Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 7559233" data-attributes="member: 6696971">@<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=23751" target="_blank">Maxperson</a>Do you mean something like “baseline familiarity centered around our own physical systems?” Gravity is a thing, some interactions transfer more energy than others, nonparasitic plants need light for photosynthesis, humans (and animals like them) express themselves based on biological and social imperatives. Stuff like that?I don’t think (broadly) that anyone would disagree with that (@Aldarc included). I think the friction arises when we try to sort out the nature of a certain paradox that seems to violate our baselines arbitrarily, what to extrapolate from it, what is the consequence/utility (from a gameplay perspective) of digging too deeply or hewing too closely/granularly (to our baselines). Further still, the more Through the Looking Glass components get ported to our games, the more friction there is (as even our seemingly trivially “true” baselines become challenged).EDIT - That isn’t even touching on the questions of:1) Does hewing to x too closely cause gameplay issues (balance, overhead)?2) Does hewing to x too closely interfere with having interesting inputs to gameplay (framed conflicts, proposed action declarations, exciting obstacles).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Manbearcat, post: 7559233, member: 6696971"] @[I][B][U][URL="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=23751"]Maxperson[/URL][/U][/B][/I] Do you mean something like “baseline familiarity centered around our own physical systems?” Gravity is a thing, some interactions transfer more energy than others, nonparasitic plants need light for photosynthesis, humans (and animals like them) express themselves based on biological and social imperatives. Stuff like that? I don’t think (broadly) that anyone would disagree with that (@Aldarc included). I think the friction arises when we try to sort out the nature of a certain paradox that seems to violate our baselines arbitrarily, what to extrapolate from it, what is the consequence/utility (from a gameplay perspective) of digging too deeply or hewing too closely/granularly (to our baselines). Further still, the more Through the Looking Glass components get ported to our games, the more friction there is (as even our seemingly trivially “true” baselines become challenged). EDIT - That isn’t even touching on the questions of: 1) Does hewing to x too closely cause gameplay issues (balance, overhead)? 2) Does hewing to x too closely interfere with having interesting inputs to gameplay (framed conflicts, proposed action declarations, exciting obstacles). [/QUOTE]

Verification