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
With Respect to the Door and Expectations....The REAL Reason 5e Can't Unite the Base
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: 5980310" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>My own experience - admittedly limited - is that there is no general tendency on the part of new roleplayers to assume that stakes and intent are confined to a process-simulation approach to resolution.</p><p></p><p>The point about expectations is important.</p><p></p><p>Certain games make it clear that narrating complications, such as the gorge, is part of their action resolution mechanics. And one of those games is 4e (although as I've frequently pointed out, the rules indicate this only obliquely, via the example in the Rules Compendium - see my post 138 upthread - rather than explicitly).</p><p></p><p>So if you were playing 4e, and were familiar with the rules, then presumably that counterfactual you <em>wouldn't</em> be surprised by this sort of thing.</p><p></p><p>But this does give rise to the question - how can a failed ride check be narrated <em>without</em> introducing something like the gorge? All I can think of is (i) you urge your horse to greater speed, but it ignores you, and (ii) some sort of equipment failure eg you forgot to tighten your saddle straps.</p><p></p><p>To me, these all seem like variants on the gorge. Where did the horse's weak leg come from? The player didn't ask for a veterinary check, did s/he? Or if the lameness is due to the horse stepping in a pothole, where did that pothole come from. Or the brush, for that matter, or the switchback? Or the terrain feature that necessitates a jump (perhaps a gorge!)?</p><p></p><p>I don't see how weak legs, potholes, bushes, switchbacks or whatever other elements of the fiction are being introduced in these examples are interestingly different, for the purposes of the current conversation, from a gorge. Or is it all about degrees? - gorges are more geographically extreme than brush? (As I said upthread, no one is saying that "Rocks fall. Everybody dies!" is good narration.)</p><p></p><p>It seems to me that that way of framing the question is already imposing a process-simulation resolution system.</p><p></p><p>The game is not part of a process of running a series of random trials. The gorge narration is likely to occur once in a campaign. (Unless it becomes some sort of running joke or motif.)</p><p></p><p>The reason a player who has invested build resources in riding skill is less likely to have his/her PC confronted by a gorge is because, by investing those resources, s/he has purchased the privilege of having his/her PC be more likely to get what s/he wants when riding is involved.</p><p></p><p>That is not the only way to interpret PC build mechanics, obviously. But it is one implied by certain sorts of action resolution mechanics, including skill challenges.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I'm still confused as to which system we are discussing.</p><p></p><p>4e does not have a ride skill. Nor does it have an animal handling skill. Nor does it have a region knowledge or geography skill. It has a Nature skill. It also has rules for augments (so a Nature check can be augmented via a History check or Perception check, for example).</p><p></p><p>The systems I'm familiar with that have more narrowly defined skill/attribute lists (BW, HeroWars/Quest), and that use skill-challenge like mechanics, also have more robust augment rules than 4e.</p><p></p><p>So which system are we talking about involves a player (i) choosing to use a riding skill, and (ii) not being able to draw upon other relevant skills, like knowledge of the local geography, to augment?</p><p></p><p>As per the DMG and PHB, in 4e it is the GM who, by default, has the authority to narrate consequences of checks. In both the DMG and DMG2, however, there is discussion of when/how one might cede some of that authority to the players.</p><p></p><p>Nicely put.</p><p></p><p>Very nicely put. Both as to part of the rationale for narrating the gorge (another part of the rationale might because it is the most interesting complication the GM can think of), and also as to consequence - that the riding ability is still available to be used to progess through the situation.</p><p></p><p>I like this too - and I think it nicely complements LostSoul's anlaysis.</p><p></p><p></p><p>And another nice complement to what LostSoul said - the horse is still there, the distance is what it is, etc.</p><p></p><p>I'm not sure why you say this. As chaochou said,</p><p></p><p>(b) is itself an element of (a) - part of the narration of the new situation will also convey what has changed in it such that you are nearer to escape. Even if the skill challenge fails overall, that previous narration, and the colour and fictional positioning that it has introduced, still stands. This point is a further complement to LostSoul's analysis - that the colour and fiction of decisions made by the player, and the way those checks resolve, remain established at the table and colour the overall consequence of resolving the situation.</p><p></p><p>Thanks chaochou.</p><p></p><p>I am hoping to run Burning Wheel once my 4e campaign finishes. But 4e does different things (gonzo fantasy) from what BW does (more gritty). And 4e also uses different (and on the whole less formal) techniques for signalling player buy-in (eg race, class, paragon path, epic destiny). But within those parameters, I don't find it hard to run 4e in a vanilla narrativist way.</p><p></p><p>As a GM, I like to have the freedom to be lazy away from the table - minimal prep, for example - but am happy to work hard at the table! The long lists of monsters, traps etc, the skill descriptions, the gods, the maps - all make it fairly straightforward to frame scenes that respond to what the players are doing and where they are trying to take things, provided that I'm paying attention and have my wits about me. (My view of WotC's design strategy from a commercial point of view is: instead of giving players and GMs the tools to build the PCs/situations that will support their desired story/theme, they will sell lots and lots of books with lots and lots of lists of possible elements, from which players and GMs can choose the ones they want.)</p><p></p><p>I guess the real question is, is D&D worth it? To which my answer is: yes, provided you're happy with gonzo fantasy, with fairly traditional fantasy tropes and themes (if you're happy with these, the situations in 4e practically write themselves; if you're not, then I'm not sure that there's much else to work with), and with combat as the principal, and perhaps ultimate, site of conflict resolution (4e is D&D, after all!).</p><p></p><p>Finally, way upthread (post 108) I posted this - one of the earlier posts in this discussion of gorges and action resolution mechanics:</p><p></p><p>Other than perhaps adding a "tightly" into the first sentence ("must be <strong>tightly</strong> related") I still stand by this. Comparing metagame/"genre logic" resolution to Toon is in my view unhelpful - suggesting, apart from anything else, that those who are GMing the game in such a way are not running, or don't care about, serious games. (For whatever reason, this is a recurrent pattern in discussions of 4e play on these forums.)</p><p></p><p>And likewise, no one has explained what action resolution mechanics they think will produce creative, non-highest-number driven play, if not the sort of resolution that I and [MENTION=6696971]Manbearcat[/MENTION] have talked about. Before the gorge was introduced from another thread, I posted this example:</p><p></p><p>If all narration of consequences must be tightly connected via process simulation, then failed Diplomacy checks by CHA-dumping fighters are always going to be narrated as those PCs being rude/uncouth/generally disgusting. Which will mean that players of those PCs will never initiate Diplomacy checks (except as a joke, I guess). Which means that play will default to only the face talking, only the rogue picks locks, the party can never attempt stealth or riding unless every PC is trained, etc. How is that good for the game?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 5980310, member: 42582"] My own experience - admittedly limited - is that there is no general tendency on the part of new roleplayers to assume that stakes and intent are confined to a process-simulation approach to resolution. The point about expectations is important. Certain games make it clear that narrating complications, such as the gorge, is part of their action resolution mechanics. And one of those games is 4e (although as I've frequently pointed out, the rules indicate this only obliquely, via the example in the Rules Compendium - see my post 138 upthread - rather than explicitly). So if you were playing 4e, and were familiar with the rules, then presumably that counterfactual you [I]wouldn't[/I] be surprised by this sort of thing. But this does give rise to the question - how can a failed ride check be narrated [I]without[/I] introducing something like the gorge? All I can think of is (i) you urge your horse to greater speed, but it ignores you, and (ii) some sort of equipment failure eg you forgot to tighten your saddle straps. To me, these all seem like variants on the gorge. Where did the horse's weak leg come from? The player didn't ask for a veterinary check, did s/he? Or if the lameness is due to the horse stepping in a pothole, where did that pothole come from. Or the brush, for that matter, or the switchback? Or the terrain feature that necessitates a jump (perhaps a gorge!)? I don't see how weak legs, potholes, bushes, switchbacks or whatever other elements of the fiction are being introduced in these examples are interestingly different, for the purposes of the current conversation, from a gorge. Or is it all about degrees? - gorges are more geographically extreme than brush? (As I said upthread, no one is saying that "Rocks fall. Everybody dies!" is good narration.) It seems to me that that way of framing the question is already imposing a process-simulation resolution system. The game is not part of a process of running a series of random trials. The gorge narration is likely to occur once in a campaign. (Unless it becomes some sort of running joke or motif.) The reason a player who has invested build resources in riding skill is less likely to have his/her PC confronted by a gorge is because, by investing those resources, s/he has purchased the privilege of having his/her PC be more likely to get what s/he wants when riding is involved. That is not the only way to interpret PC build mechanics, obviously. But it is one implied by certain sorts of action resolution mechanics, including skill challenges. I'm still confused as to which system we are discussing. 4e does not have a ride skill. Nor does it have an animal handling skill. Nor does it have a region knowledge or geography skill. It has a Nature skill. It also has rules for augments (so a Nature check can be augmented via a History check or Perception check, for example). The systems I'm familiar with that have more narrowly defined skill/attribute lists (BW, HeroWars/Quest), and that use skill-challenge like mechanics, also have more robust augment rules than 4e. So which system are we talking about involves a player (i) choosing to use a riding skill, and (ii) not being able to draw upon other relevant skills, like knowledge of the local geography, to augment? As per the DMG and PHB, in 4e it is the GM who, by default, has the authority to narrate consequences of checks. In both the DMG and DMG2, however, there is discussion of when/how one might cede some of that authority to the players. Nicely put. Very nicely put. Both as to part of the rationale for narrating the gorge (another part of the rationale might because it is the most interesting complication the GM can think of), and also as to consequence - that the riding ability is still available to be used to progess through the situation. I like this too - and I think it nicely complements LostSoul's anlaysis. And another nice complement to what LostSoul said - the horse is still there, the distance is what it is, etc. I'm not sure why you say this. As chaochou said, (b) is itself an element of (a) - part of the narration of the new situation will also convey what has changed in it such that you are nearer to escape. Even if the skill challenge fails overall, that previous narration, and the colour and fictional positioning that it has introduced, still stands. This point is a further complement to LostSoul's analysis - that the colour and fiction of decisions made by the player, and the way those checks resolve, remain established at the table and colour the overall consequence of resolving the situation. Thanks chaochou. I am hoping to run Burning Wheel once my 4e campaign finishes. But 4e does different things (gonzo fantasy) from what BW does (more gritty). And 4e also uses different (and on the whole less formal) techniques for signalling player buy-in (eg race, class, paragon path, epic destiny). But within those parameters, I don't find it hard to run 4e in a vanilla narrativist way. As a GM, I like to have the freedom to be lazy away from the table - minimal prep, for example - but am happy to work hard at the table! The long lists of monsters, traps etc, the skill descriptions, the gods, the maps - all make it fairly straightforward to frame scenes that respond to what the players are doing and where they are trying to take things, provided that I'm paying attention and have my wits about me. (My view of WotC's design strategy from a commercial point of view is: instead of giving players and GMs the tools to build the PCs/situations that will support their desired story/theme, they will sell lots and lots of books with lots and lots of lists of possible elements, from which players and GMs can choose the ones they want.) I guess the real question is, is D&D worth it? To which my answer is: yes, provided you're happy with gonzo fantasy, with fairly traditional fantasy tropes and themes (if you're happy with these, the situations in 4e practically write themselves; if you're not, then I'm not sure that there's much else to work with), and with combat as the principal, and perhaps ultimate, site of conflict resolution (4e is D&D, after all!). Finally, way upthread (post 108) I posted this - one of the earlier posts in this discussion of gorges and action resolution mechanics: Other than perhaps adding a "tightly" into the first sentence ("must be [B]tightly[/B] related") I still stand by this. Comparing metagame/"genre logic" resolution to Toon is in my view unhelpful - suggesting, apart from anything else, that those who are GMing the game in such a way are not running, or don't care about, serious games. (For whatever reason, this is a recurrent pattern in discussions of 4e play on these forums.) And likewise, no one has explained what action resolution mechanics they think will produce creative, non-highest-number driven play, if not the sort of resolution that I and [MENTION=6696971]Manbearcat[/MENTION] have talked about. Before the gorge was introduced from another thread, I posted this example: If all narration of consequences must be tightly connected via process simulation, then failed Diplomacy checks by CHA-dumping fighters are always going to be narrated as those PCs being rude/uncouth/generally disgusting. Which will mean that players of those PCs will never initiate Diplomacy checks (except as a joke, I guess). Which means that play will default to only the face talking, only the rogue picks locks, the party can never attempt stealth or riding unless every PC is trained, etc. How is that good for the game? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
With Respect to the Door and Expectations....The REAL Reason 5e Can't Unite the Base
Top