Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Snarf Zagyg" data-source="post: 9034009" data-attributes="member: 7023840">Your points are all well-taken; I don't disagree with any of them, although I might quibble a little. I do think that that while the four points you list are accurate, I don't think that they are mutually exclusive. For example, many FKR tables might operate with all four elements in place; to the extent that one, or more, is not firmly in place, then there is greater need for the others to step up.All that said, I think that one issue that is often overlooked in theory but that happens in practice is, for lack of a better term, the participants. By this, I will go back to the old saying about Everway- that it would have been a success, if only Jonathan Tweet could DM every game.Different people have different skill levels and different comfort levels- and that can also vary over time. I watched a so-called FKR session on-line (I won't embarrass the person by linking to it) and it was ... painful to me. It was basically just a terrible AD&amp;D session. One of the problems with discussing FKR in a real sense beyond the basics is that you keep ending up at the same point - that because so much is crowded into the second-order design (what is happening at the table) it is difficult to discuss a lot of the issues when we are so used to discussing rules design.Or, put another way, this is why Gygax and Arneson had such a falling out over producing a written ruleset. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Snarf Zagyg, post: 9034009, member: 7023840"] Your points are all well-taken; I don't disagree with any of them, although I might quibble a little. I do think that that while the four points you list are accurate, I don't think that they are mutually exclusive. For example, many FKR tables might operate with all four elements in place; to the extent that one, or more, is not firmly in place, then there is greater need for the others to step up. All that said, I think that one issue that is often overlooked in theory but that happens in practice is, for lack of a better term, [I]the participants. [/I]By this, I will go back to the old saying about Everway- that it would have been a success, if only Jonathan Tweet could DM every game. Different people have different skill levels and different comfort levels- and that can also vary over time. I watched a so-called FKR session on-line (I won't embarrass the person by linking to it) and it was ... painful to me. It was basically just a terrible AD&D session. One of the problems with discussing FKR in a real sense beyond the basics is that you keep ending up at the same point - that because so much is crowded into the second-order design (what is happening at the table) it is difficult to discuss a lot of the issues when we are so used to discussing [I]rules design[/I]. Or, put another way, this is why Gygax and Arneson had such a falling out over producing a written ruleset. ;) [/QUOTE]

Verification