NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FrogReaver" data-source="post: 9640737" data-attributes="member: 6795602"> <ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">What we agree on is that mechanics that can be ignored are not the same as mechanics that cannot be.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">What we don't agree on is that this necessitates a gameable space that is volatile/erratic/unintuitive.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I think 'black box' is an accurate description in the sense that the precise mechanics are at least initially hidden from players.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I don't agree with the implication that having mechanics hidden from players makes for a non-gameable or less gameable space.</li> </ul>So our agreement on that one difference about mechanics as tools vs mechanics as requirements doesn't support (or at least clearly support) these other conclusions you attribute to it.Note: I'm happy to discuss any of these things in more detail.Here's my biggest issue - you describe your preference with good adjectives and my preference with bad adjectives.  Maybe it's not intended, but it's there plain as day.  The very terms you choose to do your analysis in privileges your preferences.Note:  It's not just you doing this, others do as well, and those with my preferences often do the same toward yours.  But until we are all able to actually develop and use some neutral terminology then we aren't going to really get anywhere.  I will keep trying but I don't have high expectations for the results.This is a better description, but I'll note that the positive word choices about my game preferences are made in terms of feelings, whereas the benefits you listed for your preferences above were no feelings and thus more objective.  That's more privileging of your preferences.  It's okay, it's not just you or anyone else with views more similar to yours.  People with views similar to mine do the same.  But it makes real discourse next to impossible.First let me say I agree with this.  But it also goes both ways.  There's certain differences I've brought up that get trivialized and vice versa.  I think we all mostly agree these things are different, our discussions mostly turns on how the particulars are talked about (good adjectives vs bad, objectivity vs experiential) and which differences actually matter.Also this is a bit fascinating to me because in the torchbearer 2e example it was claimed to have the same kind of mechanic as wandering monster checks in D&D.  But as you note here the rest of the context really must be considered with that.</blockquote>

Verification