Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 6361687" data-attributes="member: 4937">That's purely an opinion though.&nbsp; I don't necessarily agree.&nbsp; My suspicion is that most DMs would benefit from a faction system, but that it would be difficult to design a system that works better than the hand waves and rulings of a good DM and that the burden of book keeping in a complex campaign might be onerous.&nbsp; But in general, my experience is that most DMs default to not rewarding players for thinking in terms of logistical resources, including the ability to call upon reliable allies.&nbsp; And, there are certainly times when handling those things systematically would result in better emmersion and better gameplay.&nbsp; One example of doing something like this well IMO was in the Savage Tide campaign, where cRPG style faction mechanics were ported over into a framework for strengthening a faction which in turn directly impacted how well the faction resisted attacks by a mutual enemy.&nbsp;&nbsp; That IMO would be an example of 'smartening up' PnP play by encouraging thoughtful activities which otherwise many DMs wouldn't tangibly reward.I'm not convinced.&nbsp; I'm certainly convinced that there is a general dumbing down in mainstream cRPG titles as cRPGs become more mainstream and have larger and larger development budgets.&nbsp;&nbsp; I'm less convinced of the same in PnP games just because they don't have the same constraints.&nbsp;&nbsp; However, I'm even less convinced than that that some new system is revolutionizing play, particular in the case of something like Dungeon World where I have pretty mixed feelings about the proposition/resolution mechanics.Wait?&nbsp; What???&nbsp;&nbsp; I'm still unconvinced that anything tops &quot;Die no save.&quot; when it comes to making failure &quot;matter more&quot; from the perspective of failure implies great danger.&nbsp;&nbsp; Heck, in Dungeon World failure is not only expected but at times even desirable.&nbsp; Wait?&nbsp; Wait???&nbsp;&nbsp; How can you passionately argue that how factions behave is overwhelmingly in control of the GM, and yet throw out the argument that in DW you make more impact on the world than old RPGs.&nbsp; Isn't that entirely the province of the GM as well?&nbsp; What in the world is your standard of measurement?&nbsp;&nbsp; Becoming a king and shaping the politics of a world on a global level?&nbsp; Saving the world from certain doom or a new dark age?&nbsp; Becoming an immortal god and changing the world even to the extent of changing the rules as physics at the metagame level?&nbsp; These are all features I've seen explored in old RPGs and all of which was encouraged by the rules of said RPGs.&nbsp;&nbsp; How in the world can DW force 'vastly more' impact than any of that, particularly given the very limited nature of the propositional/response play its designed to resolve?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 6361687, member: 4937"] That's purely an opinion though. I don't necessarily agree. My suspicion is that most DMs would benefit from a faction system, but that it would be difficult to design a system that works better than the hand waves and rulings of a good DM and that the burden of book keeping in a complex campaign might be onerous. But in general, my experience is that most DMs default to not rewarding players for thinking in terms of logistical resources, including the ability to call upon reliable allies. And, there are certainly times when handling those things systematically would result in better emmersion and better gameplay. One example of doing something like this well IMO was in the Savage Tide campaign, where cRPG style faction mechanics were ported over into a framework for strengthening a faction which in turn directly impacted how well the faction resisted attacks by a mutual enemy. That IMO would be an example of 'smartening up' PnP play by encouraging thoughtful activities which otherwise many DMs wouldn't tangibly reward. I'm not convinced. I'm certainly convinced that there is a general dumbing down in mainstream cRPG titles as cRPGs become more mainstream and have larger and larger development budgets. I'm less convinced of the same in PnP games just because they don't have the same constraints. However, I'm even less convinced than that that some new system is revolutionizing play, particular in the case of something like Dungeon World where I have pretty mixed feelings about the proposition/resolution mechanics. Wait? What??? I'm still unconvinced that anything tops "Die no save." when it comes to making failure "matter more" from the perspective of failure implies great danger. Heck, in Dungeon World failure is not only expected but at times even desirable. Wait? Wait??? How can you passionately argue that how factions behave is overwhelmingly in control of the GM, and yet throw out the argument that in DW you make more impact on the world than old RPGs. Isn't that entirely the province of the GM as well? What in the world is your standard of measurement? Becoming a king and shaping the politics of a world on a global level? Saving the world from certain doom or a new dark age? Becoming an immortal god and changing the world even to the extent of changing the rules as physics at the metagame level? These are all features I've seen explored in old RPGs and all of which was encouraged by the rules of said RPGs. How in the world can DW force 'vastly more' impact than any of that, particularly given the very limited nature of the propositional/response play its designed to resolve? [/QUOTE]

Verification