An Odd Thought Occured to Me about RPG's.

[UngainlyTitan]

I would agree with Henry that it is deeply baked into wargamming and rpgs but in a mild form it does occur eleswhere. In soccer and some other field games there is what is know and the advantage rule. This allows a referee to no award a free kick for a foul if he thinks that the team that suffered the foul has an advantage. Judicious use if this rule can keep the flow of a game and make it more interesting than a game where the ref stops play for every infraction.

 

[Theo R Cwithin]

RPGs are very different from other games in the sense that players (including the GM) can freely do things not explicitly covered by the rules, and are actually encouraged to. So the GM often is required to interpret existing rules or even make a new rule to cover the new situation. I think that naturally spills over into how established rules are used/perceived at the table.

 

[nedjer]

There are plenty of sports that put interpreting the rules ahead of following the exact letter of the law. In football aka soccer referees are heavily criticised if they don't let the game flow and/ or book too many players. On another level, football authorities refuse to have sin bin time-outs and tennis-like video replays, because 'interpreting' the rules (by introducing errors through a referee and fuelling controversy) add to the excitement and make play less predictable.



Just edit in my fail for using a second football analogy after just two posts

 

[Sunseeker]

If what RPers wanted was an immutable, god-emperor DM setting, we'd all go play computer games where no matter how much we yell at the screen, we can't change the rules. Since that's not the type of game we want, we have the culture you are aware of, one where, depending on the situation, you can suggest that something should work differently than the book because that would make it more awesome or more logical.

The main point is really that D&D is a strange sort of democratic dictatorship, the end goal is to have fun. If the general input is that X rule is dumb and making it cool does not destroy the game and results in everyone having a better game, then do it.

To say that the rules are the rules and should always be the rules is idiotic even from a WoTC standpoint, as they've revamped the rules several times themselves to make things more "cool" or "fun".

 

[Raven Crowking]

(1) In any creative enterprise, it is okay to break the rules, so long as you know what the rules are, and you are breaking them to good effect.

(2) In a role-playing game, the rules exist to aid in adjudicating the intereaction of characters within a fictional space. The traditional idea of a role-playing game includes the idea that the "reality" of this space trumps the rules. In fact, I would argue that the more the rules trump the "reality" of the fictional space, the less a game should be considered a "role-playing game". This is especially true because

(3) The rules are designed based upon the expectations of the designers, and always perforce are limited to those expectations, and extrapolations of those expectations, whereas in actual play -- unless the potential actions of the characters are severely/artificially limited -- sooner or later the RAW will not make sense in terms of both the fictional "reality", and/or the intentions of the designer(s), and/or what "makes sense" to those at the table.

It would be foolish to let a rule which was written with one situation in mind take precedence over a ruling when the rule is not appropriate to the actual situation. This doesn't make it a "bad rule" -- just an incomplete one (all all rpg rulesets are incomplete) -- but following the rule under such a circumstance would be a bad ruling.

IMHO, of course, and very much IME.


RC

 

[Diamond Cross]

Well, I don't really agree to #1. There are certain times when it's okay to break the rules, but it's not okay to break the rules just for the sake of breaking the rules or breaking the rules to use against the players or the DM.

For me those times would be if the rule is unclear or vague or if there are conflicting rules.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Well, I don't really agree to #1. There are certain times when it's okay to break the rules, but it's not okay to break the rules just for the sake of breaking the rules or breaking the rules to use against the players or the DM.

For me those times would be if the rule is unclear or vague or if there are conflicting rules.

Are you objecting to "breaking them to good effect"?

(2) and (3) are really subsets of the idea expressed in (1).


RC

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Eh...when it comes to rules following vs rules breaking, RPGs are just sports on paper without physical contact (sweat and motion are optional).

Pick a sport, any sport: odds are high that a given play will have some kind of rule broken or bent; the odds shifting higher if its a contact/collision sport (football, hockey) or free-flowing (soccer, basketball). Sports like baseball or cricket have a lower incidence of cheating on a per-play basis, but you'll still find cheating on a per game basis (corked bats, spitballs).

And that's without bringing up intentional fouls or playacting to draw penalties.

 

[Diamond Cross]

Are you objecting to "breaking them to good effect"?

(2) and (3) are really subsets of the idea expressed in (1).


RC

Not being sarcastic, but it all depends on what you mean by good effect.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Not being sarcastic, but it all depends on what you mean by good effect.

That doesn't sound sarcastic at all, and is absolutely true!

It is also at least partly subjective. That subjectivity is probably necessary for a thing to be an "art".

As for the general idea that an rpg is like poker, or sports on paper, the general idea between games like poker or sports is that one is competing against another or others, so that the rules supply a level playing field.

In contrast, a role-playing game is an endeavour where folks work together to increase the enjoyment of all. It is not a zero-sum game. The ultimate win conditions result in everybody winning.


RC