Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 9318408" data-attributes="member: 71699">I feel like the arc of design - the designers were well aware of SCs - just moved away from seeing them as necessary. Groups find functional play in judging for themselves whether enough has been done, and in a sense that's the baseline in all TTRPG whether or not you systematise it.SCs require group skill to avoid glitching on questions like - if we made our last needed success but the connected action doesn't really feel to us like it should seal the deal, what do we do?I can go either way. I see worth in systematising it - especially using looser, flexible methods such as L5R momentum (and maybe PF2, which I haven't yet played.) I enjoy using clocks (particularly opposed clocks). And yet I'm comfortable with groups who feel better judging the fictional position and deciding enough has been done (and there is scope for group skill around this, too.)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="clearstream, post: 9318408, member: 71699"] I feel like the arc of design - the designers were well aware of SCs - just moved away from seeing them as necessary. Groups find functional play in judging for themselves whether enough has been done, and in a sense that's the baseline in all TTRPG whether or not you systematise it. SCs require group skill to avoid glitching on questions like - if we made our last needed success but the connected action doesn't really feel to us like it should seal the deal, what do we do? I can go either way. I see worth in systematising it - especially using looser, flexible methods such as L5R momentum (and maybe PF2, which I haven't yet played.) I enjoy using clocks (particularly opposed clocks). And yet I'm comfortable with groups who feel better judging the fictional position and deciding enough has been done (and there is scope for group skill around this, too.) [/QUOTE]

Verification