Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Monte on Logic in RPGs
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Balesir" data-source="post: 5937813" data-attributes="member: 27160"><p>Which is probably what I would do - not to be a bum to the player, but because doing so has some potentially nasty implications for the game world. That "itching" spell is now useless underwater, for example, or when used on swimming monsters. Maybe it can also be countered by other spells, like Gust of Wind or Create Water. Nothing wrong with designing a spell that has such weaknesses, but deciding on the spur of the moment that an established spell has such unconsidered weaknesses may be very disruptive of the fabric of the fiction.</p><p></p><p>This is certainly not true for me - unless you are talking about <strong>playing</strong> in sport, <strong>making</strong> movies and such like. RPGs go beyond "entertainment" because they are not passive - I take an active part in them, whether I am a player or a GM.</p><p></p><p>My experience is that well structured, interacting rules systems create the most genuinely unexpected moments of creative coolness. If I as GM am making up the rules as I go along, anything that I don't see as "expected" to some degree is, pretty much by definition, against the "rules". Sure, a player might impress with a piece of argument/poetic insight that acts to persuade me to go beyond the rules as I intuitively grasp them - but by the time the action happens I have already "internalised" it.</p><p></p><p>With a good, interactive rules system, on the other hand, players can make stuff happen that genuinely surprises and awes me. And if the rules allow that without breaking, I'm utterly impressed!</p><p></p><p>Yeah, this is al old saw, for me. If "consistency" is important (and I think it is), then each "ruling" must be a "rule" (i.e. the same situation must generate the same ruling in all cases), so "rulings" just amount to "making up the rules as you go along". Much better, to my mind, to decide and communicate the rules up front. Whether that is a "professional" production or a homebrew ruleset or hack of a published system is pretty immaterial, as I see it - but formulating and communicating up-front is almost always better than making the stuff up as you go along (even though "Universalis" gives a very intriguing model for doing that collectively).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Balesir, post: 5937813, member: 27160"] Which is probably what I would do - not to be a bum to the player, but because doing so has some potentially nasty implications for the game world. That "itching" spell is now useless underwater, for example, or when used on swimming monsters. Maybe it can also be countered by other spells, like Gust of Wind or Create Water. Nothing wrong with designing a spell that has such weaknesses, but deciding on the spur of the moment that an established spell has such unconsidered weaknesses may be very disruptive of the fabric of the fiction. This is certainly not true for me - unless you are talking about [B]playing[/B] in sport, [B]making[/B] movies and such like. RPGs go beyond "entertainment" because they are not passive - I take an active part in them, whether I am a player or a GM. My experience is that well structured, interacting rules systems create the most genuinely unexpected moments of creative coolness. If I as GM am making up the rules as I go along, anything that I don't see as "expected" to some degree is, pretty much by definition, against the "rules". Sure, a player might impress with a piece of argument/poetic insight that acts to persuade me to go beyond the rules as I intuitively grasp them - but by the time the action happens I have already "internalised" it. With a good, interactive rules system, on the other hand, players can make stuff happen that genuinely surprises and awes me. And if the rules allow that without breaking, I'm utterly impressed! Yeah, this is al old saw, for me. If "consistency" is important (and I think it is), then each "ruling" must be a "rule" (i.e. the same situation must generate the same ruling in all cases), so "rulings" just amount to "making up the rules as you go along". Much better, to my mind, to decide and communicate the rules up front. Whether that is a "professional" production or a homebrew ruleset or hack of a published system is pretty immaterial, as I see it - but formulating and communicating up-front is almost always better than making the stuff up as you go along (even though "Universalis" gives a very intriguing model for doing that collectively). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Monte on Logic in RPGs
Top