Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Where is D&D Headed Next (Wired.com)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5919109" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>Then you'd change them, I guess.</p><p></p><p>I have my own views on what the issues are, but they come from a particular perspective about what RPGing is about, and so of course are controversial, because not everyone has the same view of RPGing.</p><p></p><p>[MENTION=386]LostSoul[/MENTION], in a recent post on a thread somewhere in this forum, said that one phenomenon he has encountered in his RPGing is that <em>he</em> likes a game which requires players to make meaningful choices, but many <em>players</em> don't want to make meaningful choices, but rather want to be entertained.</p><p></p><p>I've had what I think are similar experiences - both in the real world, and in message board exchanges - and while it wouldn't have occurred to me to describe them in that way, I think they are the same sort of thing, or closely related. They involve expectations about the GM supplying a certain sort of experience to the players - and related to this are expectations about the sorts of powers a GM will exercise. Also expectations about how the imaginary situations around which the game revolves will be set up (in particular, will there be some sort of plot of overarching goal or thematic purpose that the GM supplies and the players respond to?).</p><p></p><p>Then there are less global, more particular questions about what sort of experience and orientation the mechanics of a game best support.</p><p></p><p>Take a game like 3E. It has intricate PC build mechanics. (And in that respect resembles Rolemaster and Burning Wheel, and perhaps to a slightly lesser extent Runequest and Traveller, just to name some games I'm familiar with.) Those mechanics have many moving parts, meaning that the way to mechanically optimise your PC's ability at some particular ingame activity (say, killing things using a sword) is not at all transparent. (This is a difference from the other games I've mentioned, which have pretty transparent skill systems in which you basically can't go wrong by trying to lift your numbers in the relevant skill.) And when you then look at the norms of encounter and adventure design for 3E (and D&D in general), you find that the overwhelmingly common conflict is mortal combat, and the overwhelmingly common consequence of losig a conflict is PC death.</p><p></p><p>Given those factors, it's no wonder that (i) PC building becomes a big part of the game, and (ii) there is player push back against GMs who try to interfere in PC building. That (ii) will occur is particularly obvious, because the whole premise of the game is that the GM will design encounters in which if you don't win then your PC will die - and the only resource you as a player have to prevent that is to use these baroque mechanics to build a PC who will reliably win - and now the same guy who is out to kill you is trying to interfere with your deployment of the one resource that you have!</p><p></p><p>Conversely, if you're going to keep the basic parameters of the game the same, yet avoid (ii), you're basically saying that the players punt responsibility for the play of the game, including the survival of their PCs, to the GM - and they're just along for the ride! This might fit with roleplaying as entertainment, an experience delivered by the GM. But it's not going to fit with a group of players who want their roleplaying to involve meaningful choices.</p><p></p><p>I don't think that what you say is true of any of the systems I named - Rolemaster, Runequest, Burning Wheel or HeroWars/Quest - except perhaps the lattermost, which is mechanically very light and much more overtly story-oriented in its action resolution mechanics. The other three games all have far more gritty and "realistic" combat engines than D&D.</p><p></p><p>But RM, RQ and BW all have mechanics every bit as intricate and baroque as D&D. But they are more transparent in their PC build mechanics (not necessarily simpler, but more obvious), so it's more obvious what is involved in making your PC good at something. But, and I think more importantly, they have both action resolution mechanics <em>and</em> assumptions about encounter and scenario design that mean that the stakes aren't always life or death, and that there is more than one path to a viable PC build. (This is as simple as having options other than combat make clear contributions to PC advancement. But it goes well beyond that.)</p><p></p><p>This is true. And I think it goes back to the sort of experience the game is meant to deliver. But there's a long running counter-current in D&D play that says that punting responsibility for, and control over, the play experience to the GM can be a problem. To put it another way: narrative games (and the earlier hypersimulationist games like RQ and RM) are a controversial and perhaps narrow solution to a much more widely recognised problem.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 5919109, member: 42582"] Then you'd change them, I guess. I have my own views on what the issues are, but they come from a particular perspective about what RPGing is about, and so of course are controversial, because not everyone has the same view of RPGing. [MENTION=386]LostSoul[/MENTION], in a recent post on a thread somewhere in this forum, said that one phenomenon he has encountered in his RPGing is that [I]he[/I] likes a game which requires players to make meaningful choices, but many [I]players[/I] don't want to make meaningful choices, but rather want to be entertained. I've had what I think are similar experiences - both in the real world, and in message board exchanges - and while it wouldn't have occurred to me to describe them in that way, I think they are the same sort of thing, or closely related. They involve expectations about the GM supplying a certain sort of experience to the players - and related to this are expectations about the sorts of powers a GM will exercise. Also expectations about how the imaginary situations around which the game revolves will be set up (in particular, will there be some sort of plot of overarching goal or thematic purpose that the GM supplies and the players respond to?). Then there are less global, more particular questions about what sort of experience and orientation the mechanics of a game best support. Take a game like 3E. It has intricate PC build mechanics. (And in that respect resembles Rolemaster and Burning Wheel, and perhaps to a slightly lesser extent Runequest and Traveller, just to name some games I'm familiar with.) Those mechanics have many moving parts, meaning that the way to mechanically optimise your PC's ability at some particular ingame activity (say, killing things using a sword) is not at all transparent. (This is a difference from the other games I've mentioned, which have pretty transparent skill systems in which you basically can't go wrong by trying to lift your numbers in the relevant skill.) And when you then look at the norms of encounter and adventure design for 3E (and D&D in general), you find that the overwhelmingly common conflict is mortal combat, and the overwhelmingly common consequence of losig a conflict is PC death. Given those factors, it's no wonder that (i) PC building becomes a big part of the game, and (ii) there is player push back against GMs who try to interfere in PC building. That (ii) will occur is particularly obvious, because the whole premise of the game is that the GM will design encounters in which if you don't win then your PC will die - and the only resource you as a player have to prevent that is to use these baroque mechanics to build a PC who will reliably win - and now the same guy who is out to kill you is trying to interfere with your deployment of the one resource that you have! Conversely, if you're going to keep the basic parameters of the game the same, yet avoid (ii), you're basically saying that the players punt responsibility for the play of the game, including the survival of their PCs, to the GM - and they're just along for the ride! This might fit with roleplaying as entertainment, an experience delivered by the GM. But it's not going to fit with a group of players who want their roleplaying to involve meaningful choices. I don't think that what you say is true of any of the systems I named - Rolemaster, Runequest, Burning Wheel or HeroWars/Quest - except perhaps the lattermost, which is mechanically very light and much more overtly story-oriented in its action resolution mechanics. The other three games all have far more gritty and "realistic" combat engines than D&D. But RM, RQ and BW all have mechanics every bit as intricate and baroque as D&D. But they are more transparent in their PC build mechanics (not necessarily simpler, but more obvious), so it's more obvious what is involved in making your PC good at something. But, and I think more importantly, they have both action resolution mechanics [I]and[/I] assumptions about encounter and scenario design that mean that the stakes aren't always life or death, and that there is more than one path to a viable PC build. (This is as simple as having options other than combat make clear contributions to PC advancement. But it goes well beyond that.) This is true. And I think it goes back to the sort of experience the game is meant to deliver. But there's a long running counter-current in D&D play that says that punting responsibility for, and control over, the play experience to the GM can be a problem. To put it another way: narrative games (and the earlier hypersimulationist games like RQ and RM) are a controversial and perhaps narrow solution to a much more widely recognised problem. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Where is D&D Headed Next (Wired.com)
Top