Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8861735" data-attributes="member: 42582">No probs. I wasn't setting out to disagree (let alone start a fight!), just responding to what I saw in your post. I think at a certain point, that "abstraction" means that what is happening is less action resolution and more scene re-framing. The borderline here is not precise, but I think that the core of action resolution is that the player character has done some relatively definite thing in the fiction, and we're now working out what flows from that; whereas scene reframing is more about changing the parameters of the situation in which the PC finds themself, as a precursor to actually declaring and resolving actions.I think that 3E's Perception and Diplomacy skills - at least by reputation - are often used in a scene-reframing way. Rather than the player declaring what their PC is doing in the fiction, they declare "I make a Perception check" or "I use Diplomacy", and then the dice are rolled, and the upshot (if the check succeeds) is a new scene - eg instead of their being an empty room, the room is one in which the PC can see a (would-be) hidden doodad; or instead of their being an angry NPC, the situation is one in which the PC is dealing with a compliant NPC.I'm not exactly sure which PC abilities you've got in mind in the 5e context - my familiarity with 5e is not hopeless, but is limited - but the picture I've got is similar to what I've described in the previous paragraph, whether that is based around ability/skill checks, or the use of spells (eg casting LTH means that the situation is changed from one of risky camping to one in which the PCs are safe in a magical redoubt), or similar.Torchbearer has a little bit of player-side stuff that can permit scene-reframing - mostly the use of Circles to trigger encounters with useful NPCs - but not on the scale of modern D&D. And I do think this is relevant to the dungeon-crawl style of play.I think too much of this is what can give classic D&D dungeon crawling a bad reputation. Or at least can narrow its appeal.I think it's helpful if a RPG gives a sense of the degree of "granularity"/detail expected for action declarations to be resolved. Torchbearer follows its parent game Burning Wheel in this respect - by having fairly comprehensive difficulty lists under its skills and attributes, and related rules for what gear gives what sort of bonus, it gives a good sense of the level of detail expected in action declaration. It also encourages the GM to "say 'yes'" to "good ideas" - like, say, removing a door from its hinges once their make has been successfully inspected (which might be a Carpenter or Scout check - TB has no issue with overlapping competencies in particular situations). It uses a separate part of the system - the rules for advancement - to encourage the players to aim for checks as well as "good ideas", and so avoids the problem of "GM says 'yes'" = "easy mode".I think it is possible (not necessarily probable) that a revised version of 5e D&D could - through its skill descriptions, its advice on setting DCs,  its advice on narrating failures, and its spell descriptions - articulate a consistent approach to the granularity/detail of action declarations. Dealing with the issue that "saying 'yes'" = "easy mode" might be harder, as it's not clear what the incentive would be for players to sometimes want to make checks instead.</blockquote>

Verification