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="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 8426754" data-attributes="member: 6785785"><p>A few thoughts on recent posts.</p><p></p><p>- The GM is, even in D&D, I would say not even remotely allowed to just do anything they want! Sure, I get the rules say this, but I think it’s clear that the idea is about not being beholden to the rules when they don’t seem to make sense for the given situation. It’s not about discarding or changing rules on a whim! That argument’s just not very compelling. Especially given that outside of D&D and some other traditional games, the GM is explicitly not granted such authority.</p><p></p><p>- DCs and similar are very useful. They’re a perfect example of a mechanic that can clearly translate fiction into game so that the player has a similar understanding as the character. If I have a +8 to climb and the DC is a 15, then I know my chances of success when I roll a d20. Compare this with the GM saying “It looks like a fairly difficult climb, but not too difficult; you can probably do it, but not certainly”.</p><p></p><p>It’s far more immersive for me to be able to assess the difficulty of the climb (the DC) compare it to my ability (my modifier) and then determine my chances. This maps pretty well to what the character would be doing in the fictional world. What they would not be doing is filtering their understanding of the situation through another person whose verbal description will be open to interpretation, and which won’t be anywhere near as accurate.</p><p></p><p>For this to work, yes, the DC should always be announced by the GM. I know many folks who play D&D this way, so the assertion that this never happens is purely anecdotal. </p><p></p><p>- On the neutral ref in FKR. I’m not sure I see it, given the role as it seems to be designed. So much authority is granted to the GM, combined with the generation of the fiction and interpretation of the world…these two things wouldn’t seem to me to lead to a neutral GM. What makes referees neutral is that they are a third party, separate of the two that are competing. Not so in FKR. They are the opposition and the referee.</p><p></p><p>Now the same could be said of many other games, and that can certainly be true! What tends to either remove or at least mitigate that somewhat are clear rules and processes. Plenty of FKR games seem to have such, but the subset of those that don’t seem a bit problematic in this regard.</p><p></p><p>- On the accretion of rules as needed; this to me seems very much like the process that was used in the proto-D&D games. That rules were introduced as needed. But how they were designed was perhaps a bit arbitrary. Hence why early D&D has so many different resolution systems. I get the desire to address some of that arbitrariness…to find a simpler way to apply rules and make the game flow easier.</p><p></p><p>But this seems to specifically be about the rules of D&D as they’ve expanded and morphed in their early form, and then across editions. I think there have been several ways this particular problem has been addressed over the years, to varying degrees of success. What the FKR games seem to be doing, in my opinion (at least the subset that don’t have clearly established rules), is to basically be following the template that led to the problems they want to address. or, more accurately because I doubt that they’re setting out to do so, but they seem to risk it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="hawkeyefan, post: 8426754, member: 6785785"] A few thoughts on recent posts. - The GM is, even in D&D, I would say not even remotely allowed to just do anything they want! Sure, I get the rules say this, but I think it’s clear that the idea is about not being beholden to the rules when they don’t seem to make sense for the given situation. It’s not about discarding or changing rules on a whim! That argument’s just not very compelling. Especially given that outside of D&D and some other traditional games, the GM is explicitly not granted such authority. - DCs and similar are very useful. They’re a perfect example of a mechanic that can clearly translate fiction into game so that the player has a similar understanding as the character. If I have a +8 to climb and the DC is a 15, then I know my chances of success when I roll a d20. Compare this with the GM saying “It looks like a fairly difficult climb, but not too difficult; you can probably do it, but not certainly”. It’s far more immersive for me to be able to assess the difficulty of the climb (the DC) compare it to my ability (my modifier) and then determine my chances. This maps pretty well to what the character would be doing in the fictional world. What they would not be doing is filtering their understanding of the situation through another person whose verbal description will be open to interpretation, and which won’t be anywhere near as accurate. For this to work, yes, the DC should always be announced by the GM. I know many folks who play D&D this way, so the assertion that this never happens is purely anecdotal. - On the neutral ref in FKR. I’m not sure I see it, given the role as it seems to be designed. So much authority is granted to the GM, combined with the generation of the fiction and interpretation of the world…these two things wouldn’t seem to me to lead to a neutral GM. What makes referees neutral is that they are a third party, separate of the two that are competing. Not so in FKR. They are the opposition and the referee. Now the same could be said of many other games, and that can certainly be true! What tends to either remove or at least mitigate that somewhat are clear rules and processes. Plenty of FKR games seem to have such, but the subset of those that don’t seem a bit problematic in this regard. - On the accretion of rules as needed; this to me seems very much like the process that was used in the proto-D&D games. That rules were introduced as needed. But how they were designed was perhaps a bit arbitrary. Hence why early D&D has so many different resolution systems. I get the desire to address some of that arbitrariness…to find a simpler way to apply rules and make the game flow easier. But this seems to specifically be about the rules of D&D as they’ve expanded and morphed in their early form, and then across editions. I think there have been several ways this particular problem has been addressed over the years, to varying degrees of success. What the FKR games seem to be doing, in my opinion (at least the subset that don’t have clearly established rules), is to basically be following the template that led to the problems they want to address. or, more accurately because I doubt that they’re setting out to do so, but they seem to risk it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
System matters and free kriegsspiel
Top