Komplexní OSR vs. nová vlna freeform her

[boubaque]

Mimo to, že používáme slova jinak - kde je teda to OSR hnutí, které má za cíl "vysvětlit těm novým generacím hráčům, jak se vlastně původně ty RPG hrály a proč je stojí zkusit hrát v tomto duchu i dnes"?

V druhe pulce prvni dekady byl nejvyraznejsi (ne nejdulezitejsi) osobou tohohle hnuti RPG Pundit. Jen to bylo spis formulovano jako rehabilitace oldschooloveho hrani (proti middleschoolum, vampirum a indieckam), ale to je v zasade to, co mas mezi temi uvozovkami.

EDIT: Jinak "hnuti" je pro me neco, co vznika od spodu a tim padem nemusi mit jasne definovane cile a nastroje. Naopak, pokud je organizovane zvrchu, prestava byt hnutim (takze ANO treba je hnutim jen podle jmena).

[Markus]

Diskuze o toxicitě na OSR scéně si zaslouží vlastní prostor.

[Quentin]

Já bych do hry radši nedával žádné mechaniky, on by je beztak každý akorát používal blbě.

Sice to byl asi vtip, ale takhle to řešíme u nás doma

[Corny]

To je docela zajímavá sebereflexe

[sirien]

...když si tak skilled, že nejenže nepotřebuješ postranní kolečka, ale vlastně nepotřebuješ ani to kolo.

Quentin vznášející se nad cyklosteskou a řítící se vpřed pohodlnou cestovní rychlostí 50kmh na základě toho, že si na základě hromady zkušeností a studia cyklo-fyziky prostě představuje, jak kolo pod ním funguje (včetně 27 stupňové převodovky, dvojitých ložisek, pneumatického odpružení a elektrického tachometru), je myslím docela věrnou alegorií Quentinova tvrzení, že u nich doma se mechaniky nepoužívají

[Markus]

The Prince of Nothing má zajímavé články právě o tématu komplexita starého D&D vs. jednoduchost parazitujících her. Jestli dokážete snést jeho lehce trollící styl psaní, jsou tam zajímavé rozbory.

První je The Rules-Lite Sickness & Gaining Momentum

If you move beyond the idea of monsters as simple blobs of hit points you see that the D&D bestiary, arguably the finest in all of TTRPG land, has a whole host of creatures that are inextricably linked to the abilities, spells and magic items of the player characters. Monster A causes disease, which can be countered with Cure Disease or class immunity, Monster B has poison, monster C uses illusions etc. The same for obstacles like traps, green slime, ravines etc. The 5th level magic-user has access to fireball so the GM introduces a fire-resistant monster. Then consider all the information gathering capabilities that might be imperfectly ported. This interplay between character and monster ability is to a large degree, not something that was designed all at once beforehand, but something that grew organically over time, in a continual arms race between players and GM. The point is that a Medusa will not have the same meaning in AD&D as in DarkDerp if DarkDerp does not also facilitate porting in the various counter-measures, cures and components that interact with it.

What you sacrifice is depth. The reality of DnD is that it is about a great deal more than lateral thinking, creativity and logistics. It is about strategy and tactics. The decision to use a potion of heroism at the right time, preparing the right spells, figuring out a timely use of an obscure spell to get around a problem. The lie of the ultra-lite is that you can capture the quintessential nature of DnD despite largely removing its progression and Gygaxian building blocks. Unless you are thinking about level 1-3, this is false.

Druhý je The Abrogation of the Wheel: A comparison between IttO and B/X

Zajímavé mi přijde hlavně srovnání způsobu XPení:

OSE: Like its parent B/X, OSE uses a simplified form of the standard method for XP. Although some amount of experience points is awarded for the destruction of monsters, the bulk (75% est.) is awarded for recovering treasure. Although initially dismissed as ‘unrealistic’ by philistines and demons in human shape, the Gold for XP method has considerable advantages:

* It is purely outcome dependent while maximizing player agency. It does not prescribe any single method of tackling the dungeon, it looks purely at the amount of treasure that results from it. The result is that treasure gained through diplomacy, trickery or subterfuge is just as valuable as that gained through force.
* It provides variable and intermittent reinforcement. Not only is such a reward system more inherently engaging, it provides a built-in reinforcement of effective behaviors, encouraging skillfull, active play. Player agency is further reinforced by providing a method for adept players to progress faster in the game, encouraging mastery of the game.
* Skilfull GMs can leverage this method by a variety of ways such as proper concealment of treasure, or introduce complications. If blasting a room with a fireball risks damaging the valuable tapestries, suddenly this creates an extra factor to consider before using it. Suddenly finding a bandit gangs hidden hoard is absolutely crucial, so there is a reason for Charm Person, ESP or Speak With Dead. All this encourages more sophistication in tackling problems.

IttO: IttO uses as a metric a ‘succesfull expedition,’ which is defined as ‘[…] simply one that returns
to Civilisation with something to show for it. This could be a lost artifact, a terrible secret, or just a
good story.‘ Characters that survive a number of expeditions go up in level. The last caveat is crucial, as otherwise the outlined system would reward simply standing in one place and dithering until the session is over. If we read this in good faith, it is desirable the players at least interact with the adventure.

While ostensibly simpler, this participation method of awarding XP has numerous drawbacks compared to the Gold for XP method.
* Like B/X it is also outcome dependent. It does not prescribe a single method of play, it only tallies the number of ‘succesfull expeditions.’
* Because of the vagueness inherent in what constitutes a ‘succesfull expedition’ and an assumption of good faith in the players, it is not unreasonable to surmize IttO provides Continuous Reinforcement (in all but a few extreme cases). This is not only less inherently engaging, but also removes any differentiation between excellent play and barely adequate play. There is less incentive to push your luck and maximize gains, far more incentive to play conservatively and play to minimize losses. The optimum form of play is one of Risk Mitigation.
* Unlike Gold for XP, any emergent effects of the Participation method are decidedly negative: Consider a party that locates the likely place for an Arcanum, but decides it will explore further and while doing so recovers another Arcanum. Provided all actors are rational and the financial cost for retreat is not prohibitive, the smartest thing to do for the PCs is to retreat now, and venture forth again the next session, yet again earning their XP. You are incentivized to do as little work as possible to get your daily allotment of XP.

The fix is, of course, to provide an incentive system, rewarding characters for discovering Arcana or ‘terrible secrets’ and providing them with at best a stipend for ‘a good story.’ The fix is Arcana for xp.

[ShadoWWW]

Dost dobrý článek, Markusi.

[Markus]

Díky! On je ve skutečnosti starší z mého blogu a byla tady k němu i stručná diskuze. Ale takhle se to dostane k dalším lidem, takže taky dobrý.