Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 9268589" data-attributes="member: 82106">Yeah, a lot of this meshes with stuff I've discovered in the process of developing my own game. So, at the beginning it was just essentially 4e with some obvious fixes to stuff that bugged me. However, over time I rationalized and reinforced, through noting how play could be problematic, really formalizing and reinforcing the concepts that the players rely on. So, whereas in 4e Quests are a fairly secondary mechanism that takes place within the context of adventures, in HoML there is no such concept as an 'adventure' in any formal sense, the players express Quests and pursue them, and that drives the whole game, and the rules (I claim no particular quality here as a rules author) try to reflect that. Likewise the advancement system, which is just &quot;you get stuff that you quest for&quot; basically. That focuses on delivering in a fictionally mediated manner a process where the players can express how they develop their character's abilities. Practices act to allow the players to reframe any check situation (assuming they have a relevant practice) in a way that complements their thematic and mechanical needs, etc. Actually, [USER=6696971]@Manbearcat[/USER] pointed out that the above really treads into neo-trad territory. I had to think about this, but it certainly opens up a series of questions about how rules/principles specifically relate to different styles of play and where the knobs are there (I don't necessarily disagree with MBC on that, I think it is at least true that HoML would support a type of neo-trad play pretty easily).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 9268589, member: 82106"] Yeah, a lot of this meshes with stuff I've discovered in the process of developing my own game. So, at the beginning it was just essentially 4e with some obvious fixes to stuff that bugged me. However, over time I rationalized and reinforced, through noting how play could be problematic, really formalizing and reinforcing the concepts that the players rely on. So, whereas in 4e Quests are a fairly secondary mechanism that takes place within the context of adventures, in HoML there is no such concept as an 'adventure' in any formal sense, the players express Quests and pursue them, and that drives the whole game, and the rules (I claim no particular quality here as a rules author) try to reflect that. Likewise the advancement system, which is just "you get stuff that you quest for" basically. That focuses on delivering in a fictionally mediated manner a process where the players can express how they develop their character's abilities. Practices act to allow the players to reframe any check situation (assuming they have a relevant practice) in a way that complements their thematic and mechanical needs, etc. Actually, [USER=6696971]@Manbearcat[/USER] pointed out that the above really treads into neo-trad territory. I had to think about this, but it certainly opens up a series of questions about how rules/principles specifically relate to different styles of play and where the knobs are there (I don't necessarily disagree with MBC on that, I think it is at least true that HoML would support a type of neo-trad play pretty easily). [/QUOTE]

Verification