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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 9215562" data-attributes="member: 71699">I'm thinking of <a href="https://imbrattabit.wordpress.com/2019/12/09/what-does-it-take-to-be-a-neotrad-role-playing-game/" target="_blank">this article</a>, which can be read to differ on some key points from the OP. Alternatively, one could take "They [characters] are not simply created as part of the fictional world, they have a close link with the game itself" to be reconciled with the OP by assuming that examples such as the teleporting swordmage are more about that close link with G than they are about the player's original conception. One could then say that just so long as the player's original conception is one that the game text chosen affords - such as teleporting every six seconds - there is no water between them.My personal experience and conception of neo-trad has formed more around modern mechanics realising player characters / intentions, e.g. through how they afford privileges or fiats over the ongoing shared narrative, than G being detached from character concepts as on first reading I took the OP to advocate. Hence my question up thread about priority of character concept over mechanics. On the other hand, perhaps I wasn't attentive enough to the implications of negative space.Thus, I had formerly taken OC and neo-trad to be closely connected if not the same (OC being in some respects the "why" of neo-trad design.) The OP included notions that to my mind suggested a degree of disconnect, i.e. that character concept should prevail over mechanics; e.g. that robust exploration rules should give way to my scout character concept. I had not formerly understood neo-trad to downplay mechanics: rather the reverse! The OP subsequently explained that such disconnect is forestalled through exercise of choice over rule set in the first place, so that presumably - if I had strong feelings on the matter - we would not choose Pathfinder but instead TOR or whatever text thematically fit with my prevailing desires.In conclusion, I offered the distinction to make room for the OP's notion. I held fears about their notion being over-productive in terms of game texts. If their notion includes that "They [characters] are not simply created as part of the fictional world, they have a close link with the game itself" - which I can see that it very well could - then I would drop the distinction.**There might still be value in thinking of neo-trad as labelling game designs likely to satisfy OC prelusory goals, with in mind the possibility that such goals could be satisfied in theory through care in selection from among all designs.</blockquote>

Verification