Why do RPGs have rules?

[Autumnal]

Resolved: that rules exist to move arguments from the table to broader-distribution media. Originally, fanzines and amateur press associations; now, the Internet.

 

[Bedrockgames]

I agree that different approaches to invention will produce different things.

My assertion is that this doesn't stop them being inventions and (in our current context) works of imagination.

To present a stark example: I can build my Lego spaceport based on ideas about what looks cool (having just watched Star Wars or Star Trek or whatever); or based on my ideas about what would make sense in a spaceport (say, fuel tanks, launch pads, etc). The two things I'm making up might end up looking different. But they're still both things that I made up! (Given that everything I know about space travel I learned from reading some popular histories, a bit of Wikipedia, and watching movies.)

I think you are getting very hung up on language here and taking our positions extremely literally. No one is asserting these aren’t imaginary. Obviously these worlds don’t exist outside our imagination. It being imaginary doesn’t mean it can’t be simulationist or that the process can’t be grounded in conventions from the real world rather than genre. They are just saying the aim is to produce something believable, consistent and grounded more in a natural realism. But the process and the distinction, whatever language is used to describe them is important. In the example you give those are two very different outcomes for two very different sensibilities around lego. All we are saying is this approach to world building and running a game produces a very different experience than if you are making decisions based on what feels cool, what feels more dramatic, etc.

 

[Lanefan]

You don't think that proves the point?

It proves the point that this one person is highly skilled in several areas rather than just one, much like a multiclass character would be in comparison to a single-class; but does nothing to refute my point that in the game it's common - and probably wise - to leave a tricky task for the professional trained in competently doing such tasks just like you're going to leave tricky tasks in real life for those who have training in them (assuming, of course, you have access to said trained professional in either case).

In a class-based RPG characters have classes, where a class represent a set of skills and abilities in which they're well trained*; which means when a certain skill or ability is required (e.g. unlocking a door) having a character on hand who has training in that skill comes in useful. And sure, characters or parties operating without those skills can still often get by, but it's nowhere near as easy or simple.

* - in real life people often have professions, which are almost an exact analogy.

 

[Bedrockgames]

To present a stark example: I can build my Lego spaceport based on ideas about what looks cool (having just watched Star Wars or Star Trek or whatever); or based on my ideas about what would make sense in a spaceport (say, fuel tanks, launch pads, etc). The two things I'm making up might end up looking different. But they're still both things that I made up! (Given that everything I know about space travel I learned from reading some popular histories, a bit of Wikipedia, and watching movies.)

I would argue you aren’t simply making it up in the second case. You are constrained by more fidelity to what feels plausible, realistic etc. And as you point out based on source material. In the first case you have given yourself more freedom to imagine whatever you want.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I think you are getting very hung up on language here and taking our positions extremely literally. No one is asserting these aren’t imaginary. Obviously these worlds don’t exist outside our imagination. It being imaginary doesn’t mean it can’t be simulationist or that the process can’t be grounded in conventions from the real world rather than genre. They are just saying the aim is to produce something believable, consistent and grounded more in a natural realism. But the process and the distinction, whatever language is used to describe them is important. In the example you give those are two very different outcomes for two very different sensibilities around lego. All we are saying is this approach to world building and running a game produces a very different experience than if you are making decisions based on what feels cool, what feels more dramatic, etc.

I think my response is, yes, that is one opinion. I don't have any real evidence that there's a significant difference. I'm no historian, but if my narrativist play was set in 1st Century Rome I can probably depict its typical environs moderately well, having had enough interest in such things to do some reading, etc. So I'd expect that much of the fiction I created would 'ring true' enough to pass at a game table. Naturally I'd probably have some maps of the city in that time period on hand in order to explain some of the geography if it became relevant. I expect you and I would probably get the same sorts of typically misunderstood things wrong. I expect those would most critically involve the world view and social aspects of life in Rome, which are AFAIK VERY different in many respects from what we modern Western people would think.

 

[pemerton]

I would argue you aren’t simply making it up in the second case. You are constrained by more fidelity to what feels plausible, realistic etc. And as you point out based on source material. In the first case you have given yourself more freedom to imagine whatever you want.

The first example is also constrained - it is "what looks cool!"

The differences here are aesthetic in my view.

 

[Aldarc]

I think of it it as seriously considering a hypothetical. I.E. okay elves live forever except through a violent death, what are the cultural implications of that. Like a counterfactual. That is a distinct way to world build, versus just deciding how it is you want elven culture to be. Both are entirely fine. Both can produce good, bad and mediocre results. I find it more satisfying when worlds are constructed this way (at least in many cases).

What is it like to be a bat?

 

[Autumnal]

What is it like to be a bat?

Darn you for citing that. I was refining some thoughts where it’d fit, but had other things need my attention.

 

[Aldarc]

Darn you for citing that. I was refining some thoughts where it’d fit, but had other things need my attention.

No problems.

To expand my thoughts, I find it somewhat silly to imagine life with supernatural counterfactuals while simultaneously insisting on simulated factuals for things like imagining life in Middle Age feudal societies. IMHO, it's impossible for me to imagine that a world with D&D style magic and ancestries, rather common or not, would result in a social outcome that produced the Middle Age (Western) Europe, its various societies/cultures, and accompanying norms. The mere existence of magic as a form of "capital" would have a tremendous transformative impact on the development and shape of human societies. That most everything else in human society is the same but there is some old guy in a tower who can cast fireball breaks my own sense of "realism" far more than any dramatic contrivance around player characters.

 

[Autumnal]

IMHO, it's impossible for me to imagine that a world with D&D style magic and ancestries, rather common or not, would result in a social outcome that produced the Middle Age (Western) Europe, its various societies/cultures, and accompanying norms. The mere existence of magic as a form of "capital" would have a tremendous transformative impact on the development and shape of human societies. That most everything else in human society is the same but there is some old guy in a tower who can cast fireball breaks my own sense of "realism" far more than any dramatic contrivance around player characters.

Yes. The whole fabric, social and physical, of medieval society reflects that there is no such magic as they envisioned. As well, of course, nobody historically envisioned anything like RPG magic or monsters. Affordances and capabilities (their presence and their absence) shape the way people live.

I happen to be bingeing on recent Mesoamerican history right now so this is freshly in mind. So many things matter: latitude, climate, stocks of animals that can be used in different ways, how labor is defined, how powerful spirits must be honored and appeased, the whole deal. Changing something as major as how magic works would, I assume, give you a spread of societies we’ve never seen.