Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="fusangite" data-source="post: 2907562" data-attributes="member: 7240">Indeed. And one should choose rules that support the social contract and avoid rules than undermine it.I think the degree to which a game relies on this is directly dependent on the quality of the rules that have been written. Well-written, well-balanced rules that clearly outline areas of GM discretion are rarely open to abuse.In my books, it is a bad system. Any system that creates incentives for behaviour that damages the game is a bad system. Vampire is about railroading and hand waving; it is a cool setting yoked to a terrible system and a dictatorial theory of GMing. Vampire is exactly the kind of game you end up with when structural problems with system are displaced into personal blame.Don't you agree that it would be preferable if the rules were re-written in order to reduce or eliminate the problems you are describing? Don't you think more people would have more fun playing the game if the rules supported instead of thwarting their stated objectives?So I see we are basically in agreement.Yep. I had a player who came up with a clever way to break D&amp;D: he built up his charisma-based skills to very high levels and used them to mobilize mobs of villagers everywhere he went. By involving dozens of un-statted NPCs in every confrontation, he tried to make my game collapse. Soon after, we both agreed it was time he found another game.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="fusangite, post: 2907562, member: 7240"] Indeed. And one should choose rules that support the social contract and avoid rules than undermine it.I think the degree to which a game relies on this is directly dependent on the quality of the rules that have been written. Well-written, well-balanced rules that clearly outline areas of GM discretion are rarely open to abuse.In my books, it is a bad system. Any system that creates incentives for behaviour that damages the game is a bad system. Vampire is about railroading and hand waving; it is a cool setting yoked to a terrible system and a dictatorial theory of GMing. Vampire is exactly the kind of game you end up with when structural problems with system are displaced into personal blame.Don't you agree that it would be preferable if the rules were re-written in order to reduce or eliminate the problems you are describing? Don't you think more people would have more fun playing the game if the rules supported instead of thwarting their stated objectives?So I see we are basically in agreement.Yep. I had a player who came up with a clever way to break D&D: he built up his charisma-based skills to very high levels and used them to mobilize mobs of villagers everywhere he went. By involving dozens of un-statted NPCs in every confrontation, he tried to make my game collapse. Soon after, we both agreed it was time he found another game. [/QUOTE]

Verification