One D&D

[Raleel]

I'm happy AW and your selected PTBA games work for you. You lay out a number of good points, several of which make it clear it wouldn't work well for my group. It would probably work for my other group which is made of entirely people who have GMed a fair bit, but that crew also likes to try out stuff. We did the quiet year and I really liked that one quite a bit. And it wasn't just because of the shocked look on the faces when I declared the resource we lost in a cavern collapse was "our children"

However, I do have to point out that

It sings when played with players who are active contributors rather than passive ones. (A table of GMs or nearly all GMs works best in my experience). This, along with the rapidity of play means everyone is encouraged to be engaged all the time.

Indicates that it would work well for a group of pubbers, who skew heavily towards GM. That's good, but it would provide us with yet another opportunity to dump on PBTA ;)

 

[robb]

I'm happy AW and your selected PTBA games work for you.

As I have said before I am largely "post PbtA" myself. (Although I would certainly play/run AW again). I was just trying to answer Rob's question about reasons why it could have got so popular/successful? <insert Pub incredulity/vitriol>

I guess that I will always remain fond of AW as it is the game that convinced me to come back to GMing after about a 10 year break. It lured me in with the promise of no prep. Now I am stuck prepping trad games!

 

[RangerRupert]

<insert Pub incredulity/vitriol>

Release the geese!

 

[hawkeyefan]

Mine is largely that the trope based worldbuilding frequently leads to me feeling like I'm playing in a TV Tropes page rather than a living, breathing world. It's noticable that my favourite narrative RPGs by far are Spire & Heart which take the opposite approach and go all in with worldbuilding.

Spire and Heart are among my favorite games. I ran a campaign of Spire that wrapped up about a a year and a half ago or so, and I think it may have been my favorite campaign of anything ever.

And although I agree with you that they have really rich worldbuilding, I think in a lot of ways they have more in common with Apocalypse World and similar games in that a lot of things are loosely defined. You have the city districts and the factions and so on… but many details are left up to each group to decide. My City Watch and Paladins are likely going to be different than yours. My take on Mr. Winter in Red Row will be unique, as will yours.

There are no timelines, no major events of the past other than the Aelfir conquering Spire. All the factions are mutable, and most overlap in some way with others. There are no canonical answers for anything.

To be even fairer than you, the one time I tried running it, it was not a good group, and I don't think it was the best constructed PbtA game.

Some of them suck. Some suck really bad. Some are really no different than a more trad-oriented game except using the 2d6 tiered success dice mechanic.

Others either hew closely to Apocalypse World and how it works, or else add interesting bits to that core… and those tend to be the interesting games designed with the system. I know I defend PbtA a lot in these conversations, but I’m actually pretty picky about which versions I’d run or play.

PbtA and Fantasy Flight's die system do that for me. Systems where it doesn't run through your mind intuitively suck ass. PbtA wants to be different to be different, to be special. What it does instead is make me slow down game play and go WTF, before getting on with the gaming. Fuck PbtA and Fantasy Flight. Stop trying to reinvent the fucking wheel and lets get on with gaming.

I don’t know… like most games, the more you run/play, the easier it gets. It becomes very intuitive. I mean, unlike most games, no matter what you’re doing, you’re resolving it using the same core mechanic. So that doesn’t take long to get used to. The core of the system is actually easier than most systems.

 

[Acmegamer]

I agree with you and largely feel the same way about the system.

As a thought exercise why do you think it has the fan base it does? What about it that gives makes it the system of choice among some hobbyists. Grant, there have been a lot of obscure RPGs with very different takes but vanishingly small audiences. In contrast PbtA has already passed some hurdles to where it is now a niche of its own. And we are now talking 14 years since the debut of the system.

Honestly, I have no idea at all. I bounced off of both Fantasy Flights system (Used in the Newer Star Wars & Genesis Rpg) and PbtA. Totally couldn't grok why either systems were popular.


Edit: robb I'm sincerely happy for you but seriously I couldn't stand AW, it was the first of that type of system I read. I didn't like the tone of it, hated the mechanics. I could indeed go and pull out the book and go through it with a fine toothed comb and do a line by line, but to be blunt I've been trying to forget that fucking book since I first took the time to read it. Basically I want those hours back, so why would I want to compound those lost hours by spending more hours on it? I'm glad you love it and sincerely appreciate your breaking down why you love it to robertsconley .

Edit : hawkeyefan You are stating that like its fact and not opinion. Problematic in my opinion.

 

[TJS]

Apocalypse World, when I've played it, has really always struck me as basically really just a formalisation of techniques you'd used to run an quick off the cuff no prep pickup game.

Edit: Or well a bit more than that. The moves seem like a formalisation of that approach, the rules seem to exist in many ways to avoid the need to go around the rules that often happens in such games (Eg a bit of railroading to get things moving, fudging because you don't actually have stats for anything to do otherwise etc - the sort of thing that you'd never do in a campaign game but are fine in quick off the cuff one off when everyone knows the score). Powered by the Apocalypse sets things up so those sort of things actually have rules. eg you don't have to fudge a combat because the rules don't handle combat in the traditional way.

Or in other words I kind of see it doing something which is really a bit distinct from traditional rpgs but which traditional rpgs are bad at. It's very difficult to run a one shot in a traditional game in 3 hours or less that actually feels like it actually arrives anywhere. It's sort of feels like it's made for movies rather than the trad rpgs long form tv series.

 

[robb]

I didn't like the tone of it [AW]

This is something that comes up a lot and I can see why. I personally find the tone of the text very funny because I feel it is very much tongue in cheek. I have zero belief that Baker thinks like that. If it comes across to someone as somehow authentic or trying to be cool then I can totally see it as being annoying.

IMO this is one of the reasons that AW (despite design superiority) needed its hacks to become more mainstream.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Edit : @

hawkeyefan You are stating that like its fact and not opinion. Problematic in my opinion.

I can understand how a new game may not click at first, or even after a while. But I think we can look at the actual system at play and day it’s really not that complex. Everything is roll 2d6 add a stat, with tiers of success at 6-, 7-9, or 10+.

Compared to many systems, that’s pretty straightforward. Again, I can understand how it may not click… but when that happens I think it’s more a combo of system and person than just one or the other.

Not placing blame with either… just a mismatch between the two.

This is something that comes up a lot and I can see why. I personally find the tone of the text very funny because I feel it is very much tongue in cheek. I have zero belief that Baker thinks like that. If it comes across to someone as somehow authentic or trying to be cool then I can totally see it as being annoying.

IMO this is one of the reasons that AW (despite design superiority) needed its hacks to become more mainstream.

I’ve heard this a lot as well. I thought it was obviously tongue in cheek… but many folks don’t seem to think so, or if they do, it still sours them. I personally don’t mind it because aside from the tone, the instructions are clear and direct.

 

[robertsconley]

I can understand how a new game may not click at first, or even after a while. But I think we can look at the actual system at play and day it’s really not that complex. Everything is roll 2d6 add a stat, with tiers of success at 6-, 7-9, or 10+.

Compared to many systems, that’s pretty straightforward. Again, I can understand how it may not click… but when that happens I think it’s more a combo of system and person than just one or the other.

Not placing blame with either… just a mismatch between the two.

Everybody understands the mechanics; it is the system as a whole that comes across as nonsense to some folks and resonates with others.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Everybody understands the mechanics; it is the system as a whole that comes across as nonsense to some folks and resonates with others.

If the system feels like nonsense to someone, it’s kind of hard to say that they understand it.

 

[Fenris-77]

PbtA doesn't want to be different to be different. That's nonsense. PbtA is what is because of specific design goals and implementation. Saying its just trying to be fancy betrays a pretty sad bias I think.

 

[EmperorNorton]

Edit : hawkeyefan You are stating that like its fact and not opinion. Problematic in my opinion.

Calling what he said problematic after saying this...

PbtA wants to be different to be different, to be special. What it does instead is make me slow down game play and go WTF, before getting on with the gaming. Fuck PbtA and Fantasy Flight. Stop trying to reinvent the fucking wheel and lets get on with gaming.

... is wild to me.

 

[Fenris-77]

I'll also just toss in that PbtA games tend, at least my experience, to play play quite fast and furious at the table. Not slow at all. I don't even know how you'd manage that with such a simple base mechanic.

 

[DeadBob]

I'll also just toss in that PbtA games tend, at least my experience, to play play quite fast and furious at the table. Not slow at all. I don't even know how you'd manage that with such a simple base mechanic.

While I like PtbA games, I do uunderstand that coming up with different sorts of costs or Yes but results can be vastly more taxing on creativity than simple Did Happen/Didn’t Happen results in other games.

I suspect that’s the part that slows down play for folks.

 

[robb]

If the system feels like nonsense to someone, it’s kind of hard to say that they understand it.

I think it is possible to understand a system and to not like the design or feel it is trivial or not useful at the table or lots of other things.
It may be acceptable in some places to then call it nonsense.

 

[Moracai]

While I like PtbA games, I do uunderstand that coming up with different sorts of costs or Yes but results can be vastly more taxing on creativity than simple Did Happen/Didn’t Happen results in other games.

I suspect that’s the part that slows down play for folks.

Yes. This is the system telling me what to do, instead of the other way around. That is the thing I dislike about it the most.

 

[hawkeyefan]

I'll also just toss in that PbtA games tend, at least my experience, to play play quite fast and furious at the table. Not slow at all. I don't even know how you'd manage that with such a simple base mechanic.

I think it varies a bit on the specific game. Some moves that have choices based on the level of success tend to take a little time. These tend to be knowledge type moves like Discern Realities or Know Things and the like. In Stonetop, for example, you can ask a certain number of questions about a topic based on the outcome. It can take a little tine… but given the nature of it, I really don’t think that’s a problem.

When it comes to action based moves, the choices are much clearer. For example, when a character wants to make a ranged attack, the move is Let Fly. On a full hit, they deal damage. On a partial, they have to choose one: put themselves at risk to make the shot, mark their next ammo box (half ammo, then no ammo), or roll damage with disadvantage.

This becomes known pretty early on in play, so the player can decide this quickly.

All in all, the game’s just as fast or faster than most other games, with maybe a few situational exceptions.

 

[Fenris-77]

Ugh, I detest those moves anyway.

 

[robb]

Yes. This is the system telling me what to do, instead of the other way around. That is the thing I dislike about it the most.

Well I am glad that we have finally got back to discussing how crap PbtA is.

 

[Moracai]

Yeah, I'm not even sure how we got to talk about it in the first place in a D&D thread...

 

[Fenris-77]

This always happens. Thread drift is our friend.

 

[hawkeyefan]

While I like PtbA games, I do uunderstand that coming up with different sorts of costs or Yes but results can be vastly more taxing on creativity than simple Did Happen/Didn’t Happen results in other games.

I suspect that’s the part that slows down play for folks.

This can be true… again, it depends on the specific game a bit… but generally speaking, I think this is the big hurdle for many GMs when they first run PbtA. In most traditional games, a failed roll tends to have a clear result… the attack misses, the skill check fails, and so on. In PbtA, you have to get used to introducing complications on such rolls. No roll should result in “nothing happens”.

I think it is possible to understand a system and to not like the design or feel it is trivial or not useful at the table or lots of other things.
It may be acceptable in some places to then call it nonsense.

I don’t equate not liking something with it being nonsense. Maybe I’m being too literal… I know people say “that’s nonsense” as a general statement of dissatisfaction. So if that’s the case… sure. I read Acmegamer ’s use as more literal. As if the system does not make sense.

Yes. This is the system telling me what to do, instead of the other way around. That is the thing I dislike about it the most.

I think this is less true than it first seems. You decide what happens. The system may restrain you to some extent, but that’s almost always true with any rule system. A failed saving throw in D&D, for example, tells you what happens.

In PbtA, the GM typically makes a move on a failed roll. They decide what makes sense based on the situation. Then that’s the move they make. The list of moves are not meant to restrict you so much as offer a reminder of the kinds of things you can introduce as a complication or setback on a miss.

I think people see such a list and then think it’s limiting. But really, any given situation is going to have a limited number of possible outcomes.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Ugh, I detest those moves anyway.

Which ones?

 

[Fenris-77]

A lot of people don't realize that the 'constraints' on the GM in PbtA are mostly just a specific codification of best gaming practices developed in other games. I don't play a ton of PbtA, but I know it made me a better GM. I'm not saying it would do that for everyone, but seeing some best practices laid out that clearly was a watershed moment for me.

 

[Fenris-77]

Which ones?

The knowledge ones. I hates them.

 

[Stan]

This always happens. Thread drift is our friend.

It'll likely pop back to D&D once additional news comes out. There's a limit to how much you can analyze one sentence of info.

 

[A Fiery Flying Roll]

Yeah, I'm not even sure how we got to talk about it in the first place in a D&D thread...

Because we have to wait for Hasbro Wizards to do something else dumb. Give it half an hour or so.

A lot of people don't realize that the 'constraints' on the GM in PbtA are mostly just a specific codification of best gaming practices developed in other games. I don't play a ton of PbtA, but I know it made me a better GM. I'm not saying it would do that for everyone, but seeing some best practices laid out that clearly was a watershed moment for me.

Yeah, I'd agree with that. One true stroke of marketing genius with PbtA is that it's managed to convince both its advocates and detractors that it's way more narrativist than it actually is. It really isn't, especially when you compare it to FATE or Good Society or any of the games the Forge were putting out in their heyday. All the "Fiction First" stuff isn't actually part of the mechanics, it's a combination of GM advice and snappy marketing slogan.

 

[hawkeyefan]

The knowledge ones. I hates them.

Why’s that? I like the ones in Stonetop. Know Things and Seek Insight. I find they work well.

 

[Fenris-77]

Why’s that? I like the ones in Stonetop. Know Things and Seek Insight. I find they work well.

I prefer to just tell the players things, I don't like gating setting knowledge behind skill rolls. It's inevitable that that happens to some degree, but I like to avoid it wherever possible.

 

[robertsconley]

If the system feels like nonsense to someone, it’s kind of hard to say that they understand it.

I understand it fine and I consider it nonsense. But But I can understand why other find it fun and useful.

The fallacy you are making here is assuming that everybody learns and thinks in the same manner. That is not case. Something I learned over four decades writing, implementing, and supporting metal cutting software. As well as participating in various forms of organized tabletop roleplaying.

I have my opinions on PtbA and similar RPGs but I am also aware that these systems work well for other folks like robb. I don't need to be convinced that PtbA RPGs can work well because there is objective proof in the form of sustained sales for over 14 years, continued support by many hobbyists, along with numerous accounts of actual play.

But it doesn't change the fact that for me and others that the design of PbtA and how it plays is nonsense.

Nor nonsense equates to a lack of understanding. I think running railroaded adventures is also nonsense. Yet I learn how to run them well as a result of running LARP events.

While somethings in a LARP are more free form than tabletop like many on many roleplaying, traditional adventures are subject to logistical and safety constraints as a result of it being live action. Hence part of running a good LARP event is also learning how to run good railroaded adventures.

In addition, I ran sessions of Fate, Dungeon World, and other RPGs outside of my wheelhouse to see what I can learn from adopting a different approach.

 

[EmperorNorton]

I feel like you are using your own definition of what "nonsense" means, that doesn't match the dictionary definition, and that is causing confusion.

Something can be not to my taste, but that doesn't make it make no sense. It just doesn't work for me or my group.

Idk man, people just seem to insist on using much stronger language than "Yeah, it doesn't work for me", and I don't get why. If you can't get why "This is nonsense" and "This doesn't work for how I play games" are different statements... yeah I don't know.

And honestly, if people started talking about how OSR is "nonsense" or that GURPs was "nonsense", I'm sure that you would also react strongly.

 

[T. Foster]

I feel like there’s a sweet spot version of D&D that’s not as squishy and subjective as the early versions but also not as drearily mechanistic as the later versions, that has specific flavor but in a broad archetypal way that draws more on cultural zeitgeist than reading game-specific lore. Alas, WotC will never go there because that’s not compatible with their aggressive monetization model of microtransactions and subscription-based access to tools and content and AI DMs and such (and also because it would alienate at least some portion of their existing fanbase but honestly who even knows how much of a concern that is for WotC these days). An OSR game could (and for all I know already has - maybe something like Shadowdark or Majestic Fantasy already hits that sweet spot?) but doesn’t have the name-recognition factor so will always be a second tier also-ran at best even if it provides a superior play-experience.

 

[Moracai]

A failed saving throw in D&D, for example, tells you what happens.

It does, but it does not tell me I have to channel my creativity into something I haven't planned before.

 

[Endless Flight]

Im not a huge fan of PbtA games but they are perfect for some genres of roleplaying games.

 

[sharps54]

Having spent time in the SCA I can confirm that both it and LARPing is indeed nonsense

 

[Moracai]

Having spent time in the SCA I can confirm that both it and LARPing is indeed nonsense

Specialty Coffee Association?

 

[hawkeyefan]

The fallacy you are making here is assuming that everybody learns and thinks in the same manner.

I’m not making such a fallacy. As I already said (bolded for emphasis):

I can understand how a new game may not click at first, or even after a while. But I think we can look at the actual system at play and day it’s really not that complex. Everything is roll 2d6 add a stat, with tiers of success at 6-, 7-9, or 10+.

Compared to many systems, that’s pretty straightforward. Again, I can understand how it may not click… but when that happens I think it’s more a combo of system and person than just one or the other.

Not placing blame with either… just a mismatch between the two

Not every game is for everyone and we all have different preferences and different ways we learn or absorb information.

The issue is that the below:

I understand it fine and I consider it nonsense.

Is contradictory. Nonsense means “makes no sense”. If you understand something, then it makes sense. If it makes no sense, then you don’t understand it.

Now, if you want to clarify that when you say “nonsense” what you mean is “I don’t like it” or “I don’t find it satisfying” then that’s a perfectly valid thing to say. But given the original context from Acmegamer I took nonsense in the literal sense. I certainly may be wrong on that, though.

As far as your comment, though, it’s unclear. Perhaps hold off on telling others that they’re making some kind of fallacy when the confusion is coming from your word choice?

It does, but it does not tell me I have to channel my creativity into something I haven't planned before.

That’s true. I think that’s different than what you first said about “it’s the system telling me what to do instead of the other way around”, though. Like, almost completely opposite.

I prefer to just tell the players things, I don't like gating setting knowledge behind skill rolls. It's inevitable that that happens to some degree, but I like to avoid it wherever possible.

Okay, so I get that 100%. I don’t hold back information in these cases. Instead, I tailor what they learn to the outcome of the roll.

So they try Know Things. No matter what, I’m gonna tell them the basic information that makes sense… that the Willow Hags live in Farrier’s Fen and are said to wield powerful magic. If they roll a 10+, then they’ll also learn some additional benefit that’s useful… maybe that the location of their lair is 50 miles northwest of the town of Marshedge. On a 6-, they learn that the witches hate mankind and will extract a high cost to bargain with them, or some similar negative element.

I find these kinds of moves help shape play in interesting ways.

But not all PbtA games use them well. When it’s just “you rolled low, you don’t learn anything” that’s poor design. “Nothing happens” should never be the outcome of a roll.

 

[Moracai]

hawkeyefan I didn't express myself clearly enough before, sorry.

 

[Telok]

Apparently "grok" is a news summary LLM "AI" on the platform formerly known as Twitter.

Still... that might actually get me to go back to D&D. Its like... "DwarfFortress: the Boatmudering" as a ttrpg. I'd play that in a heartbeat.

 

[Mankcam]

I have a bunch of PbtA is pdf form that I've barely read, I think the only things that stand out from that list is Monster Of The Week and a more indie one about 1970s style action movies, it has funky cover art, meant to emulate movies like Shaft.

The only ones that I have as printed books are two FitD books (Blades In The Dark, Scum & Villainy). In truth I initially bought Blades are mistakenly thinking it was a new Fate Core release, as Evil Hat packaged it in the same digest format as Fate Core. I impulsively grabbed Scum & Villainy because it seemed it might do Star Wars and Firefly well. I'm happy I have them, but not sure if we'll ever get them to the table.

The only other PbtA game I have in hardcopy is Avatar Legends, due to being a backer of when it was crowd-funded.
Those Avatar books are really well done in production standards and the system looks reasonable for a chassis to emulating the Avatar series.
If I do manage to get a PbtA game to the table, it'll be Avatar Legends with my kids who are huge Avatar fans as well.
But we'll be playing that because it's Avatar, not because it's PbtA per see.

I kinda put PbtA in the same bag as YZE, Fate, BH, and Storyteller/Storypath for some reason. If the genre or setting is good, we may play it, but I dont have any plans at present due to my campaign backlog.

As a system for my main adult gaming group I think they may like it for one shots, but I can't see them liking it for ongoing play. I doubt I'll be pushing it hard while we have other campaigns on the horizon.