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
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
System matters and free kriegsspiel
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: 8398204" data-attributes="member: 6696971"><p>And that is the crux, isn’t it?</p><p></p><p>Neutrality of refereeing is rendered out of existence in such a scenario.</p><p></p><p>When you have codification of action resolution process, you’re building from the middle out (what does OBS4 mean? What Position and Effect be for this situation? Here are the spread of results for all moves). You don’t have to be peerless/unchallengeable when establishing obstacles. Here are the action resolution mechanics < move backward from them to framing obstacles/situation > move forward to action and consequence.</p><p></p><p>When you’re building and iterating the resolution method in real time for each obstacle/situation, you’re starting at the the beginning. What is phenomenon we’re modeling (obstacle/situation) > build resolution scheme that manages appropriately integrating all the parameters of the model > hopefully you’re a peerless expert and now we move on to action and consequence. </p><p></p><p>Of course if you’re not a peerless expert or the “high-trust” dynamic at the table is wobbly or outright compromised due to an abundance of (often high ego) experts in related fields, before action and consequence, you would have to append:</p><p></p><p>* change situation to be possessed of worse or better framing based on the potency of the dispute of your action resolution model (you lose neutrality of GMing here!).</p><p></p><p>* defer to received input or vehemence from table experts who are disputing your model (the “high trust” parameter is gone!).</p><p></p><p></p><p>The selection pressures that would lead to table dysfunction are significant. The functional table had to have been the very rare breed.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Manbearcat, post: 8398204, member: 6696971"] And that is the crux, isn’t it? Neutrality of refereeing is rendered out of existence in such a scenario. When you have codification of action resolution process, you’re building from the middle out (what does OBS4 mean? What Position and Effect be for this situation? Here are the spread of results for all moves). You don’t have to be peerless/unchallengeable when establishing obstacles. Here are the action resolution mechanics < move backward from them to framing obstacles/situation > move forward to action and consequence. When you’re building and iterating the resolution method in real time for each obstacle/situation, you’re starting at the the beginning. What is phenomenon we’re modeling (obstacle/situation) > build resolution scheme that manages appropriately integrating all the parameters of the model > hopefully you’re a peerless expert and now we move on to action and consequence. Of course if you’re not a peerless expert or the “high-trust” dynamic at the table is wobbly or outright compromised due to an abundance of (often high ego) experts in related fields, before action and consequence, you would have to append: * change situation to be possessed of worse or better framing based on the potency of the dispute of your action resolution model (you lose neutrality of GMing here!). * defer to received input or vehemence from table experts who are disputing your model (the “high trust” parameter is gone!). The selection pressures that would lead to table dysfunction are significant. The functional table had to have been the very rare breed. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
System matters and free kriegsspiel
Top