Great interview. Love the idea of attack spends vs. defense. Really enjoy mechanics systems that are designed or adapted to help realize a setting/themes.
It's interesting how there's this tension in the schism between "mechanics" and narration. Even seasoned GMs and game designers struggle to define the break point between them. Although not the point of this video, it became an sticking point a few times. My suggestion is that we talk about the game rules as "tools" instead of mechanics. There's a difference in the philosophy of using a mechanic that suggests it should always apply (but doesn't). A tool, like a hammer, you pick up and use when it serves you. You can use a tool in innovative ways, like using a large screwdriver as a prybar or a mallet. Just like you can pick up initiative when it suits you or ignore it when asking for a roll during a conversation. The same thing is true down to things as defining as attributes. You pick them up when they're useful and drop them when they don't effect the game. In my mind that resolves the crisis of "When do you use the combat rules?" The answer is "When using them as a tool gives you utility." In most cases that utility is answering difficult questions in a unbiased way. Sorry I've been thinking about this a lot.
Oh I think you’re absolutely right in this from an audience perspective. On the matter of utility, however, I grant that the author has control to provide more or less utility in different places. I’m making those choices, the author shapes how and when their hand touches upon the experience of the audience. In the interest of acknowledging Robert’s project as a valid premise, and to create an engaging conversation that acknowledges his role, I tended toward, “What aesthetic or imperative led you to include, or to demur the inclusion of tools for x situations?” I may think more on this tools based schema, and especially on the “demur to use a tool when it doesn’t provide utility ” maxim at another time.
@@The_CGA I don't think Robert is at fault in struggling a bit with the questions of "When do you switch?" because it's just such an old learned skill that we don't think about it. It's like asking him "How do you stand up and walk?" it takes a minute to even put such a complex skill into words because it's automatic. But answering the question is so interesting because it's breaking down ideas that can be (and should be) examined. I've just been trying to come up with a metaphor and language for making it easier to discuss. I want to hear the juicy details of Robert's thought process too. It's interesting to think about the authorial process in terms of who wants to pick up what tools and when. Sometimes it's the DM/GM/Narrator/Facilitator, sometimes it's the players. Is realizing you're picking up a tool acknowledging that you're ready to become part of the audience? Hmmm.
I've been semi designing an RPG action economy, in reaction to 5e, and this is the mindset I've naturally distilled out of that process. And in playing Symbaroum for 3 years now, I can say narrative tension is now as essential as problem solving a combat situation.
I think you’re basically right in that. My surmise is that the goal there is to juxtapose the tropes of D&D high fantasy into a “cinematic action fantasy” genre (I can imagine a Dark Horse 🐴 comic series here), setting one up to play with familiar tropes in a different tone. The bedrock of how magic works seems to be specific in a way that separates itself from D&D, at least to the same degree as Riftwar, WoT, or Legend of the Seeker. The presence of granular XP and “levels”might diminish this contrast in the eyes of the viewer, however. The mechanics otherwise speak to a different point of view. There is a need for graphic design and art to communicate a lot of this, I think.
@@The_CGA Yeah, that gels. I'm going to go poke more into the magic system and see if that is enough of a draw for kickstarting. This is exactly the sort of project I want to see succeed, even if it's not my cup of tea.
