Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="nnms" data-source="post: 6262908" data-attributes="member: 83293">Here's an exercise that might help break things down even further.  It requires actually playing a short session.Pick a simple game.  The Cthulhu Dark game would work great as it's truly simple.  As would Moldvay Basic D&D.  Or failing that pick a game you know really well in terms of rules but doesn't require the individual player to have rules mastery.  You want one of the many games where people can describe what their character's do in normal language.  Fast character generation would also be ideal as why spend half an hour on a character for a short learning experience exercise session?  Though I suppose there's no reason you just couldn't take an existing game and do this for part of a session.Now have someone else run a short scenario.  They're in charge of the setting content, the foes and monsters, the NPCs, etc., just like GM, referee or DM traditionally is.  However, they're not in charge of the rules.  At all.  You are.  Whenever the GM would normally go to the dice or ask for a roll, he instead asks you to implement the rules system.And you are also a normal player.  So make characters if you need to.Then play as normal.  You'll need to listen very carefully to how the guy taking care of the adventure content is describing things in the world.  He might have stats for various monsters, but you're going to need to decide on the difficulty of various tasks and handle the implementation of the rules system when it is needed.  You'll need to pay attention to description and how everything is perceived and ask questions.  Basically the GM's description and communication needs to be good enough that you can handle the rules completely while meeting everyone at the table's expectations of what makes sense given the described situation.The times I've done this I've noticed a few different effects:1) You really see how everything connects back to the act of description.  You need to clearly communicate with one another and the rules implementation needs to make sense based on what is described rather than what the GM thinks it's like in his/her head but hasn't fully explained.2) System usage will diminish to only being used when it's needed.  If another player and the GM are going back and forth describing the situation, there won't be "I guess we're supposed to roll something here" coming up as often.  The rules will become more and more about resolving that which is actually uncertain and important.3) You'll start to have a very keen sense on what is important to the other participants and what they want to be uncertain.  They'll be dramatic build ups where the possible consequences are mounting and then you'll implement the system to resolve things.  You'll also get a sense when things are not important or are routine and no one really has a stake in the results either way.4) The GM will get a good bit of exercise with his description muscles.  He doesn't have to describe it just well enough so that it makes sense to himself, but to you.4a) All rules use will be based on your understanding of someone else's description rather than on system elements.  You won't have the monster's stats in front of you.  You'll have to rely on the description of the monster and the various stats the GM uses as you ask him to (just like when you ask a player to make a roll for something and use a number on his character sheet).</blockquote>

Verification