Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Enrahim2" data-source="post: 8992296" data-attributes="member: 7039850">No D&amp;D version  require ad-hoc game-design. It require however a lot of judgement calls with regard to what should be the outcome of various situations. Many people by their own preference decide they want to make rules for themselves to help them make such judgement calls, or as a medium to communicate a piece of their mind to the players so they can better predict the outcome of actions they take, and make more informed decissions. It is hence a matter of choice.Similarly fate do also require judgment calls. For instance do experienced sailor in a world filled with pirates help with shooting someone in the face? And there are clearly room for and people interested in making new rules on top of that system as well.I think the qualitative difference between fate and D&amp;D doesn't lie in if new rules are  required or the absence or presence of a need for a clear system for how to make judgment calls for things rules don't cover. I think is that the qualitative difference is that those situations that do require judgment calls in D&amp;D are of a kind that it is easier to make rules for that have similar &quot;shape&quot; as the existing rules. Hence making new rules are both more inviting, and it is easier to view the system as flawed when you recognize how easy it is to find such &quot;gaps&quot; that is easily filled by rules.However having judgment calls that that is easy to fill with rules doesn't mean that the game is harder to judge or give more &quot;power&quot; to the judge, than a game where the judgment calls is of a type that is not easily filled by rules. Indeed it might be harder to make good judgment calls when they have to be done in relation to an all-encompasing abstract rules framework rather than just relying on your everyday experience as a human being.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Enrahim2, post: 8992296, member: 7039850"] No D&D version [I] require[/I] ad-hoc game-design. It require however a lot of judgement calls with regard to what should be the outcome of various situations. Many people by their own preference decide they want to make rules for themselves to help them make such judgement calls, or as a medium to communicate a piece of their mind to the players so they can better predict the outcome of actions they take, and make more informed decissions. It is hence a matter of choice. Similarly fate do also require judgment calls. For instance do [I]experienced sailor [/I]in a world filled with pirates help with shooting someone in the face? And there are clearly room for and people interested in making new rules on top of that system as well. I think the qualitative difference between fate and D&D doesn't lie in if new rules are [I] required[/I] or the absence or presence of a need for a clear system for how to make judgment calls for things rules don't cover. I think is that the qualitative difference is that those situations that do require judgment calls in D&D are of a kind that it is easier to make rules for that have similar "shape" as the existing rules. Hence making new rules are both more inviting, and it is easier to view the system as flawed when you recognize how easy it is to find such "gaps" that is easily filled by rules. However having judgment calls that that is easy to fill with rules doesn't mean that the game is harder to judge or give more "power" to the judge, than a game where the judgment calls is of a type that is not easily filled by rules. Indeed it might be harder to make good judgment calls when they have to be done in relation to an all-encompasing abstract rules framework rather than just relying on your everyday experience as a human being. [/QUOTE]

Verification