not even be obvious to participants when something in a game is subverted this way until they experience it, or even AFTER they experience it, yet they are likely to be dissatisfied. So 'choice of game' does a lot of work! Monkeying with that is hazardous to success in an RPG.</p><p></p><p>Yeah, but then people seem to misapprehend what my experience tells me the conscientious, principled play will or is likely to achieve, or how it is achieved, in various games. Now, obviously I am not some oracle of rightness in terms of what I think, but, for example, I don't see 5e actually doing a lot of things that some people have claimed for it, certainly not in close to a way equivalent to certain other games. But when I point that out, I get told that "it can be done." Hmmmm, yeah, but that's a pretty weak assertion! I can do any darn thing at all with Holmes Basic too, if I hack it enough... lol.</p><p></p><p>GM-fiat is coded throughout 5e, that would be MY response to this. Sure, you can work to avoid it, but it isn't just a matter of saying "Oh, I'm not going to use Rule 0", there's much more to it than that! In fact I am not sure how you can NOT use Rule 0, though you might sort of 'reconstitute it' as basically a coda of pretty much every other rule (5e tends to read this way, a LOT of its 'rules' recapitulate some phrase about how the GM is supposed to make choices as to how, why, when, and where a rule is used).</p><p></p><p>We are simply saying that 5e has a very different take on what that is than say TB2, DW, BitD, BW, or for that matter original D&D. Some of those games (most of them) don't mention a 'Rule 0', and are written with the intent of being less centered around GM directed play. So obviously this has a real impact on the structure of the game, and how, when, why, and where all the things you mention above happen, or could happen.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 8645462, member: 82106"] Well, IIRC, the 'shortage of oil' thing came up because Awanye failed a resources check to buy oil. [USER=6696971]@Manbearcat[/USER] was then given the usual choice, a twist or a condition. Now, he's GOT to utilize the stuff that comes from the PCs, belief, goal, creed, instinct, and friends/enemies primarily. I don't recall the exact mechanical details of this specific interaction, but the upshot was that we were getting our oil, but with a complication, which was that this shifty guy had to be dealt with. This addressed Jakob's belief/creed and the previous history with Bear and the hand removal was leveraged to provide the fiction. The twist threatened to turn into a condition, and then it further threatened to turn into an immediate problem about how to dispose of the situation once we grabbed the guy. Two obs were overcome, resulting in the situation being back-burnered and left to maybe next time we are in Strond. Likewise we ran into a complication (another twist) at the point where we exited the town, due to not being able to pass our resource tests for lifecycle costs. This turned into another series of tests where [USER=6696971]@Manbearcat[/USER] put pressure on one of our friends, the Ghost Mother. We were able to cut down the consequences to a condition for Awanye, and some fictional change in state for the Ghost Mother. It might also eventually create some relationship with a priest, but I'm not sure how that will play out, the precedence rules are a factor there. What difference does any of this make? I am completely puzzled by why this is going on and on. Of course rules don't enforce themselves, DUH! Participants in the game decide what rules they are using or not using in their own game. When I play Monopoly maybe I do funny things with the money from 'fines', maybe I don't, it will be up to all the people playing to decide. What the criteria for that are, that's also up to the participants, but its probably implicit and something like "because it will be more fun" with some kind of additional refinement perhaps, like "because it adds a bit more luck to the game" or whatever. Given that this sort of thing is simply THERE in all games, why debate about it? What CAN be debated is what the game text itself does or does not do which may affect people's ideas about what they want to use and why, and maybe how. I think it is far less 'strictly limitless' than you assert. Its true that the GM in TB2 could probably devise almost any fiction that accomplished certain goals that the system specifies. Maybe the shifty fence with the oil could have been something totally different, but it would HAVE to address elements of the character sheet of the PC involved, that is mandated by the rules, and is a CENTRAL element. I don't see where 5e really erects those constraints. It seems more like "DM, do what you want, though you should consider this or that." vs games like TB2 that are much stronger in evoking specific principles and tying them directly to very concrete mechanics. Isn't this just self-evident? Again, I'm not understanding why were burning thread space on this. Sure, its a pretty small change though, IMHO. House rules certainly count as 'customization' of the rules, but we still follow THOSE rules, and they fit with the rest of the game in the same way as the RAW rule. I think [USER=6696971]@Manbearcat[/USER]'s point is that some things really are NOT opt-out if you want to play anything like the game as designed. If you make such a change the character of the game will change considerably and all of a sudden your shorthand is invalid. When someone says "lets play Dungeon World" I have a PRETTY GOOD idea of what that will be. If it turns out to be something quite a bit different, then the game is likely to fail. It may not even be obvious to participants when something in a game is subverted this way until they experience it, or even AFTER they experience it, yet they are likely to be dissatisfied. So 'choice of game' does a lot of work! Monkeying with that is hazardous to success in an RPG. Yeah, but then people seem to misapprehend what my experience tells me the conscientious, principled play will or is likely to achieve, or how it is achieved, in various games. Now, obviously I am not some oracle of rightness in terms of what I think, but, for example, I don't see 5e actually doing a lot of things that some people have claimed for it, certainly not in close to a way equivalent to certain other games. But when I point that out, I get told that "it can be done." Hmmmm, yeah, but that's a pretty weak assertion! I can do any darn thing at all with Holmes Basic too, if I hack it enough... lol. GM-fiat is coded throughout 5e, that would be MY response to this. Sure, you can work to avoid it, but it isn't just a matter of saying "Oh, I'm not going to use Rule 0", there's much more to it than that! In fact I am not sure how you can NOT use Rule 0, though you might sort of 'reconstitute it' as basically a coda of pretty much every other rule (5e tends to read this way, a LOT of its 'rules' recapitulate some phrase about how the GM is supposed to make choices as to how, why, when, and where a rule is used). We are simply saying that 5e has a very different take on what that is than say TB2, DW, BitD, BW, or for that matter original D&D. Some of those games (most of them) don't mention a 'Rule 0', and are written with the intent of being less centered around GM directed play. So obviously this has a real impact on the structure of the game, and how, when, why, and where all the things you mention above happen, or could happen. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Supposing D&D is gamist, what does that mean?
Top