Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 7445844" data-attributes="member: 16814">I think that this is missing the mark.&nbsp; The question isn't &quot;Can system X ape the mechanics of system Y&quot; but rather &quot;can system X provide the same playgoal/outcome as system Y&quot;.&nbsp; The idea is to look at whether a given system can evoke a desired feel, not whether it does that evocation the same way.&nbsp; For instance, no one plays Fate to evoke the Fate's mechanics.&nbsp; They play Fate because it lets them evoke the kind of experience they players want.&nbsp; Instead of evaluating whether or not D&amp;D can do the mechanical end of what aspects in Fate do, we should be looking to see what aspects actually do, and then if D&amp;D can do that.My answer is that aspects evoke meaningful character choices in game by using those character choices to allow success or add complication to play.That said, D&amp;D can do this.&nbsp; I do this regularly in my D&amp;D 5e game by taking what players have given me as important about their characters in backgrounds and traits and letting those improve or hinder action declarations in play.&nbsp; Frex, I had a player that had caravaner as a background, who's story was that she grew up on the trail with her father's caravan, trading around the realm.&nbsp; For this, whenever a question of where a given settlement or landmark was or the best way to get there from here, her character knew, and had advantage on navigation checks between settlements.&nbsp; In Fate terms, she had an aspect along the lines of &quot;I always know the way&quot; or somesuch.Now, if you want to talk about which system does this better, then Fate does, hands down.&nbsp; It's built around this kind of evocation as the centerpiece of play.&nbsp; No arguments.&nbsp; But I don't think comparing whether or not D&amp;D has aspect-like mechanics really gets to the question asked.&nbsp; I think you can mostly do most play goals in most systems, but they're better served in systems that place those play goals front and center rather than systems that pay lip service to them or mostly ignore them.&nbsp; D&amp;D does what it does, and I think it's a broad platform that can accommodate a wide range of play goals, but none super duper well.&nbsp; It's generalist and somewhat malleable.&nbsp; Other games, especially ones that focus on a theme or playgoal (or both) will do that better than D&amp;D, oftentimes much better, but it's going to be hard to not find at least some space for that goal in the broad tent of D&amp;D.Now, all that said, D&amp;D does fantasy.&nbsp; It doesn't do non-fantasy settings well.&nbsp; Other games (like Fate) are very much setting agnostic, so that's a strong point in their favor.&nbsp; If my goal is 'I want to play cyberpunk' D&amp;D is of no help whatsoever, but I could play that in Fate.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ovinomancer, post: 7445844, member: 16814"] I think that this is missing the mark. The question isn't "Can system X ape the mechanics of system Y" but rather "can system X provide the same playgoal/outcome as system Y". The idea is to look at whether a given system can evoke a desired feel, not whether it does that evocation the same way. For instance, no one plays Fate to evoke the Fate's mechanics. They play Fate because it lets them evoke the kind of experience they players want. Instead of evaluating whether or not D&D can do the mechanical end of what aspects in Fate do, we should be looking to see what aspects actually do, and then if D&D can do that. My answer is that aspects evoke meaningful character choices in game by using those character choices to allow success or add complication to play. That said, D&D can do this. I do this regularly in my D&D 5e game by taking what players have given me as important about their characters in backgrounds and traits and letting those improve or hinder action declarations in play. Frex, I had a player that had caravaner as a background, who's story was that she grew up on the trail with her father's caravan, trading around the realm. For this, whenever a question of where a given settlement or landmark was or the best way to get there from here, her character knew, and had advantage on navigation checks between settlements. In Fate terms, she had an aspect along the lines of "I always know the way" or somesuch. Now, if you want to talk about which system does this better, then Fate does, hands down. It's built around this kind of evocation as the centerpiece of play. No arguments. But I don't think comparing whether or not D&D has aspect-like mechanics really gets to the question asked. I think you can mostly do most play goals in most systems, but they're better served in systems that place those play goals front and center rather than systems that pay lip service to them or mostly ignore them. D&D does what it does, and I think it's a broad platform that can accommodate a wide range of play goals, but none super duper well. It's generalist and somewhat malleable. Other games, especially ones that focus on a theme or playgoal (or both) will do that better than D&D, oftentimes much better, but it's going to be hard to not find at least some space for that goal in the broad tent of D&D. Now, all that said, D&D does fantasy. It doesn't do non-fantasy settings well. Other games (like Fate) are very much setting agnostic, so that's a strong point in their favor. If my goal is 'I want to play cyberpunk' D&D is of no help whatsoever, but I could play that in Fate. [/QUOTE]

Verification