Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 8865447" data-attributes="member: 6696971">I think this is a pretty good sticking point of disagreement.  We've got the primary play loop tech as discussed.  We've got action economy/time/space allocation for the primary Exploration action declarations of Searching, Listening, Interacting w/ Doors which includes proto-Ability Check tech (1d6 and 1 or sometimes 2 and maybe ability modifier is add-on like forcing doors open) that can be mapped onto outlier actions as required.  We've got interactions with Traps.  We've got Evasion & Pursuit rules and how dropping various items interacts with that.  We've got Rest, we've got Combat Sequence, we've got Retainers (and Hirelings in Expert).  The least rules that we have is for parley if a Monster Reaction is 3-5 or 6-8 or 9-11, but say yes, say no, or roll the proto-Ability Check tech handles that easily enough (I've always gone 1d6 @ 1 if 3-5, 1d6 @ 1/2 on 6-8, 1d6 @ 1/2 and positive ability modifier adjust on 9-11).These bolded and italicized words are what I'm getting at in my description of 2 upthread (which appears to me like what you're depicting):2) A heavily GM-directed experience where the crawl features free play, serial exploration and is more about performative aspects, ephemera (map and key and boxed text and possibly handouts), mood, tone, aesthetic than what (1) is about. GM's extrapolate their conception of the dungeon ecology and they play their mental model of the simulation while players try to suss out the GM's mental model while immersing themselves in all the stuff in that first sentence. Yes, resources are brought to bear and challenges are undertaken, but it is an extremely divergent experience from (1) above due to a number of reasons, structure and systemization of play + prospective roles and GMing techniques chief among them (both the inputs and the experience of the play).So, for instance, your mechanical gamey-ness being replaced by judgement and communication and (your sense of) organic and (your sense of) immersive might look like this:SUB OUT codified Exploration Turns, Light Duration and Strength, Wandering Monster (Clock), and the weariness that creates Rest requirement of 1 Turn in 6 (or suffer penalties) and SUB IN:GM (reading boxed text or their own text or making it up):  Your exhausting, squirming climb through the cavernous chimney empties you out onto a dark, stoney landing.  Your muscles and bones ache as you gather yourself.  Your guttering torch shares a kindred protest.  It repels the immediate darkness for now, but the flickering flame will soon be quenched.  A rope bridge that has seen far better days spans a bottomless cavern.  Your light extends only so far, thus what lies beyond is outside of your meager means.  Bats explode from below and exit through the tiniest of fissure in the ceiling.  When the echoing sound finally desists, there are other...ominous sounds.  Scratching, smearing...then nothing.  The dizzying acoustics of this place make it impossible to discern what and from where.  But...something...else...is clearly in these abyssal caverns...and its moving...PLAYERS:  <Make action declarations to sort out the action economy of their exploration here, how that resolves, how weary are they and how do they resolve their weariness, how much light is left in this torch + the others and what are the limits of its illumination, does that sound mean that something is drawing near or moving away or is it merely the imagination>Again, that looks like my (2) above vs the (1) in my post upthread (which would be Moldvay Basic or, better still, Torchbearer as exemplars).  Deeply different play, different head-space for all participants.  The sense of "meaningfulness" of being able to both assess the present gamestate and confidently move that gamestate in a desired direction (and what moving it in an undesired direction both entails and looks like), as a player, will be quite different from (1) to (2).</blockquote>

Verification