A Question Of Agency?

[Neonchameleon]

I am not understanding your point in raising voice then

You don't find time to be important? Let's try and put it in terms I think you'll understand.

Immersion is, to me, flow within the gameworld. And I keep it in part by having an understanding of the world and being able to act on that. Every time I stop focusing on the world and have to interact with the structures it breaks my immersion. And asking the GM takes longer than checking my character sheet. I am sufficiently numerate (I accept not everyone is) that I can keep track especially of a streamlined character sheet like the Apocalypse World one. Any back and forth about what I can do and how likely it is with the GM that I can do such and such a thing chips away at my immersion while doing it - and the longer it takes the more damaging.

 

[Neonchameleon]

It may not be as fast, but if I can imagine it, I can generally speak it. It's rare that I'm at a loss for words. I don't think voice is nearly as limited as you are making it out to be.

How long does it take?

The particular part that gets me is the odds of success. When I do something in the real world I generally have a pretty good idea of how likely it is to work. Which means it's part of what I want from a ruling - but things like that take time.

Time is important for flow and thus immersion.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Because there is merit to limitation. Look at D&D and most other games. They all set limits and those limits define much of the game. You can only be one race. You start with one class and sometimes you can't switch or add new ones. Hit points and the like limit the damage you can take. Limitations are a good thing, but like anything else, if taken to an extreme become bad.

And why do you think freeform games can't have limits?

 

[Maxperson]

How long does it take?

Unless the person is a very slow talker, it doesn't really matter in my opinion. These games are open ended, so we will get there and have a grand time.

The particular part that gets me is the odds of success. When I do something in the real world I generally have a pretty good idea of how likely it is to work. Which means it's part of what I want from a ruling - but things like that take time.

Time is important for flow and thus immersion.

I suppose that would be system dependent. In D&D it takes me very little time to set a DC after a player describes to me what he wants his PC to do.

 

[Bedrockgames]

And here's where I'm getting confused.

If you find the game most freeing where there are no rules why bother playing D&D at all and not just going freeform. Freeform does have some major advantages. What does having the rules provide you?

I don't play D&D much these days. If I do, it tends to be things like the ODD and Moldvay. Mostly I play other games (including the ones I make).

But to answer the question, because I find having no rules, not to be fun. I don't want freeform. I want space for rulings. You've been talking a lot about combat so in combat, I find, more and more, I just enjoy having as simple a system as possible, that enables the kinds of rulings I am talking about (I basically want rules, but rules that don't get in the way of the player being able to say what they want to try, and the GM being able to respond with either a handy rule in the book or formulating a ruling (and I think the more a game leans on rulings in terms of what rules it actually puts in the book, the more I enjoy the game lately).

 

[Maxperson]

And why do you think freeform games can't have limits?

I'm sure that they can, but those limits will be rules. You cannot have "no rules" and "game limits" in the same game. The level of rules impacts the amount of freedom you have. The more rules you have, the less freedom you have.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Immersion is, to me, flow within the gameworld. And I keep it in part by having an understanding of the world and being able to act on that. Every time I stop focusing on the world and have to interact with the structures it breaks my immersion. And asking the GM takes longer than checking my character sheet. I am sufficiently numerate (I accept not everyone is) that I can keep track especially of a streamlined character sheet like the Apocalypse World one. Any back and forth about what I can do and how likely it is with the GM that I can do such and such a thing chips away at my immersion while doing it - and the longer it takes the more damaging.

Okay. Yes, I don't actually mind having a back and forth with the GM if we are hashing out things. I do mind time in terms of how long a rule takes to deploy (so anything that becomes a mini-game, I tend to get bored with quickly). But any amount of back and forth usually feels pretty seamless to me

 

[Bedrockgames]

The particular part that gets me is the odds of success. When I do something in the real world I generally have a pretty good idea of how likely it is to work. Which means it's part of what I want from a ruling - but things like that take time.

I very rarely know my actual probabilty of success in the real world. All I have is a gut instinct, which is sometimes wrong. Also, if the GM is making reasonable rulings, it is usually not that hard to gauge in my experience (especially once you've been in a few sessions with the same GM). Not saying this isn't an issue for you. If it is, obviously play what game works for you. Just for me this is pretty much a non-issue.

 

[Maxperson]

You don't find time to be important? Let's try and put it in terms I think you'll understand.

Immersion is, to me, flow within the gameworld. And I keep it in part by having an understanding of the world and being able to act on that. Every time I stop focusing on the world and have to interact with the structures it breaks my immersion. And asking the GM takes longer than checking my character sheet. I am sufficiently numerate (I accept not everyone is) that I can keep track especially of a streamlined character sheet like the Apocalypse World one. Any back and forth about what I can do and how likely it is with the GM that I can do such and such a thing chips away at my immersion while doing it - and the longer it takes the more damaging.

Okay. Yes, I don't actually mind having a back and forth with the GM if we are hashing out things. I do mind time in terms of how long a rule takes to deploy (so anything that becomes a mini-game, I tend to get bored with quickly). But any amount of back and forth usually feels pretty seamless to me

I think this again goes to different playstyles and how the agency isn't necessarily greater or lesser, but different. We're all different people with different capabilities and desires. What seems limiting or freeing to one person may not be for another.

 

[FrogReaver]

On GM decisions by fiat:

I see examples of GM's in other systems making a ruling and I'm told that it's not fiat because there's some general principle written in the rules pages that is guiding that decision. Okay that's fair, but if all it takes is some kind of guiding principle or reason to make something not be fiat, then I'd have to say that in the great history of RPG's very few if any DM decisions have ever been made by fiat as defined this way. Whether explicit to the system or not, GM's tend to have guiding principles and reasons for their decisions.