What are the rules for?

[Thomas Shey]

Or if you want to lift a horse, or throw it at someone, or determine if it can be supported by a bridge, or are weighing it in preparation for a transaction, or any of the other reasons why you'd want rules for the weights of objects and beings in the world. I don't care how likely I think it is to be relevant. If it exists in the game world, it has weight. And the players may choose to interact with it, in whatever manner they see fit, and they do not need any justification for any decision.

I'd suggest in a typical game, none of those three would be common; that's why I suggest a context where it might come of repeatedly and frequently.

As to the other--but of course it matters how likely it is to be relevant. Any rules set is going to stop having rules applicable to some situations somewhere. The commonest--and I'd argue best--criterion for deciding that is how likely it is to come up.

 

[A_Carrington]

Ideally not. A solid core mechanic can be easily adapted to almost any conceivable situation, and should enable a GM to easily and rapidly generate new rules or systems on the fly to represent rare situations.

And, of course, I don't agree that picking up creatures is rare. Using an enemy as a weapon is an option printed in the book.

 

[overgeeked]

It’s important to distinguish between rules and mechanics.

The rules are, generally speaking, one player is the referee and they control the world, control NPCs, set TNs, set scenes, end scenes, etc. The other players control PCs. And the three-step play loop (referee describes the scene, players ask questions & decide how their PCs react, referee engages the mechanics if necessary and narrates results).

The mechanics are roll these dice, create characters this way, damage works like this, etc.

The rules exist so that we know the boundaries of the game and can play it successfully.

The mechanics exist to sell books.

 

[A_Carrington]

The rules are everything printed in the rulebook.

Edit : Don't reply with OH YEAH??? EVEN THE ART? WHAT ABOUT THE COPYRIGHT INFORMATION????

That's not how you would behave in a conversation with someone in person. You aren't a robot, and you will not interpret sentences literally. I won't bother reading any reply that pretends to not understand my meaning.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Ideally not. A solid core mechanic can be easily adapted to almost any conceivable situation, and should enable a GM to easily and rapidly generate new rules or systems on the fly to represent rare situations.

I'd say this entirely turns on one's definition of "easily" and to what degree you expect the rules to handle possibly important details. I'm a big believer in a system that's basic structure gives a good framework for doing anything you'll be likely to be doing, but that's not the same as thinking it will necessarily provide sufficient detail for handling some situations if they're going to come up in important and/or frequent ways.

As an example, I'd say the frameworks that most of the games that called themselves "RuneQuest" have had included all the basics for the things they expect to come up, and a framework for things that don't very often. But while they'd include enough rules for the basic kind of haggling a typical PC does, I wouldn't say they had enough to make an adquate rules set for running a game with a strong mercantile focus by themselves (I will freely admit this is dependent on one's definition of "adequate" up front, but I'm arguing it from my point of view, so that's what I'm using).

And, of course, I don't agree that picking up creatures is rare. Using an enemy as a weapon is an option printed in the book.

That doesn't mean its common. Outside of superhero games I've seen a creature picked up in games in any fashion where a rules reference might be necessary over the years a number of times that could be counted on one hand.

 

[A_Carrington]

You know what easily means.

That doesn't mean it's rare. I've seen enemies picked up and thrown many times.

Anecdotes are not evidence.

 

[innerdude]

You're a warhorse lifting subsytem!

Your mom's a warhorse lifting subsystem!


You all know this is meant in jest, right? Right?

 

[A_Carrington]

yeah my mom's strong af

 

[Thomas Shey]

You know what easily means.

No, actually, in this kind of context I'm not going to assume that another person and I are going to be using "easily" the same way, because I've seen plenty of cases where it isn't.

That doesn't mean it's rare. I've seen enemies picked up and thrown many times.

Anecdotes are not evidence.

You go by your experience, I'll go by mine. I have no reason to believe yours is the more common one here.

 

[GMMichael]

The commonest--and I'd argue best--criterion for deciding that is how likely it is to come up.

That tracks. But  how the proposed rule handles it is just as important.

The mechanics exist to sell books.

Since we're defining things: mechanics exist to fix cars. Mechanisms are the systems you get when rules interact.

That doesn't mean it's rare. I've seen enemies picked up and thrown many times.

Have you been playing Dragon's Dogma?