Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 9238525" data-attributes="member: 6785785">Don’t you think that my suggestion of supporting more than one way of playing would necessarily allow for more than one way of playing? To use different rules if you desire a shift toward X style of play? I think it’s far more important for beginning GMs and players to have solid guidance than to be told they can ditch the rules and do it all themselves. That they learn how to play according to the rules and establish a foundational understanding. I think the current rulebooks are really muddled in this regard. It’s not really that great an example because the game has actual rules that allow all those different approaches to play. That’s the intent of its design… and if that’s a design goal… if you want to allow multiple play experiences, you have to provide complete rules and guidance to help deliver that experience. If it didn’t have mech rules, then you wouldn’t be talking about how you can pilot a mech in the game. And so on.Now, RPGs are different and don’t need the amount of design that a videogame might in order to include a given play experience… but I don’t think what’s provided is anywhere near as robust as many often claim. Good thing no one’s suggesting such a thing for D&amp;D. Yeah… why learn a game from the rulebooks?Again… this is just accepting the transfer of responsibility to another party. And while I think some of this is okay given the nature of RPGs… I don’t think the fundamentals should be among them.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="hawkeyefan, post: 9238525, member: 6785785"] Don’t you think that my suggestion of supporting more than one way of playing would necessarily allow for more than one way of playing? To use different rules if you desire a shift toward X style of play? I think it’s far more important for beginning GMs and players to have solid guidance than to be told they can ditch the rules and do it all themselves. That they learn how to play according to the rules and establish a foundational understanding. I think the current rulebooks are really muddled in this regard. It’s not really that great an example because the game has actual rules that allow all those different approaches to play. That’s the intent of its design… and if that’s a design goal… if you want to allow multiple play experiences, you have to provide complete rules and guidance to help deliver that experience. If it didn’t have mech rules, then you wouldn’t be talking about how you can pilot a mech in the game. And so on. Now, RPGs are different and don’t need the amount of design that a videogame might in order to include a given play experience… but I don’t think what’s provided is anywhere near as robust as many often claim. Good thing no one’s suggesting such a thing for D&D. Yeah… why learn a game from the rulebooks? Again… this is just accepting the transfer of responsibility to another party. And while I think some of this is okay given the nature of RPGs… I don’t think the fundamentals should be among them. [/QUOTE]

Verification