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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 9844549" data-attributes="member: 42582">Vincent Baker has an interesting blog about the relationship, in Apocalypse World play, between the core activity of "the conversation" - that is, a structured way of generating shared imagining of some people doing some things in circumstances of conflict - and the more technical and mechanical rules that the game offers for generating content for the conversation: it's <a href="https://lumpley.games/2019/12/30/powered-by-the-apocalypse-part-1/" target="_blank">section 4 of this blog post</a>.At the end of the discussion in section 4, he observes that:Deep hacks' is a term we sometimes use for PbtA games that don’t follow Apocalypse World’s template here. . . . the conversations are structured so differently at the core that they require a whole different structure of elaboration and collapse.The reason I'm pointing this out is because it reminds us that not all RPGs have the same structure in their play. For instance, if someone wants to play a RPG that is similar to classic dungeon-crawling D&D, I think it would be a mistake to focus on the conversation and its principles as the core, or certainly as the whole of the core. The core, for that sort of RPG, has to include the map-and-key.I also think that this helps us understand why this sort of RPGing won't, in play, manifest a story: to allude to [USER=6925338]@soviet[/USER]'s post just upthread, it might produce a travelogue; but a travelogue of the sort that one sees in the examples of play in Gygax's DMG, or Book 3 of OD&D, or Moldvay's example of play in his Basic Rulebook, is not much of a story!</blockquote>

Verification