Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 4566039" data-attributes="member: 18280">What you are talking about here is what, recently, I defined as &quot;smart play&quot; vs. &quot;satisfying play&quot;.&nbsp; &quot;Smart play&quot; is whatever the rules encourage (and isn't necessarily what the rules seem to encourage, or what the game designers think that the rules encourage), whereas &quot;satisfying play&quot; is what makes a player want to come to the table/field/whatever, again and again.In a well designed game, smart play leads to satisfying play, so that following the rules of the game/using the reward structure of the game tends to make the game satisfying for all concerned.&nbsp; Certainly, a well designed game is not one in which you can only have satisfying play by working against the rules/reward structure.There is no edition of D&amp;D IMHO wherein the rules/reward structure actually rewards you for wantonly killing other PCs.&nbsp; In fact, in most cases, inter-party bickering is the surest way to a TPK.&nbsp; IME, at least.However, a game with multiple parties can certainly enjoy competition against ofther parties.&nbsp; Even when the same players are part of multiple parties.&nbsp; And, in games where not everyone is playing together all of the time, reaching certain &quot;milestones&quot; first can be a kind of competition -- finding the way to a lost sublevel of a megadungeon, for example.Many D&amp;D games, OTOH, are competitive in that the players (through their PCs) are competing against artificial constructs (monsters and NPCs).&nbsp; This is no different than observing that, while a video game designer can include &quot;insta kills&quot; in a game, thus always &quot;winning&quot;, it is the situation within the game world that the player is actually competing against.&nbsp; The game designer, like the DM, has to work to ensure that this competition is both challenging enough to be meaningful, without being so challenging as to be unfun.All IMHO, of course.&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />RC</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Raven Crowking, post: 4566039, member: 18280"] What you are talking about here is what, recently, I defined as "smart play" vs. "satisfying play". "Smart play" is whatever the [I][B]rules[/B][/I] encourage (and isn't necessarily what the rules [I][B]seem to [/B][/I]encourage, or what the game designers [I][B]think[/B][/I] that the rules encourage), whereas "satisfying play" is what makes a player want to come to the table/field/whatever, again and again. In a well designed game, smart play leads to satisfying play, so that following the rules of the game/using the reward structure of the game tends to make the game satisfying for all concerned. Certainly, a well designed game is not one in which you can only have satisfying play by working [I][B]against[/B][/I] the rules/reward structure. There is no edition of D&D IMHO wherein the rules/reward structure [i][b]actually rewards you[/b][/i][b][/b] for wantonly killing other PCs. In fact, in most cases, inter-party bickering is the surest way to a TPK. IME, at least. However, a game with multiple parties can certainly enjoy competition against ofther parties. Even when the same players are part of multiple parties. And, in games where not everyone is playing together all of the time, reaching certain "milestones" first can be a kind of competition -- finding the way to a lost sublevel of a megadungeon, for example. Many D&D games, OTOH, are competitive in that the players (through their PCs) are competing against artificial constructs (monsters and NPCs). This is no different than observing that, while a video game designer can include "insta kills" in a game, thus always "winning", it is [I][B]the situation within the game world[/B][/I] that the player is actually competing against. The game designer, like the DM, has to work to ensure that this competition is both challenging enough to be meaningful, without being so challenging as to be unfun. All IMHO, of course. ;) RC [/QUOTE]

Verification