Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 9002786" data-attributes="member: 6696971">Do we all agree that there is a difference between &quot;may&quot; and &quot;must?&quot;&nbsp; A difference both conceptually and in what arises downstream of the implication of a governing &quot;may&quot; vs a governing &quot;must.&quot;Because it seems to me an enormous amount of virtual ink can be saved if we can all just affirm that we cannot help but agree with the reality that (a) these two things are inherently quite different from each other and (b) the experiences that arise downstream of inhabiting a space governed by one vs the other is quite different.When it comes to GM control, &quot;the GM may elect to do thing x, y, z (on and on) at their discretion&quot; vs &quot;the GM must do thing x, y, z (on and on)...full stop...and everyone knows it&quot; creates a very different play experience for all participants at the table, GM and Player alike.&nbsp; I mean...this community knows this.&nbsp; It has a sharp (and biting!) instinct for this.&nbsp; The 4e Edition Wars and the fallout for 5e design were both, in no small part, a reaction to the deep understanding of the significant contrast between &quot;a GM-facing may&quot; vs &quot;a table-facing must.&quot;EDIT - [USER=71699]@clearstream[/USER] , we cross-posted.&nbsp; So to be clear:&nbsp; (i) it looks like you agree with my statements above about rule 0/hacking and (ii) you don't believe that AW Custom Moves are hacking and therefore the person who I was responding to either (a) wasn't responding to your own statements or (b) didn't have your position correct?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Manbearcat, post: 9002786, member: 6696971"] Do we all agree that there is a difference between "may" and "must?" A difference both conceptually and in what arises downstream of the implication of a governing "may" vs a governing "must." Because it seems to me an enormous amount of virtual ink can be saved if we can all just affirm that we cannot help but agree with the reality that (a) these two things are inherently quite different from each other and (b) the experiences that arise downstream of inhabiting a space governed by one vs the other is quite different. When it comes to GM control, "the GM may elect to do thing x, y, z (on and on) at their discretion" vs "the GM must do thing x, y, z (on and on)...full stop...and everyone knows it" creates a very different play experience for all participants at the table, GM and Player alike. I mean...this community knows this. It has a sharp (and biting!) instinct for this. The 4e Edition Wars and the fallout for 5e design were both, in no small part, a reaction to the deep understanding of the significant contrast between "[I]a GM-facing [/I][B][I]may[/I][/B]" vs "[I]a table-facing [B]must[/B].[/I]" EDIT - [USER=71699]@clearstream[/USER] , we cross-posted. So to be clear: (i) it looks like you agree with my statements above about rule 0/hacking and (ii) you don't believe that AW Custom Moves are hacking and therefore the person who I was responding to either (a) wasn't responding to your own statements or (b) didn't have your position correct? [/QUOTE]

Verification