Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6983426" data-attributes="member: 42582">I don't agree with this theory of mechanics.I think the mechanics are a device for determining the content of the fiction when the actions (in a sufficiently broad sense) of the GM's characters would push it one way (eg the dragon would eat the dwarves), the actions (again, in a sufficiently broad sense) of the players' characters would push it another way (eg the dwarves stand against and defeat the dragon), and the rules don't give one participant in the game licence to override the other.Examples of override permissions that make mechanics unnecessary: in most RPGs the player can decide what colour his/her PC is, what his/her name is, and some info about the PC's family. No rolls necessary.Examples of mechanics because there is no general override permission: in classic D&D, the GM is generally not just allowed to fiat up dungeon encounters, but should either have placed them in advance (therefore making them discoverable by the players) or determined them via wandering monster rolls. There are edge cases here - eg what to do if the PCs go into a part of the dungeon not yet written up - and discussion on how to handle those edge cases without violating the basic tenets of play was a major topic of discuss around 35 to 40 years ago.I've chosen these examples, rather than more traditional ones (eg combat to hit rolls) because they make it clearer why I think (i) mechanics aren't a crutch, and (ii) I think that mechanics aren't, per se, linked to tension/drama. They're linked to decision-making about the content of the shared fiction.(Btw, this isn't my original theory or anything. I'm basically parrotting Vincent Baker.)This doesn't seem very apropos of my post.Yes, boring games are boring. But let's assume for the sake of discussion that someone wants to use a dragon in a non-boring game. If the fiction is to live up to the genre tropes, that dragon should be able to break armies and breathe fire. How do you propose this should be handled? Most FRPGs handle the fire-breathing, at lesat, via mechanics; and many also want to handle the breaking of armies that way, too, although - depending a bit on broader context (of the game system, of the particular table) I think that is a better candidate to be handled simply by the GM exercising his/her authority to establish backstory without contest from the players.</blockquote>

Verification