clearstream
(He, Him)
Yes, and as related to the OP, reading the Daggerheart game text I observe structures and statements that will have utility to modes of play that forcefully make that shift, and structures and statements that will have utility to modes of play that do not.A final argument that I will mention is that - when looked at in the context of ordinary, conventional RPGing with a typical GM-player divide - the most important thing to do to achieve narrativist play is to change the way the GM makes decisions from the sorts of approaches that are set out in "mainstream" RPG books (like, eg, most D&D DMGs). The relevant changes include having regard to player thematic cues, allowing players to set the goals for their PCs (and not asking them to pick from a GM-authored menu), and having regard to those thematic cues in establishing situations (= framing scenes) and establishing consequences. This in turn requires departing from "neutral GMing" as well as "follow the story board" GMing, and is apt to cause friction with some fairly common approaches to action resolution and to the establishing of consequences (eg rules around healing of injuries or recovery/replenishment of gear).
I have no idea what makes this particular bundle of arguments "modalist". It's a series of arguments about the relationships between technique, play procedures, expectations/convention, and various aesthetic goals one might have while RPGing.
I appreciate that through a modalistic lense it can be hard to see that continuum. RQ and RM could seem as dissimilar as word puzzles and novels, rather than as similar as one word puzzle with another. Modalism is defined by denying any conceptual space surrounding and between instances.I mean, I've actually played RQ and RM, and I can't see the "continuum" pathway from... one of them to the other, even though they're both d%-using purist-for-system-oriented engines.
Last edited: