Let's talk about "plot", "story", and "play to find out."

[Micah Sweet]

No but it makes it pretty bloody useless to try and get consensus on. It is what it is.

Oh sure. You'll never get consensus on a public forum.

 

[Fenris-77]

Oh sure. You'll never get consensus on a public forum.

I don't need consensus, only submission. Assimilation is inevitable. We are Borg.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I don't need consensus, only submission. Assimilation is inevitable. We are Borg.

Your gaming and table group will adapt to service us.

 

[TwoSix]

Your gaming and table group will adapt to service us.

Why railroad when you can Borg cube?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Why railroad when you can Borg cube?

Best ride in town. Cross the galaxy.

 

[thefutilist]

I don't like the term Free form. Every Free form game has system mechanics, principles, agendas and best practices, even if they aren't explicit and formalised.

 

[hawkeyefan]

They're not sure why, IMO, because it's a preference. People feel good about things they like, and bad about things they don't. But feeling that some rules are "in-your-face" and others aren't is obviously subjective.

Yes but perhaps people can actually stop for a moment and consider these things, no? Sometimes, it may indeed be difficult to explain why we like or dislike something. Other times, though, it’s easy as hell.

Sometimes it takes someone asking about these things to really consider them, and to do so thoughtfully. I know that is often the case with me.

I don't like the term Free form. Every Free form game has system mechanics, principles, agendas and best practices, even if they aren't explicit and formalised.

Yes! Even freeform RP likely has some kind of rules or structure in place. I mean, even if it just defaults to like basic etiquette, that’s still something.

Obviously, as has been stated, what amount people consider to be preferable to them will depend on the person. But what are the reasons? What makes someone feel the way they do?

 

[Fenris-77]

Oddly, or perhaps not, I find FKR as a design idea intensely frustrating. I love a lot of low weight games, but FKR makes me want to kick babies. The first time you're playing a 'modern' game and you know more about subject X that your GM you are quite likely to hit the eject button. IMO anyway, I'll admit to not having experimented with it much as even the idea leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

So the rules are necessary, they provide an essential structure to things.

I don't actually think they are strictly necessary, just helpful. They're tools.

What makes a rule “in your face”? I’m not sure what that would be based on what folks have said regarding this topic. There are lots of mechanics that seem incredibly in your face and game oriented to me that others accept as necessary, but which are not in fact necessary.

I mean, it has been explained to you several times already, even in this thread.

 

[pemerton]

Games with detailed, exception-based rules (I'm thinking of D&D spells here as a specific example) exist to establish concepts within the fictional setting that grant the setting its own authority, a presence that exists outside the desires of both players and GM. Even if they're rarely referenced (like a host of spells are rarely to never used in play), they exist as a framework to establish what does happen when they are evoked, outside of the current desires of the participants. They exist to act as a check on "narrative contrivance", which my current thesis is the real bane of those who are interested in simulationist-style play.

Transferring authority to the setting via rules (most especially rules that model diegetic elements) is the check on GMs and players creating new narrative elements based on what's currently compelling. Creating new narrative "just because" that wasn't properly generated is what sim players usually object to.

But can't the GM just introduce (eg) a new spell, and then say that the NPC (or whomever) learned it via spell research?

I mean, classic D&D modules are not devoid of new spells and effects. And there are modern D&D products that introduce new spells, and new character types which mix-and-match spells in different ways. I might reason that, say, "Energy Drain" is a cleric-only spell (because I'm working from the AD&D PHB, where it's the reverse of Restoration) but then discover that the GM has introduced the MU Energy Drain spell from one of those classic modules (G3, maybe?).