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
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
The Principle of Legitimate Intentions
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="clearstream" data-source="post: 8998103" data-attributes="member: 71699"><p>Parking those interesting concerns for the moment (we can revisit if it becomes relevant) we need to also examine your <strong>propositions</strong>. You say that</p><p></p><p></p><p>There are a few things going on here, and some are important to me.</p><ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Foremost, the player describes their character climbing the wall in view of an <strong>intention</strong> they have. So the <strong>proposition </strong>is the couplet - <strong>intention=description</strong></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Secondly, there is a possible assumption at work that some participants can simply narrate additions to fiction and others must seek agreement on additions to fiction whether that's agreement by <strong>adjudication </strong>or agreement by <strong>fortune</strong>.</li> </ol><p>I think the second concern is that the model appears reductive, but fails to be as reductive as it should be. It has built into it a certain kind of play. Adjudication is included because of an assumption that some parties need approval of what they add to the fiction (and some don't).</p><p></p><p>I'm not sure exactly what's needed as yet, but some things I have in mind are</p><p></p><p><strong>Intention</strong> - This is the why, e.g. "What's at the top of that wall?" "Safety." "Okay, i want to climb the wall to reach safety." Usually partipants have collections of intentions that they will say things in view of.</p><p></p><p><strong>Description</strong> - This is what participants say in view of their intentions. "I climb the wall". Some call it approach. It's usually what they propose to add to the fiction (justifying your choice of the word "proposition")</p><p></p><p><strong>Narration </strong>- This is adding to some facet of the fiction. (So I suggest this can be divided by facet.)</p><p></p><p><strong>Contingent-narration</strong> - Narration of some facet of fiction coupled to a demand for agreement.</p><p></p><p><strong>Agreement-by-fortune</strong> - What you have called fortune.</p><p></p><p><strong>Agreement-by-rule</strong> - Where adding to the fiction is filtered by a rule (rather than a roll or an approval.)</p><p></p><p><strong>Agreement-by-consensus</strong> - Might also be called "agreement by principle" in view of what we've said about operationalizing the game text.</p><p></p><p><strong>Agreement-by-authority </strong>- What you have called adjudication. Could also be called "by-approval".</p><p></p><p><strong>Rule-invocation</strong> - This is the right to invoke rules. To say that a rule applies in this case, and not that case. In some game texts, designers state that rules apply in all cases. In other game texts, some participants are given the power to invoke rules, or change them, and others are not. We might also need <strong>rule-binds</strong> to cover who is bound by the rules. Or maybe there is a better way to express this?</p><p></p><p><strong>Operationalizing principle</strong> - This separates those out from principles used to decide what the rules mean.</p><p></p><p><strong>Agreement-by-principle</strong> - Given that game designers now regularly state principles in their game text, this matters. What's particularly important is that it speaks to <em>the <strong>intentions </strong>participants <strong>ought </strong>to form</em>.</p><p></p><p>So the thought is to shed as far as possible committment to any given arrangement, to try to see what underlies all arrangements.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="clearstream, post: 8998103, member: 71699"] Parking those interesting concerns for the moment (we can revisit if it becomes relevant) we need to also examine your [B]propositions[/B]. You say that There are a few things going on here, and some are important to me. [LIST=1] [*]Foremost, the player describes their character climbing the wall in view of an [B]intention[/B] they have. So the [B]proposition [/B]is the couplet - [B]intention=description[/B] [*]Secondly, there is a possible assumption at work that some participants can simply narrate additions to fiction and others must seek agreement on additions to fiction whether that's agreement by [B]adjudication [/B]or agreement by [B]fortune[/B]. [/LIST] I think the second concern is that the model appears reductive, but fails to be as reductive as it should be. It has built into it a certain kind of play. Adjudication is included because of an assumption that some parties need approval of what they add to the fiction (and some don't). I'm not sure exactly what's needed as yet, but some things I have in mind are [B]Intention[/B] - This is the why, e.g. "What's at the top of that wall?" "Safety." "Okay, i want to climb the wall to reach safety." Usually partipants have collections of intentions that they will say things in view of. [B]Description[/B] - This is what participants say in view of their intentions. "I climb the wall". Some call it approach. It's usually what they propose to add to the fiction (justifying your choice of the word "proposition") [B]Narration [/B]- This is adding to some facet of the fiction. (So I suggest this can be divided by facet.) [B]Contingent-narration[/B] - Narration of some facet of fiction coupled to a demand for agreement. [B]Agreement-by-fortune[/B] - What you have called fortune. [B]Agreement-by-rule[/B] - Where adding to the fiction is filtered by a rule (rather than a roll or an approval.) [B]Agreement-by-consensus[/B] - Might also be called "agreement by principle" in view of what we've said about operationalizing the game text. [B]Agreement-by-authority [/B]- What you have called adjudication. Could also be called "by-approval". [B]Rule-invocation[/B] - This is the right to invoke rules. To say that a rule applies in this case, and not that case. In some game texts, designers state that rules apply in all cases. In other game texts, some participants are given the power to invoke rules, or change them, and others are not. We might also need [B]rule-binds[/B] to cover who is bound by the rules. Or maybe there is a better way to express this? [B]Operationalizing principle[/B] - This separates those out from principles used to decide what the rules mean. [B]Agreement-by-principle[/B] - Given that game designers now regularly state principles in their game text, this matters. What's particularly important is that it speaks to [I]the [B]intentions [/B]participants [B]ought [/B]to form[/I]. So the thought is to shed as far as possible committment to any given arrangement, to try to see what underlies all arrangements. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
The Principle of Legitimate Intentions
Top