Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 9624639" data-attributes="member: 42582">This is false.Imagine a dynamic puzzle game, where the state of the solution evolves, in some algorithmic fashion, based on the current state of the player's attempt to solve it. The puzzle is solved when the player's solution converges on, or anticipates, the next iteration of the puzzle state. I'm not especially well-versed in code-breaking, but an example of what I've got in mind might include matching true letters to code letters in deciphering an enigma code.There is no assignment of true letters to code letters that is and was always correct - that's the whole point of enigma as a code machine!But that doesn't mean that the answer is no independent of desires, preferences or creations. What it does mean is that your imagination about the relationship between starting conditions, inference rules and solutions is too narrow.See, here you seem to betray your narrowness of imagination about RPGing: because all you can focus on (i) player declarations (so-called "narrative mechanics") as opposed to action resolution and consequences, and (ii) decisions, as opposed to realisations.It's the great achievement of RPG design since Prince Valiant in the late 1980s to have identified ways of approaching RPGing that don't depend solely on "The GM says, then the player says" - that is, that are different from round-robin storytelling.</blockquote>