Falling off the 4ed bandwagon

[UngainlyTitan]

I disagree. Rule sets play large roles in determining the kind and type of creativity by which the tools provided by the rule sets can be used. As a silly example, chess allows for no creativity as concerns piece movement.

joe b.

Chess is not DM'ed and any game that is not DM'ed is played by an agreed set of rules. Any game that is DM'ed allows for things to happen that are not covered by the rules if the DM and players are willing to work that way.

rpg were invented by people and referees getting creative with the rules and play of a wargame.

 

[Garthanos]

I'll argue that one can be almost inherently more creative with something that has a less of a casting time than one can be creative with exactly the same something that has a longer casting time.

Well compose an argument for it? so far as I can tell you have made a fairly bald assertion with nothing backing it. Break it down so the premise, assumptions and conclusion reveal themselves.

you could use this as a starting point:

1) adaptable use of abilities are most likely to be required in emergencies
2) emergencies have time constraints
3) so abilities with less time to prepare/use are mostly likly to be used adaptably.

 

[jgbrowning]

Chess is not DM'ed and any game that is not DM'ed is played by an agreed set of rules. Any game that is DM'ed allows for things to happen that are not covered by the rules if the DM and players are willing to work that way.

rpg were invented by people and referees getting creative with the rules and play of a wargame.

The rule of "This game is played with a DM" influences the creativity of a rules set, does it not? Is your argument that all rpgs are equally creative? If that's not what you mean, you agree with my saying that rules-sets do influence creativity and that some are more creative-inducing than others.

I think rules-sets massively influence creativity - that's one of the reason why there are so many different types of them, IMO.

joe b.

 

[jgbrowning]

Well compose an argument for it? so far as I can tell you have made a fairly bald assertion with nothing backing it. Break it down so the premise, assumptions and conclusion reveal themselves.

you could use this as a starting point:

1) adaptable use of abilities are most likely to be required in emergencies
2) emergencies have time constraints
3) so abilities with less time to prepare/use are mostly likly to be used adaptably.

I don't think I need an argument for the obvious.

Two exact spells: one cast in 1 round, one cast in 10 minutes. Which one allows for more creative uses? In what situation could the 10 minute version be more creative than the 1 round version. Even if one says, "With the added time restraint, the 10 min version means that people have to be more creative to find it useful," I'd reply with, "The guy with the 1 round version can say 'I'm going to wait 9 minutes and 9 rounds before casting the spell so I'll be as exactly as creative as the longer cast variety in my using of the spell."

It's the gaming equivalent of "Anything you can do, I can do better. I can do anything better than you."

The more utility something possesses, the greater probability it will be creatively used.

joe b.

 

[Garthanos]

I don't think I need an argument for the obvious.



The more utility something possesses, the greater probability it will be creatively used.

Something useful under more conditions is more likely to not need to be used creatively.

 

[jgbrowning]

Something useful under more conditions is more likely to not need to be used creatively.

Something that is useful under more conditions can have restraints put upon it by the user to exactly mimic the thing that cannot be used under as many conditions and thereby contains all the potential creativity of that restraint within it.

Just. Stop.

joe b.

 

[Garthanos]

Something that is useful under more conditions can have restraints put upon it by the user to exactly mimic the thing that cannot be used under as many conditions and thereby contains all the potential creativity of that restraint within it.
joe b.

The self restrained usage is not an example of creativity inducing conditions ...

 

[Garthanos]

I can use my plant growth spell to make any plant available grow at 1000x the speed ... he has an oak growth spell and can use it to make any oak available. It is a restraint.

The person restrained in this case by plant type has to find a way to introduce his plant type in to the scenario... planting a bunch of them around his castle... promoting them through a religion he controls. (Carrying a handful of acorns around in his pocket).

"Necessity is the mother of invention"

 

[jgbrowning]

The self restrained usage is not an example of creativity.

False.

Any point in this?

joe b.

 

[jgbrowning]

I can use my plant growth spell to make any plant available grow at 1000x the speed ... he has an oak growth spell and can use it to make any oak available. It is a restraint.

The person restrained in this case by plant type has to find a way to introduce his plant type in to the scenario... planting a bunch of them around his castle... promoting them through a religion he controls. (Carrying a handful around in his pocket).

The unrestrained person can do the same thing the restrained person can, therefore the unrestrained can be just as creative as the restrained in addition to being able to be more creative in ways the restrained cannot.

The unrestrained can say, I won't use my plant growth on anything but Oaks. Oh lookie! I have no oaks. Now I must do all this "creative" stuff to use my spell.

I don't believe wish is the spell with the least possible creativity in the game just because it has the most utility.

joe b.