Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 9007232" data-attributes="member: 6785785">Says who? I play in plenty of games where the expectation is that we're bound by the rules. That rules will be binding isn't some kind of bizarre take... it's kind of the default expectation, I'd say. I agree with this. I don't think it's something that should necessarily be done on whim, but rather with consideration and input from all parties, but otherwise, yeah, people should change rules if they think it's for the best. I think the idea that this is not "remotely true" is pure hyperbole. Will the rules always prevent mistakes? No, of course not. But the idea that they help participants know what's expected of them and how something works certainly goes a long way to helping with that. Let's just set aside the idea of a game for a moment and apply what you're saying to traffic rules. Your idea breaks down real quick when we do that.Again, pure hyperbole. I know you don't like rules, but that doesn't make your opinion objective truth. It's not about holding the rules as sacrosanct. It's about expectations and how when you alter those, that can cause problems. You said earlier in the thread that trust comes from people being on the same page. That the acceptance of the rules by the participants is what makes them binding. That's totally true. But once accepted, I don't think it's bizarre to then proceed playing with those expectations in mind. That this is laughably, absurdly, obviously false seems like you're either trying to be provocative, or you're not really thinking it through.What happens when you have to make a decision that prioritizes one over the other? I mean, this idea accepts that the experience of playing a game for the players is different than the "experience" of the characters in the fiction. I don't think that can be argued. So, accepting that, sometimes there may be conflict between the fiction and the game. What do you do in those moments?</blockquote>

Verification