Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 8984209" data-attributes="member: 71699">Other than formalists, of course. I go by what I read in games studies papers and forums discussing games. Often I read folk talking about a game as if there is a right way to play and other ways don't count as playing the game (the formalist position, essentially.) They often also seem to fail to notice the benefits of considering incorrect or abnormal ways to play.It's true that there has been an increasingly strong voice given to the view that there are multiple "right" ways to play TTRPGs. Formalist positions seem more common in relation to the rules of sports. Perhaps because of the stakes involved.In discussion on rules and meaning there's certainly a notion that it ought to be possible to not follow the rule, but what of constitutive rules?Constitutive rules are necessitated in order to constitute the activity, not because there are choices as to conduct. Without the rule, there would be no conduct that counted as the constituted activity.What counts then as incorrect play, if anything? It's so far been suggested that it is where norms prevail in a group and a participant transgresses those norms. Based on their prevailing norms, the group sees what the constituted activity ought to look like. When they see something that does not look like that, they call it incorrect.For a constitutive rule - where the activity did not preexist the rule - how did anyone know the proper way? I think they base it on how they have followed previous rules, and the designer's advice if any.From there, it can become hard for them to see that incorrect play is not always a case of the transgressor seeing their "proper" way to play the rule, and playing it improperly. What they call incorrect play includes the case where their supposed transgressor sees a different proper way to play the rule, and plays it - that way - properly. This is what I was getting at. The implications are useful, for example both aspects (norms to rely on, rule novation) facilitate game design.</blockquote>

Verification