Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="howandwhy99" data-source="post: 6733647" data-attributes="member: 3192">It is literally true it must be part of the pattern designed. As I've said before, if something is not part of that game system, the rigorously balanced dynamic design the players are actually supposed to be playing, then it is up to the players. They still need to add material that is actually possible within the design, but color is an easy one. Incorrect suppositions made by the players is part of any game play - i.e. people engaged in code breaking.Random is not what matters. Repeating a code, a pattern is what matters. Dice rolls in D&D are not in the game to create randomness, but be a representation of actual variance in the design. And you know players are judging content based on encountering prior design. I think you just don't want to admit how RPG face to face and online have been played for decades. "We're pretty far underground in the mad wizards dungeon. And it gets tougher every level. I'm guessing those little guys over there are probably tougher than they look to make it down here."If anyone cared at all why some game constructs are more commonly persisting in some environments than others, than the stocking design matters. This directly feeds to thoughts we can abstract into "Where can my game construct persist?"Have you ever looked at the rules for stocking dungeons? Dungeons stock by level. As well as environment. All sorts of stuff is possible for different games. And yes, Gygax had all sorts of bad advice in the DMG.The altar needs to be designed to be in the game. So does the alien god, if it in any way affects what that alter can do, why it came about, etc. And pointers to where they constructs are located are in map keys. This is about artful interpretation, but I agree the early D&D game didn't reward roleplaying so much as killing and gaining treasure. That Fighters and Thieves are rewarded is obvious. Later XP was given for figuring out magic items even casting spells for the M-U. Clerics had it worse off, but can be rewarded for the clerics stuff which slowly came later in AD&D.Improvisation has no business by any referee in any game. And there are no such things as "resolution mechanics".Because there is no game deal to deal with, of course. Taking a piece in chess affects the game. Your example isn't referring to anything occurring in a game. You're referring to the obviously non-game Fiction from "storygames".Damage is hardly new to D&D.Craps is betting based upon players/betters code breaking the odds pattern of a 2d6 die roll. If you can figure out the odds, you can bet with greater regular success (or worse, if your into Forge dogma). It's gaming by deciphering a code like any other game. There's more to Craps, but honestly it looked kind of dull.The Player improvised a game effect that never referred to the game design. You made a judgement call without reference to anything. You didn't dig down to where get to where the player actually refers to the game design. And then measure. The effects sounds like the consequences were made up by the player too. Remember, to be any kind of game player the player is always referring to the game system or actually engaging with it, not a fiction. The actual game map (board, field of play, pattern, etc.) is the actual design being played - i.e. deciphered.Where is the balance? The game doesn't sound balanced in the first place. What is the effect? How effective is it compared to other effects in the game? This is balancing a new spell and you put it in 3 boxes - easy, average, hard. What are you juding from? And skills, i.e. "Checks" aren't game mechanics. Game mechanics are mathematical constructs. And your last question is again, "What happens when a player doesn't something that isn't covered by the rules?" I answered above. The rules in the books are suggestions, not a complete system (which is obvious to good designers who read them). A complete, balanced system - the code - needs to be in place before every campaign a DM runs. The Forge was one person's prejudicial philosophy used to shame people and rewrite game terminology. It shames anyone and everyone who plays games as activities for Pattern Recognition and Code Breaking and deludes them into thinking they are "shared expression".* Anyone who's played any game from Chess to Magic: The Gathering can gather that.*Notice you air quoting the basic act of playing a game in this thread title. IME, sandboxing is old school players try to remember what D&D was before it was taken from them and whitewashed over. The term comes from videogames though, so maybe there is some new cross over? As the game board is the actual mechanical design of the game, moving it inherently requires problem solving/code breaking to play it to objectives well. Remember, there is no such thing as fiction in a game! It is fiction which is orthogonal to game playing. You're completely backwards on why people play RPGs that those online inherently get, roleplaying has nothing at all to do with stories or character portrayal. CRPGs are really the same dynamic game board patterns only without referees.</blockquote>

Verification