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="clearstream" data-source="post: 8653750" data-attributes="member: 71699"><p>In the Traveller scenario as you envision it, who decided there was a safe? Why does the dirt matter?</p><p></p><p></p><p>One superficial answer is that in 5e an Investigation check will confirm that.</p><p></p><p></p><p>But a less superficial answer is perhaps the following.</p><p></p><p>It might be these concerns come out of the way we talk about these game moments. We zoom in on one event, which pushes toward an all or nothing interpretation of that event. It leads to questions like the one you asked where the whole thing could be felt to turn on one decision. So it's important to clear up that it doesn't turn on one decision, because each is constrained and formed in light of what comes before it.</p><p></p><p>Going back to the concept of fictional positioning, we're in a negotiation where at some point everyone at the table nods and agrees that the accountant knows the location of the dirt. If someone says otherwise at this point, either they're about to introduce something everyone will nod and agree to (something everyone else forgot until now, or a breath-taking revelation of a new gestalt), or they're reaching (errant play or a spoilsport).</p><p></p><p>It's akin to a chain of open-ended skill challenges. At various nexuses the group has "agreed" resolution of a conflict hinges on the consequences of the course of resolutions up to there (a chain of moves in the fiction, checks and other game events.) Depending on the group's interest in pretend violence, every so many conflicts will step into combat for their resolution. The way we have spoken about the safe makes it sound like the last resolution in one such chain (likely we will play out the actual revelation of the dirt, and commence new chains - there can be multiple chains at any one time.)</p><p></p><p>The accountant knowing the location of the dirt emerges out multiple moves and events, and participants at the table have fluctuating levels of authority over each one. In that way, the accountant knowing the location of the dirt is a <em>group </em>determination. It wasn't reached in one jump - we're only here, running social interaction with this accountant, with this attitude in play, <em>because</em> of what <em>multiple</em> participants said up to now. It might have been that in this case the accountant entered the world as something a player imagined.</p><p></p><p>Frex, two sessions back, before the location of the dirt was at issue. Bob - "<em>The kingpin has an accountant right?</em>" and everyone nodded and so now we know there is an accountant. What Bob said was not just plausible, it was the right question to ask just then and followed from our situation and descriptions to that point. Everything we knew about the kingpin made it right to say "yes" they have an accountant.</p><p></p><p>What might the accountant know? Seems like one decision. It's not one decision.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Perhaps let's leave this here for now? It may be nothing turns on it. If it does, I'd need to see more of the text before I could agree (what you have quoted does not lead me to your interpretation.) And then even if we settled that, we'd still have a debate about what Social Interaction + Insight + Investigation permits players to do in 5e.</p><p></p><p>Possibly it's more fruiful to think about the chains of events that together can lead to group decisions (decisions that can't be attributed to one member of the group alone.)</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="clearstream, post: 8653750, member: 71699"] In the Traveller scenario as you envision it, who decided there was a safe? Why does the dirt matter? One superficial answer is that in 5e an Investigation check will confirm that. But a less superficial answer is perhaps the following. It might be these concerns come out of the way we talk about these game moments. We zoom in on one event, which pushes toward an all or nothing interpretation of that event. It leads to questions like the one you asked where the whole thing could be felt to turn on one decision. So it's important to clear up that it doesn't turn on one decision, because each is constrained and formed in light of what comes before it. Going back to the concept of fictional positioning, we're in a negotiation where at some point everyone at the table nods and agrees that the accountant knows the location of the dirt. If someone says otherwise at this point, either they're about to introduce something everyone will nod and agree to (something everyone else forgot until now, or a breath-taking revelation of a new gestalt), or they're reaching (errant play or a spoilsport). It's akin to a chain of open-ended skill challenges. At various nexuses the group has "agreed" resolution of a conflict hinges on the consequences of the course of resolutions up to there (a chain of moves in the fiction, checks and other game events.) Depending on the group's interest in pretend violence, every so many conflicts will step into combat for their resolution. The way we have spoken about the safe makes it sound like the last resolution in one such chain (likely we will play out the actual revelation of the dirt, and commence new chains - there can be multiple chains at any one time.) The accountant knowing the location of the dirt emerges out multiple moves and events, and participants at the table have fluctuating levels of authority over each one. In that way, the accountant knowing the location of the dirt is a [I]group [/I]determination. It wasn't reached in one jump - we're only here, running social interaction with this accountant, with this attitude in play, [I]because[/I] of what [I]multiple[/I] participants said up to now. It might have been that in this case the accountant entered the world as something a player imagined. Frex, two sessions back, before the location of the dirt was at issue. Bob - "[I]The kingpin has an accountant right?[/I]" and everyone nodded and so now we know there is an accountant. What Bob said was not just plausible, it was the right question to ask just then and followed from our situation and descriptions to that point. Everything we knew about the kingpin made it right to say "yes" they have an accountant. What might the accountant know? Seems like one decision. It's not one decision. Perhaps let's leave this here for now? It may be nothing turns on it. If it does, I'd need to see more of the text before I could agree (what you have quoted does not lead me to your interpretation.) And then even if we settled that, we'd still have a debate about what Social Interaction + Insight + Investigation permits players to do in 5e. Possibly it's more fruiful to think about the chains of events that together can lead to group decisions (decisions that can't be attributed to one member of the group alone.) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Supposing D&D is gamist, what does that mean?
Top