Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="kenada" data-source="post: 9504217" data-attributes="member: 70468">Given our past interactions on “improv game”, I’m not sure how fruitful this conversation will be, so if it’s not going to be, let’s let it drop, but I’m having trouble following you on blocking.It seems to me that blocking is necessary to create gameplay. Without it, the GM always ends up having to accept what the players want. You <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/theorizing-more-on-social-conflict-systems.707313/#post-9481402" target="_blank">mention</a> a problem with creating gameplay dynamics in your thread on social systems, so it seems like you also see the issue. Maybe I just don’t understand what “blocking” means in this context.For example, consider the following situation. The players are looking for information on local bandit attacks. They hear someone at the bar may know, so they go to the bar to find out, seeing them him at the counter.Person 1: I walk over to the counter, greet the bartender, and order my usual. I turn to the man next to me and ask, “I hear you might know a way into the bandit camp.” Person 2: I don’t know you.In improv, that failure to accept the first person’s offer potentially kills the scene. However, in a role-playing game, there are game elements the players can use to overcome this obstacle. It doesn’t kill the scene. It’s an obstacle they can play the game to overcome.For example, in 5e (2014 edition), they could assess the NPC’s BIFTs and appeal to them to make a Charisma (Persuasion) check to make a request for the information. In Blades in the Dark, they can try to Sway (probably at Risky/Limited). In Torchbearer, this might become a Convince conflict. There are plenty of different ways games operationalize this.However, the important thing is that you can lose. Maybe the check fails, or you lose the conflict. The result is the NPC leaves or (worse) informs on the PCs to the bandits. To me, it seems like that risk of failure is the point. Otherwise, obstacles aren’t effectively obstacles. (Of course, it may be that I just don’t understand.)</blockquote>

Verification