Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
GM fiat - an illustration
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="FrogReaver" data-source="post: 9635376" data-attributes="member: 6795602"><p>Well I don’t think knowledge or lack thereof about how something works makes that something arbitrary vs not. </p><p></p><p>But I would agree that knowledge can provide a lever one can at times manipulate. </p><p></p><p>That of course assumes players don’t have principles that often restrict them from using that lever. (You see this in d&d games where some players know trolls need to be killed by fire but they make up actions with character knowledge only, or when they know a particular choice is not the best but they do it anyway for roleplay reasons. Etc.)</p><p></p><p>And for narr games, they have their own explicit principles that will also get in the way of players pulling such levers. </p><p></p><p>The major difference of opinion really being that because narr games make their principles explicit in the game text that they can include those principles when talking about gamefulness as if they were part of the game itself, whereas the opposite opinion is rendered for principles (no matter how binding) that are not explicitly part of the game text. </p><p></p><p>My take would be that principles no matter the source must be included in any gamefulness or gameful state analysis. That’s because principles function as constraints on what would be the best move, and thus limit the space of potential gameful moves.</p><p></p><p>In some sense this is an argument that a game like d&d as written is not a complete game. That in order to be complete we must take into account any real constraints on the actual move space at playtime. </p><p></p><p>An example, a friend is much better at basketball than me. To make our games more interesting we make a rule that he cannot use his dominant hand to touch the ball, and if he does it’s a turnover. Maybe that’s best called a house rule. But regardless, when it comes to actual play that houserule is part of the game we are playing.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="FrogReaver, post: 9635376, member: 6795602"] Well I don’t think knowledge or lack thereof about how something works makes that something arbitrary vs not. But I would agree that knowledge can provide a lever one can at times manipulate. That of course assumes players don’t have principles that often restrict them from using that lever. (You see this in d&d games where some players know trolls need to be killed by fire but they make up actions with character knowledge only, or when they know a particular choice is not the best but they do it anyway for roleplay reasons. Etc.) And for narr games, they have their own explicit principles that will also get in the way of players pulling such levers. The major difference of opinion really being that because narr games make their principles explicit in the game text that they can include those principles when talking about gamefulness as if they were part of the game itself, whereas the opposite opinion is rendered for principles (no matter how binding) that are not explicitly part of the game text. My take would be that principles no matter the source must be included in any gamefulness or gameful state analysis. That’s because principles function as constraints on what would be the best move, and thus limit the space of potential gameful moves. In some sense this is an argument that a game like d&d as written is not a complete game. That in order to be complete we must take into account any real constraints on the actual move space at playtime. An example, a friend is much better at basketball than me. To make our games more interesting we make a rule that he cannot use his dominant hand to touch the ball, and if he does it’s a turnover. Maybe that’s best called a house rule. But regardless, when it comes to actual play that houserule is part of the game we are playing. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
GM fiat - an illustration
Top