Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 4047769" data-attributes="member: 42582">Lurker37, your post is interesting, but it does contain this assertion which is open to dispute. In the sort of play I am trying to articulat in my posts, (i) the action resolution and character build mechanics are not models of anything, and (ii) talk of &quot;player's experiences in the gameworld&quot; is an unhelpful confusion of two distinct things: the PCs' experience in the gameworld (which accord with the physics of that imaginary world, which physics are not modelled by any rule of the game); and the players' experience of the game (which happens in the real world and is not modelled by any rule of the game).In the sort of approach to the rules I am trying to articulate, the PCs are not immune to sprains or deadly falls. It's just that they never suffer them unless a player him- or herself specfies this to be so of his or her PC (because the rules, including the action resolution mechanics, do not grant anyone but the player of the PC the authority to narrate such an event into the gameworld).You seem to be equating &quot;internal consistency within the game(world?)&quot; with &quot;having all gameworld events be the actual, or at least theoretically possible, outcome of the action resolution and character build mechanics&quot;. That equation does not hold true for all approaches to play, and detriment to the game will not necessarily follow from such play.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 4047769, member: 42582"] Lurker37, your post is interesting, but it does contain this assertion which is open to dispute. In the sort of play I am trying to articulat in my posts, (i) the action resolution and character build mechanics are not models of anything, and (ii) talk of "player's experiences in the gameworld" is an unhelpful confusion of two distinct things: the PCs' experience in the gameworld (which accord with the physics of that imaginary world, which physics are not modelled by any rule of the game); and the players' experience of the game (which happens in the real world and is not modelled by any rule of the game). In the sort of approach to the rules I am trying to articulate, the PCs are not immune to sprains or deadly falls. It's just that they never suffer them unless a player him- or herself specfies this to be so of his or her PC (because the rules, including the action resolution mechanics, do not grant anyone but the player of the PC the authority to narrate such an event into the gameworld). You seem to be equating "internal consistency within the game(world?)" with "having all gameworld events be the actual, or at least theoretically possible, outcome of the action resolution and character build mechanics". That equation does not hold true for all approaches to play, and detriment to the game will not necessarily follow from such play. [/QUOTE]

Verification