Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 5325012" data-attributes="member: 18280">(1)&nbsp; 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)&nbsp; In a role-playing game, the rules exist to aid in adjudicating the intereaction of characters within a fictional space.&nbsp; The traditional idea of a role-playing game includes the idea that the &quot;reality&quot; of this space trumps the rules.&nbsp; In fact, I would argue that the more the rules trump the &quot;reality&quot; of the fictional space, the less a game should be considered a &quot;role-playing game&quot;.&nbsp; This is especially true because(3)&nbsp; 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 &quot;reality&quot;, and/or the intentions of the designer(s), and/or what &quot;makes sense&quot; 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.&nbsp; This doesn't make it a &quot;bad rule&quot; -- 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</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Raven Crowking, post: 5325012, member: 18280"] (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 [B][I]bad ruling[/I][/B]. IMHO, of course, and very much IME. RC [/QUOTE]

Verification