Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="howandwhy99" data-source="post: 6727387" data-attributes="member: 3192">Pretending is not a game like running is not a game. Yet running in races at the Olympic Games is gaming. Why? Because they preset the pattern on the field, start the timer, and enable the runners to run in a game. In fact, most competitive games are race games of one type or another.Similarly, pretending in D&D is a game for the players because they competing and/or cooperating with other players and themselves to accomplish ends within a predefined game - the pattern preset behind the screen. Player can test and better their fantasizing because it is done within a game.Sufficiently defined means that spell's design has taken into account all elements within the design of the game. If there were a table and paper in the game, then they had to have been designed prior to placement. They shouldn't simply have Saving Throws either, but AC, HP, STR, CON, DEX, Alignment, and the rest.Yeah, dictionaries can be poor at learning how people are using terms. Or in how they present those definitions. Your definition hardly helps anyone when attempting to understand what a game is. Something that amuses can hardly be considered complete.The players were playing a broken game, but chose to play it broken. That's hardly fun. You claimed it was a functional game just after demonstrating it was not. That they had to stop the game, improvise a solution, one that did not fix the game back into a system, and apparently led to the whole going done in flames, does not prove your point that improvisation is part of games. And check out the article on the 81 underarm bowling incident. The action was covered by the rules and perfectly legitimate. It's simply no one had figured it out before.And I said fictional positioning doesn't occur in D&D because of the map as gameboard the DM uses behind the screen. In fact, it never occurs in any game. So I have clearly shown D&D is, or at least was by the rules, one of "those" games meaning an actual game....But you know what, of course the game is limited. It occurs to me you think anything and everything anyone actually does can be part of playing D&D. They are limited to attempted actions of a playing piece. And Players can only ever move pieces on the game board via the referee. By rule they can't get up, move around the screen, and slide a token or whatever else is tracking location around the maze. That's clearly not allowed by the rules, so, like any game, actions taken outside of a game aren't part of it.So I'm trying to help you out. You said you don't have anything for these elements in your games and the players wanted them. My suggestions are all possible for game systems to include in your game. To your specific questions,Culture is behavior, so technically all the rules governing pieces and the board are being referred to. For hobgoblins specifically their behavior can be treated as a whole with a single statblock, just like any unit's. It is an aggregate, but then you can talk about how "all hobgoblins" behave. Marriage is a contract by my understanding, something well established in the history of game design already, but regardless define what marriage is in game terms and assign it to hobgoblins. Put it on an appropriate table for random rolling too. If creatures don't have marriage rites, they don't have them.Game pieces are in large part defined by their behaviors. Plot all of those on the Alignment Chart according to design per alignment type. Is it lawful, neutral, or chaotic? This has nothing to do with "really existing human beings". This is a game. You only ever need to cover its design. Once you know all the behaviors in the game assign them to pieces with an alignment score. For all non-PC pieces this will cover their behavior. It can be further refined by other stats like intelligence, wisdom, charisma, strength, constitution, dexterity, % in lair, morale, loyalty, and so on. All of these define, limit, what these elements can do.You're joking. Stocking a dungeon according to a game design pattern is a time honored tradition of D&D. What are you talking about?Let's not talk in conceits. What you are saying is you are creating an imagined narrative with other people. Which is why you don't want or have any use for the vast body of design suggestion in our hobby which amount to rules for a boardgame behind a screen. You want rules for who gets to resolve a conflict between two conflicting storytellers' narratives.  Those are story "games", not roleplaying games and nothing remotely enabling players to play a game - to decipher the pattern, to actually achieve game states in such, and score points. To win or to lose.</blockquote>

Verification