Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Mearls' Legends and Lore: Miniatures Madness
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 5476543" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p>Yeah, well, Czege's 'principle' is no principle at all. A principle is something which is universally applicable and elucidates or arises from some deeper structural or conceptual level. All Czege is doing is stating a preference. It is no more a principle than that the players in my game like to play dwarves.</p><p></p><p>Personally I just think that your insistence that somehow having vague and ill-defined rules adds something to the game is just wrong. Systematic rules are simply another arrow in the DM's quiver. They allow the narrative to focus on what is actually important. Instead of it being necessary for the players to bargain over when and if they have cover they simply know the answer in 95% of all situations. They can STILL ask. The DM can STILL provide every bit of 'color' he could before. In fact by making a situation exceptional he can bring focus onto that unique element of the game at that time. </p><p></p><p>The problem with vague rules is one of two things happens. Either a player uses the vagueness assertively by maintaining each situation should be favorable to him, or the player lacks that assertiveness and simply ignores said game element entirely. In either case when it becomes really significant the game has to pause while the DM justifies his ruling. </p><p></p><p>I can't tell you how many friggin times we had to have the perpetual AD&D argument about whether or not the rogue had some shadows to hide in and when or if he was able to backstab. UGH! This was particularly egregious because it was a key character mechanical class benefit which the player was going to rely on fairly heavily. These kinds of things NEED to have unambiguous mechanics, otherwise you either have endless attempts at abuse or players that simply won't be bothered to use that benefit at all. </p><p></p><p>Nothing is lost by having additional tools available to the DM, like a simple mechanical way to determine cover in most situations. My players are MUCH more likely to use all of their interesting class abilities etc in 4e than they ever were before. I have lost nothing and gained much.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 5476543, member: 82106"] Yeah, well, Czege's 'principle' is no principle at all. A principle is something which is universally applicable and elucidates or arises from some deeper structural or conceptual level. All Czege is doing is stating a preference. It is no more a principle than that the players in my game like to play dwarves. Personally I just think that your insistence that somehow having vague and ill-defined rules adds something to the game is just wrong. Systematic rules are simply another arrow in the DM's quiver. They allow the narrative to focus on what is actually important. Instead of it being necessary for the players to bargain over when and if they have cover they simply know the answer in 95% of all situations. They can STILL ask. The DM can STILL provide every bit of 'color' he could before. In fact by making a situation exceptional he can bring focus onto that unique element of the game at that time. The problem with vague rules is one of two things happens. Either a player uses the vagueness assertively by maintaining each situation should be favorable to him, or the player lacks that assertiveness and simply ignores said game element entirely. In either case when it becomes really significant the game has to pause while the DM justifies his ruling. I can't tell you how many friggin times we had to have the perpetual AD&D argument about whether or not the rogue had some shadows to hide in and when or if he was able to backstab. UGH! This was particularly egregious because it was a key character mechanical class benefit which the player was going to rely on fairly heavily. These kinds of things NEED to have unambiguous mechanics, otherwise you either have endless attempts at abuse or players that simply won't be bothered to use that benefit at all. Nothing is lost by having additional tools available to the DM, like a simple mechanical way to determine cover in most situations. My players are MUCH more likely to use all of their interesting class abilities etc in 4e than they ever were before. I have lost nothing and gained much. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Mearls' Legends and Lore: Miniatures Madness
Top