Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="howandwhy99" data-source="post: 6662040" data-attributes="member: 3192">I think we can agree to disagree on the first point. As to the reading of the MM, DMG, any adventure being run, etc., I agree. I was totally thinking of stuff happening at the table. I mean, we would need some scientific studies and lots of honest polling data to really get an idea of "which is the most", but gut check? Yeah, I think anything that adds up to peeking behind the screen is more common. But that is unequivocally breaking the rules of the game. At least the one's we use.As to the other stuff, games don't really belong to genres. What you're talking about is act of playing a game. Only using expectations from other games to lead you. Of course, there are groups of games with design similarities. For example. When playing any of the Rails games, e.g. Australian Rails, Martian Rails, it's obvious they are largely similar in experience. But trying to win a game in the line never played before by using strategies successful from another rail game is perilous. Well, that is unless the player also doesn't actually play the current game. IOW, actually engage in the deciphering of the game (required of any gameplay), to spot clues in the different design instead using only another game's design to formulate strategy. Still, due to similarity, if you're good at one, you'll likely have some immediate ability playing the other.</blockquote>