Recent content by pemerton

This is not a remotely feasible design goal, unless the action and consequence spaces are so narrow as to produce something even more caricatured than traditional dungeon-delving. Here is a possible action declaration, in a context where You (the PC) are in a cavern, water dripping from the...

You haven't given examples of narrativist 5e D&D. In another thread you posted this: Was this narrativist 5e D&D? I have no idea. What actions were declared? How were they resolved? What was at stake? Who established that? Who decided what cult-y things the cult did? Who decided that its...

The claim that the consequences of people's actions are intrinsic to those actions is controversial - for instance, was the First World War and all that it brought with it, such as the collapse of Tsarist Russia, intrinsic to the action of shooting the Archduke in Sarajevo? Presumably Hegel...

In some other recent thread you were positing spectrums, and multi-dimensional spaces, in which all RPGs manifest "narrative tendencies". You have more than once asserted that "narrativist" 5e D&D is a thing. I'm still waiting for the examples.

Right. So, what I take @Pedantic to be asserting with respect to immersion is something I've seen others assert in a similar sort of way. Hence why I take it to be what is intended. It's along these lines: necessarily, if the player is aware that the situation is a fiction being created...

How can it be incorrect, when the rulebook for the game - say, Burning Wheel, the 4e D&D PHB, or (I assume) @kenada's proto-rulebook - says that that is what the GM is expected to do? This is one possible set of techniques. Referring back to my post just upthread, it combines a map-and-key...

To add to my preceding post: Posters can post about "emergent story" and "writers' rooms" all day long, and all night as well if they like. But that is not going to change the fact that the process of play used in the Burning Wheel game that I described, and in the Stonetop game that...

This reminded me a bit of my Burning Wheel game: Alicia and Aedhros had burgled the office of a petty harbour official, had been pursued by guards, and had defeated the guards. Especially from Alicia's perspective - of collecting enough money to buy her own ship - things were looking good. Then...

But why is RM, for example, not growing, if there is a demand for realism?

I took @AbdulAlhazred to be making the point that, if the goal of this sort of design was realistic outcome, then there would be a type of progress or development in design somewhat comparable to what one sees in the development of scientific models and solutions to problems. But there is no...

Huh? I don't agree with this, for the reasons that Vincent Baker has given: if all your formal rules do is structure your group's ongoing agreement about what happens in the game, they are a) interchangeable with any other rpg rules out there, and b) probably a waste of your attention. Live...

Well, quite. As Edwards put it, Purist-for-System designs tend to model the same things: differences among scales, situational modifiers, kinetics of all kinds, and so forth. . .. Compared to other designs, high search and handling times, as well as many points-of-contact, are acceptable...

Unfair to whom? Like, which rule system are you defending here? I referenced one that I have extensive experience of - namely, Rolemaster. Which one do you have in mind?

Well, my premise was about an actual event of play. And given that we don't have a MRI on the PC knight's shoulder wound, I don't think we can say it was unrealistic provided it's in the ballpark of actual lived experience of recovery from soft-tissue injury (which is something I have a bit of)...

I think you haven't quite responded to my post. Now, saying the preceding is going to generate some frustration, so I'm going to try and carefully explain what I said, and what I mean. I think the point I am making has significance for understanding one form of the "pull to purist-for-system...