Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 6395132" data-attributes="member: 22779">Let's be honest here and every game will have poorly written rules.&nbsp; That's a given.&nbsp; Some are better or worse, but, no game is perfect.&nbsp; Of course.The problem here is that some people try to defend poorly written rules on the basis that vague rules are always preferable and even poorly written rules aren't a problem if the DM knows how to run a game.I've seen people try to defend 1e's initiative rules.&nbsp; If those aren't poorly written, vague, and baroque, I don't know what is.&nbsp; The idea that there is no such thing as &quot;poor game design&quot; but that everything is 100% subjective and thus we cannot judge a game element as good or bad is, to me, poisonous to any discussion of game mechanics.&nbsp; And, there's the other issue - people start playing at being incredibly obtuse when discussing rules as well.&nbsp; &quot;Well, it doesn't say that this fire spell will actually light fires, so, it can't light fires&quot;.&nbsp; The people who, for whatever reason, take RAW to ridiculous extremes in order and ignore any and all common sense approaches.&nbsp; These folks are every bit as problematic as the ones who feel that since no rule is ever perfect, any rule is good enough and it's a failure of the DM/GM if the game has problems.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 6395132, member: 22779"] Let's be honest here and every game will have poorly written rules. That's a given. Some are better or worse, but, no game is perfect. Of course. The problem here is that some people try to defend poorly written rules on the basis that vague rules are always preferable and even poorly written rules aren't a problem if the DM knows how to run a game. I've seen people try to defend 1e's initiative rules. If those aren't poorly written, vague, and baroque, I don't know what is. The idea that there is no such thing as "poor game design" but that everything is 100% subjective and thus we cannot judge a game element as good or bad is, to me, poisonous to any discussion of game mechanics. And, there's the other issue - people start playing at being incredibly obtuse when discussing rules as well. "Well, it doesn't say that this fire spell will actually light fires, so, it can't light fires". The people who, for whatever reason, take RAW to ridiculous extremes in order and ignore any and all common sense approaches. These folks are every bit as problematic as the ones who feel that since no rule is ever perfect, any rule is good enough and it's a failure of the DM/GM if the game has problems. [/QUOTE]

Verification