The Forge Reference Project

 

Topic: Layering Conflict Resoultion over Task Res.
Started by: David Chunn
Started on: 4/26/2005
Board: RPG Theory


On 4/26/2005 at 12:41am, David Chunn wrote:
Layering Conflict Resoultion over Task Res.

Does anyone have suggestions and methods for or experiences with layering conflict resolution over a task resolution system without changing the existing game mechanics? In other words, I don't want to change how the published game works (die rolls, techniques used, etc.), only how the results are interpreted.

I have some general ideas about how to do this by defining what's at stake with each roll. But since I've never tried doing this before, I'm seeking the wisdom of others. (Feel free to point me at any old threads relating to this. I couldn't find any.)

Thanks.

Message 15221#162399

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by David Chunn
...in which David Chunn participated
...in RPG Theory
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 4/26/2005




On 4/26/2005 at 4:13am, WhiteRat wrote:
RE: Layering Conflict Resoultion over Task Res.

David --

Which published game are you interested in 'layering'? This thread has some notes on using conflict resolution and scene framing with Third Edition D&D.

Forge Reference Links:
Topic 14762

Message 15221#162413

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by WhiteRat
...in which WhiteRat participated
...in RPG Theory
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 4/26/2005




On 4/26/2005 at 6:27am, Ben Lehman wrote:
Re: Layering Conflict Resoultion over Task Res.

David: Welcome to the Forge!

David Chunn wrote: Does anyone have suggestions and methods for or experiences with layering conflict resolution over a task resolution system without changing the existing game mechanics?


BL> No.

(but see below)

In other words, I don't want to change how the published game works (die rolls, techniques used, etc.), only how the results are interpreted.

I have some general ideas about how to do this by defining what's at stake with each roll...


BL> This would work. It is a pretty significant change to the existing game mechanics -- way bigger than, I don't know, changing from 1d20 to 2d10. Apparently, Burning Wheel Revised has a really great section about this under "GM Advice" called Let it Ride. You might want to check it out.

What game are you doing, why are you modifying it, and to what purpose? If I have some context, it will be a lot easier for me to help you.

yrs--
--Ben

Message 15221#162421

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by Ben Lehman
...in which Ben Lehman participated
...in RPG Theory
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 4/26/2005




On 4/26/2005 at 9:59pm, David Chunn wrote:
RE: Layering Conflict Resoultion over Task Res.

Thanks, Adam. That was exactly the sort of thing I was looking for as far as experiences go. Somehow I missed that one. I guess I don't check Actual Play often enough.

I'm using d6 Fantasy. My primary purposes in employing conflict resolution:

1. to facilitate player-character protagonism
2. limit GM fiat on my part
3. to add meaning and tension to every roll instead of an endless series of mostly meaningless task rolls.

Message 15221#162563

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by David Chunn
...in which David Chunn participated
...in RPG Theory
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 4/26/2005