Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ry" data-source="post: 3517084" data-attributes="member: 8314">Everybody has to agree to the rule for it to be used - the GM, as the organizer of the game, typically brings them to the table, rules are about universal agreement.&nbsp; Otherwise you get deadlock (&quot;Roll Reflex Save.&quot; &quot;No.&quot;)&nbsp; So yes, all people involved have to be &quot;OK&quot; with a ruleset to have a good time.&nbsp; But people can say they're &quot;OK&quot; with a ruleset, and abide by the rules, and still have a boring, uncomfortable time.&nbsp; With the same rules, people can say they're &quot;OK&quot; with a ruleset but actually be following something else entirely.&nbsp; I've had this experience when(nominally)&nbsp; playing D&amp;D - the DM looks at d20 rolls, thinks about the PCs and monsters as they've been presented so far, and declares results based on that instead of doing the math.&nbsp; If that experience was generally true of a system (i.e. people only had fun when a major rule was &quot;we're mostly ignoring the rules&quot;) I'd say that system was badly designed.&nbsp; I'd even say that in the face of the gamers that say &quot;We play that, and we have a blast!&quot;&nbsp; and I'd certainly say it to the GM that claimed the system was great while his players stuck to the game out of friendship or loyalty rather than fun.Best practices is about getting effective rules that deliver what a given group of gamers wants out of a game.&nbsp; There's lots of room for variety in there - but that's not the same as saying that every group is getting it right, or that every system gets it right for at least some group.&nbsp; The &quot;I'm OK, you're OK&quot; attitude that I take issue with is about this kind of scenario:System X is billed as dark horror kind of fantasy game.&nbsp; The setting has a lot of wizards that tend to cast magic every round of combat.&nbsp; Each time a caster casts a spell, there is a 10% chance that all PCs in the party turn into a bowl of green onions.&nbsp; This is just one example; the system has a pandemic of green-onion related lethal random events.Gamer A: System X is crappy; I tried to run a dark horror fantasy game and it just ended up silly.Gamer B: I like system X, because it's the magic system is really cinematic!&nbsp; I ran a dark fantasy / horror game and it was the bomb!Gamer A: Oh, come on.&nbsp; The author clearly had a green onion fetish, and it's ruined the game.&nbsp; Not to mention the lethality.Gamer B: Hey, if my group liked it, who are you to judge the game?Gamer C: I guess it all comes down to preferences.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ry, post: 3517084, member: 8314"] Everybody has to agree to the rule for it to be used - the GM, as the organizer of the game, typically brings them to the table, rules are about universal agreement. Otherwise you get deadlock ("Roll Reflex Save." "No.") So yes, all people involved have to be "OK" with a ruleset to have a good time. But people can say they're "OK" with a ruleset, and abide by the rules, and still have a boring, uncomfortable time. With the same rules, people can say they're "OK" with a ruleset but actually be following something else entirely. I've had this experience when(nominally) playing D&D - the DM looks at d20 rolls, thinks about the PCs and monsters as they've been presented so far, and declares results based on that instead of doing the math. If that experience was generally true of a system (i.e. people only had fun when a major rule was "we're mostly ignoring the rules") I'd say that system was badly designed. I'd even say that in the face of the gamers that say "We play that, and we have a blast!" and I'd certainly say it to the GM that claimed the system was great while his players stuck to the game out of friendship or loyalty rather than fun. Best practices is about getting effective rules that deliver what a given group of gamers wants out of a game. There's lots of room for variety in there - but that's not the same as saying that every group is getting it right, or that every system gets it right for at least some group. The "I'm OK, you're OK" attitude that I take issue with is about this kind of scenario: System X is billed as dark horror kind of fantasy game. The setting has a lot of wizards that tend to cast magic every round of combat. Each time a caster casts a spell, there is a 10% chance that all PCs in the party turn into a bowl of green onions. This is just one example; the system has a pandemic of green-onion related lethal random events. Gamer A: System X is crappy; I tried to run a dark horror fantasy game and it just ended up silly. Gamer B: I like system X, because it's the magic system is really cinematic! I ran a dark fantasy / horror game and it was the bomb! Gamer A: Oh, come on. The author clearly had a green onion fetish, and it's ruined the game. Not to mention the lethality. Gamer B: Hey, if my group liked it, who are you to judge the game? Gamer C: I guess it all comes down to preferences. [/QUOTE]

Verification