Some reasons why people may reject the notion that "System/Rules matter"

[Manbearcat]

People arguing about Ron Edwards, either directly or indirectly.

Or (to use an example from the "How to Fix 6e" thread) saying that everyone who likes D&D should just play DungeonWorld.

Who would be saying "everyone who likes D&D should just play Dungeon World?"

Folks who believe "system matters" or "system doesn't matter?" I'm assuming you're saying its the "system matters" folks?

Anyone who tells someone who is looking for a Moldvay Basic Dungeon Crawl, or a 1e hexcrawl, or a 3.x/5e Adventure Path to "just play Dungeon World" CLEARLY doesn't actually believe "system matters."

Those 4 experiences are entirely different and, coincidentally, pretty robust evidence that "system matters"!

I mean, hell, 4e is the most kindred form of D&D to Dungeon World and you'll never, ever get the experience of one from the other!

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Who would be saying "everyone who likes D&D should just play Dungeon World?"

You're welcome to review the thread.

As for the rest, as interesting as it would be to engage in a conversation with you, I am not sure that I would find it enjoyable given that your premise is that everyone is actually, secretly, a "system matters" person, they just don't know it, and it would likely end up with the exact result I stated that I find unpleasant.

 

[Manbearcat]

You're welcome to review the thread.

As for the rest, as interesting as it would be to engage in a conversation with you, I am not sure that I would find it enjoyable given that your premise is that everyone is actually, secretly, a "system matters" person, they just don't know it, and it would likely end up with the exact result I stated that I find unpleasant.

I don't see that premise in my last post. I don't know how you got that out of those words?

I know that because I don't believe that everyone is actually, secretly, a "system matters" person. That is CLEARLY not true. There are absolutely ways to play TTRPGs where "system doesn't matter".

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

There are absolutely ways to play TTRPGs where "system doesn't matter".

Some reasons why people may reject the notion that "System/Rules matter"

So the "systems matters' discourse has reappeared, like perennial flower, or like a rash that won't go away, depending on your point of view. Given that some people have a hard time even imagining why others reject the importance of system, I'm sharing a list of reasons why people might feel...

www.enworld.org

 

[Manbearcat]

Some reasons why people may reject the notion that "System/Rules matter"

So the "systems matters' discourse has reappeared, like perennial flower, or like a rash that won't go away, depending on your point of view. Given that some people have a hard time even imagining why others reject the importance of system, I'm sharing a list of reasons why people might feel...

www.enworld.org

Did you maybe mislink? This is your post from the first page. Did you mean to link something else or am I meant to draw some inference about something? If so...I don't have the cognitive horsepower to get your meaning. Do you want to help me out?

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Did you maybe mislink? This is your post from the first page. Did you mean to link something else or am I meant to draw some inference about something? If so...I don't have the cognitive horsepower to get your meaning. Do you want to help me out?

I didn't mislink. That was pretty much my thoughts on the subject. I believe the other thread-

Jon Peterson: Does System Matter?

D&D historian Jon Peterson asks the question on his blog as he does a deep dive into how early tabletop RPG enthusiasts wrestled with the same thing. Based around the concept that 'D&D can do anything, so why learn a new system?', the conversation examines whether the system itself affects the...

www.enworld.org

Has evolved into a robust discussion of "System Matters," in the strong sense, which is why I am not involved.

 

[Manbearcat]

I didn't mislink. That was pretty much my thoughts on the subject. I believe the other thread-

Jon Peterson: Does System Matter?

D&D historian Jon Peterson asks the question on his blog as he does a deep dive into how early tabletop RPG enthusiasts wrestled with the same thing. Based around the concept that 'D&D can do anything, so why learn a new system?', the conversation examines whether the system itself affects the...

www.enworld.org

Has evolved into a robust discussion of "System Matters," in the strong sense, which is why I am not involved.

Its not clear to me how your link to the former thread dovetails with what we're talking about here.

Is this about @Aldarc 's comments on Dungeon World? If so (and its not clear that it is), Aldarc's comments aren't telling someone to play Dungeon World. You've wrongly inferred his meaning (if this is indeed what you're talking about). He's inviting the commenter to examine their position on "system (doesn't) matter (much)" vis a vis Dungeon World (and the inherent system issues that transcend his position that GM Adventure Prefab/Curation of Content prior to play is the bulk of "system matters").

 

[Campbell]

Here's why I have doubts when people tell me that "system does not matter" to them : I have never encountered someone who says those words who would be just as comfortable playing Dungeon World, Burning Wheel, or Dogs in the Vineyard as the mainstream game they are playing. Usually it indicates a set of preferences that does not want the game to have a strong impact on play. It indicates a comfort and satisfaction with the play they have experienced. There's nothing wrong with that. They should play the games they like in the way they want to.

Generally why I take exception to "system does not matter" is because I was deeply dissatisfied with typical play, sought out games that did things differently, and spent years developing skill in a variety of play techniques. What advocates of "system does not matter" are often saying without realizing it is that developing that discipline, that technique was worthless - that they can easily achieve the same results effortlessly without putting in the work to fine tune the play process. I find it highly arrogant.

I also do not get how someone can emphatically speak on something they so thoroughly lack experience in. D&D being good enough for your purposes sure. How games you have never even taken a second look at impacting the play experience is somewhat different from my perspective. That seems to be something you cannot really speak concretely on without actually trying. Not saying you need to try though. I think most people who play D&D 5e for example and thoroughly enjoy it are poor candidates for Burning Wheel or even Dungeon World.

 

[prabe]

Here's why I have doubts when people tell me that "system does not matter" to them : I have never encountered someone who says those words who would be just as comfortable playing Dungeon World, Burning Wheel, or Dogs in the Vineyard as the mainstream game they are playing. Usually it indicates a set of preferences that does not want the game to have a strong impact on play. It indicates a comfort and satisfaction with the play they have experienced. There's nothing wrong with that. They should play the games they like in the way they want to.

Generally why I take exception to "system does not matter" is because I was deeply dissatisfied with typical play, sought out games that did things differently, and spent years developing skill in a variety of play techniques. What advocates of "system does not matter" are often saying without realizing it is that developing that discipline, that technique was worthless - that they can easily achieve the same results effortlessly without putting in the work to fine tune the play process. I find it highly arrogant.

I also do not get how someone can emphatically speak on something they so thoroughly lack experience in. D&D being good enough for your purposes sure. How games you have never even taken a second look at impacting the play experience is somewhat different from my perspective. That seems to be something you cannot really speak concretely on without actually trying. Not saying you need to try though. I think most people who play D&D 5e for example and thoroughly enjoy it are poor candidates for Burning Wheel or even Dungeon World.

So, I don't actually disagree with you much--mostly around the edges, I think.

I think system does (or at least can) matter, but I think that the people around the table (and their ... expectations, and the norms that arise during play) matter and the GM's ... ability (part talent, part technique, part principle) matters; I don't think that system necessarily matters more than the players and the GM.

I agree that I am probably not a person who'd much enjoy Dungeon World (I don't understand Burning Wheel enough to have an opinion on it or my fitness for it). I think that at least some of the pushback (for lack of a better term) that "system matters" gets is about an impression one can get from some folks into indie-games (not you, to be clear) that the people who don't prefer them haven't played them and/or are Philistines. It's actually possible to try indie-games (and understand them) and not prefer them.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Its not clear to me how your link to the former thread dovetails with what we're talking about here.

Is this about @Aldarc 's comments on Dungeon World? If so (and its not clear that it is), Aldarc's comments aren't telling someone to play Dungeon World. You've wrongly inferred his meaning (if this is indeed what you're talking about). He's inviting the commenter to examine their position on "system (doesn't) matter (much)" vis a vis Dungeon World (and the inherent system issues that transcend his position that GM Adventure Prefab/Curation of Content prior to play is the bulk of "system matters").

I apologize if I was too indirect. So I will be blunt (and forgive me for that).

I made my point. It was fairly clear and succinct. I was asked, and I answered, what I find unpleasant about "system matters" conversations. And yet I am being asked to engage in the very thing that I find unpleasant!

To engage in a conversation about why system matters.

But again, this is what I said:
Strong statement. This is where I get worried, because (to an extent), I feel similar to when an athlete says, "It's not about the money." When I see people making strong "system" arguments, I try to hold on to my wallet, because I feel that they are usually trying to sell me on something- a theory or a game. Which is fine, for them, but I don't need to be theory-splained as to why the game I enjoy doesn't work in theory, while whatever they are selling is the only real way to have fun. "System matters" inevitably means that because it matters, some systems are better than others, and let me tell you why these systems are better ....

This is what prabe said directly above me:
I think that at least some of the pushback (for lack of a better term) that "system matters" gets is about an impression one can get from some folks into indie-games (not you, to be clear) that the people who don't prefer them haven't played them and/or are Philistines. It's actually possible to try indie-games (and understand them) and not prefer them.

Is this clear enough? I was trying to politely say that I am not interested in this type of conversation, because it inevitably goes to places that I do not enjoy. That does not mean that other people cannot enjoy discussing the theory, it doesn't mean that they cannot enjoy discussing the finer points of Ron Edwards and Vincent Baker, and it doesn't mean that their preferences (and the extent to which they are enjoying their own games) is not correct. But I have found these conversations are tedious to me, and provide more heat than light. Usually, then end up with the "System Matters" folks "inviting me to examine my position" over an over again, and refusing to take, "Well, that's great for you, but I like what I like" as an answer. Which, again, unpleasant.

TLDR; bluntly, I don't want to have this conversation because I don't find it productive, and I was trying to politely excuse myself and point you to a thread that people were engaged in it.



*It was not aldarc, it was loverdrive, not that it matters.