Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Vincent Baker on mechanics, system and fiction in RPGs
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="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 9201327" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p>I assume your reference is AW 1e, it is a bit more clearly spelled out in 2e. </p><p></p><p>There's a whole page or so more beyond that breaking down the sorts of arrangements and emphasizing that you need leverage to make this move work, it isn't just 'diplomacy', you have to actually have something the other guy wants, or is afraid of, etc. </p><p></p><p>Here I'd note this is a big difference from Go Aggro, you don't need ANY particular fictional position to trigger Go Aggro, you just say something that indicates you are trying to force someone to do/not do something by force, actively; where the force MAY not be carried through on if the goal is achieved (else just use In Battle). </p><p></p><p>Just to expound a bit more, cause its me and I love to talk, DW also made things a bit more explicit. You can 'Parley' with someone, IF YOU HAVE LEVERAGE, otherwise its just chit chat. It is basically a version of Manipulate/Seduce. Because DW is less about violent interpersonal conflict than AW it lacks an exact equivalent to Go Aggro. You can Hack & Slash of course, but there's not really a move for resolving "this guy is strong enough that I can't manipulate him with a threat, but not too strong to potentially frighten." In that game, which deliberately emulates old-school D&D, you can talk, or Parley, or you can hack! Its a different game, different agenda, the tone is different, so similar but not identical move architecture. This is where all of VB's exposition of the PbtA architecture gets more than theoretical. Some designers have a good feel for what moves will produce that narrativist experience, some don't. Some PbtA games are solid narrativist designs, some bend more into Neo-Trad territory, or whatever. I think maybe [USER=177]@Umbran[/USER] 's objection to VB stems from this, you can read all the articles you want, he can't make you into a game designer with a good feel for game design. If he could you and I would be running kick starters, lol.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 9201327, member: 82106"] I assume your reference is AW 1e, it is a bit more clearly spelled out in 2e. There's a whole page or so more beyond that breaking down the sorts of arrangements and emphasizing that you need leverage to make this move work, it isn't just 'diplomacy', you have to actually have something the other guy wants, or is afraid of, etc. Here I'd note this is a big difference from Go Aggro, you don't need ANY particular fictional position to trigger Go Aggro, you just say something that indicates you are trying to force someone to do/not do something by force, actively; where the force MAY not be carried through on if the goal is achieved (else just use In Battle). Just to expound a bit more, cause its me and I love to talk, DW also made things a bit more explicit. You can 'Parley' with someone, IF YOU HAVE LEVERAGE, otherwise its just chit chat. It is basically a version of Manipulate/Seduce. Because DW is less about violent interpersonal conflict than AW it lacks an exact equivalent to Go Aggro. You can Hack & Slash of course, but there's not really a move for resolving "this guy is strong enough that I can't manipulate him with a threat, but not too strong to potentially frighten." In that game, which deliberately emulates old-school D&D, you can talk, or Parley, or you can hack! Its a different game, different agenda, the tone is different, so similar but not identical move architecture. This is where all of VB's exposition of the PbtA architecture gets more than theoretical. Some designers have a good feel for what moves will produce that narrativist experience, some don't. Some PbtA games are solid narrativist designs, some bend more into Neo-Trad territory, or whatever. I think maybe [USER=177]@Umbran[/USER] 's objection to VB stems from this, you can read all the articles you want, he can't make you into a game designer with a good feel for game design. If he could you and I would be running kick starters, lol. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Vincent Baker on mechanics, system and fiction in RPGs
Top