Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Campbell" data-source="post: 6099270" data-attributes="member: 16586">One of the most interesting elements of RPG* play is that the rules of play are not really defined by the text of the game, but by a combination of interpretation, social mores, and player consensus (where the GM is also considered a player). This makes rules drift between games easier. Granted some elements can be lifted easier than others, and some games are more resistant to drift. Elements like "Say yes or roll the dice", "let it ride", failing forward, and declaration of intent along with task declaration while as much rules of play as character generation and task/conflict resolution rules are more suitable to drift. On the other hand drifting elements like Burning Wheel's progression system that encourages players to take on tasks they will likely fail in are less so without dramatically rewriting portions of the game text, although they will still dramatically effect play. I know some will disagree with me that the rules of the game extend beyond task resolution, but I say bunk. The role and responsibilities of GMs and players at table, the goals of play, player priorities, and other "metagame" priorities are as much a part of the game rules as Power Attack. When a game is silent on these issues it just means it expects player groups to establish that element itself. *Actually true for most games, but since most are competitive endeavors little drift tends to happen. I do have experience where unspoken rules for attack priority have made games like Risk play dramatically different from table to table though.</blockquote>

Verification