Search results

Yes? I see the verb "hope" used quite consistently for what the character is doing? Not author or determine? I think noone questions a character's ability to hope? Edit1: That the participants of the game then used this hope to determine the outcome is on them, not the character? Edit2: And it...

Yes? Yes? No? The GM could very well tell openly if they are actually authoring or not, without that materially changing the situation as I see it. The absence of this information flow just makes the key point in the example clearer. (In the scenario with that information flow, philosophical...

I thought I was the one pointing out that difference, while @clearstream appeared to assert it didn't really matter, as the GM end up with chips anyway?

But the method of establishment is what is under scrutiny here! In the cleric example the existence was handwaved. I thought the point of the sentence you quoted here was to point out that this handwaving was inaproperiate in this context. You appear to be confusing if people are talking about...

Oh, I must have missed that!? I have not recognised that at all! I tought they repeatedly stated the character cannot determine the meaning of the rune, but the player can, and hence there is a difference? (This seem to strongly contradict the notion that the character determined the meaning of...

Never mind. Thought I saw a a way do deescalate, but upon closer inspection it didn't read the way I intended.

Not really. I have seen and experienced some very closed form games that has been labeled RPG (reasonably in my eyes). Also systems that can support open-ended play are often used for more close-ended play like one-shots and adventure paths.

Then it seem like the design space you are looking at has been quite heavily explored in computer games. Elite, Minecraft, terrarria, no man sky, stardew valley, animal crossing all seem to fit the overall requirements? Indeed computer RPGs generally do not fulfill this at all.. So are you sure...

I would say exactly the same for sim play with highly dynamic content :)

I just realised: If you take Talisman, and remove the inner circle+gate. Would that pass your test for being an RPG? Play time is unbounded, as the normal victory condition is gone, and rules state a new character is drafted on death. In such a context players can still set goals (hoard gold...

Edit: I think I got the wrong context. Never mind.

That seem too easy. You surely not saying that the players author the entire world by asking the GM to run a game for them? In this context I think the GM's independence as a human in terms of creativity and subjective conceptualisation around the game can't be ignored. (Edit: more simply put -...

Well, TTRPGs have a long tradition of having key play being structured. Early D&D could be played as a pure mechanical dungeon crawler with no negotiation (as demonstrated by the relative ease of computer adaptations). I can easily see a TTRPG being deviced so that hardly anyone would want to go...

I don't think we disagree then. However I would point out that "game" has a lot of overloaded meanings. When I talk about game in this context I normally include the social contract as part of that term. It seem like you here use "game" in a way that excludes social contract. This was not...

I think I see where you are coming from. However I struggle to see how to avoid negotiation in TTRPG in a good way. I think this might be due to the same issues as we had in our previous exchange about the nature of TTRPGs. At what point have you defined up so much structure that I would stop...

Interesting! I actually have somewhat opposite preference regarding characters (though weak). I tend to like "avatar" type characters that do not have much personality on their own, but expresses their player's desires. I find these tend to be more complex and multifaceted than completely made...

I once ran an about 10 session D&D campaign where I cannot remember invoking that mini game once :) There might have been a close call in a treasure cave with some skeletons rising from the sand, but I think they found a way to evade that. I also think the end game PvP was resolved based on...

Do they? Or is it indeed the GM that listens to player input, and from that migrate fictional possibilities into actualities? The difference might be hard to spot in practice, but the difference say something about the nature of the game.

(I think as experienced by the player was meant as opposed to as experienced from the fiction, that was that it wasn't a subjectivity argument, but rather a clarification about point of view)

This is an interesting claim. I want to examine it a bit closer. The player and character both recognise the runes. Both could recognise them as a possible way out, but for different reasons. If we look from the player perspective, they recognise the runes as a game mechanical object that...