Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 9008765" data-attributes="member: 42582">Well, speaking from both experience and from theory (the theory of statutory interpretation), there are two sources of uncertainty in rules: uncertainty as to reference, and uncertainty as to interaction.AW has almost no interacting rules. There are some (eg things like Use Weird in place of Hot when Seducing/Manipulating), but these are normally pretty straightforward. It does not approach wargame-like complexity.And when its rules make references, they're typically either to participants, or to the fiction.The contrast for me is with a system like, say, RM or RQ or AD&D or 4e, where the rules have lots of interaction. In RM, for instance, how does your parry defence relate to your initiative result?; or in RQ, Can you parry and attack? Parry and dodge?; or in AD&D, From what segment in the round do you start counting the casting time of a spell?; or, in 4e, When does a creature become your ally? (the 4e Dark Sun rules for defiling have a weird clause in them which has no purpose except to handle this issue).And the flipside of these rules-interactions is that the fiction tends not to be referred to in the rules, or their relationship to the fiction becomes far more uncertain.Anyway, that's how I've been thinking about it. What sorts of uncertainties do you find coming up in AW?</blockquote>