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
*TTRPGs General
Monte Cook on what rules are for
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="pemerton" data-source="post: 5715655" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>In his latest <a href="http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20111025" target="_blank">column</a>, Monte Cook says</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px">The game needs rules. They form the basis of the shared reality that allows everyone to participate in the same game.</p><p></p><p>Monte says this as if it's uncontroversial, but I'm not sure that it is.</p><p></p><p>I don't deny that the game needs rules. But is the purpose of the rules to form the basis of the shared reality among the participants?</p><p></p><p>Here is another view on the purpose of rules, from <a href="http://www.lumpley.com/hardcore.html" target="_blank">Vincent Baker</a>:</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px">Roleplaying is negotiated imagination. In order for any thing to be true in game, all the participants in the game ... have to understand and assent to it. When you're roleplaying, what you're doing is a) suggesting things that might be true in the game and then b) negotiating with the other participants to determine whether they're actually true or not...</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">Mechanics might model the stuff of the game world, that's another topic, but they don't exist to do so. They exist to ease and constrain real-world social negotiation between the players at the table. That's their sole and crucial function.</p><p></p><p>The difference between these two view matters to design. It helps explain the difference between (for example) 3E and 4e. It also explains the difference, in AD&D, between rolling to open a door (if you make the roll, your PC was able to muscle open the stuck door) and rolling a saving throw (if you make the roll, you and/or the GM have liberty to explain how it was that the threat to your PC was avoided/negated).</p><p></p><p>I think it would be a pity for WotC to lock it itself into a simulationist approach to mechanics by default, rather than because a deliberate view has been formed that this is what is best for the game.</p><p></p><p>Others' views?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 5715655, member: 42582"] In his latest [url=http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20111025]column[/url], Monte Cook says [indent]The game needs rules. They form the basis of the shared reality that allows everyone to participate in the same game.[/indent] Monte says this as if it's uncontroversial, but I'm not sure that it is. I don't deny that the game needs rules. But is the purpose of the rules to form the basis of the shared reality among the participants? Here is another view on the purpose of rules, from [url=http://www.lumpley.com/hardcore.html]Vincent Baker[/url]: [indent]Roleplaying is negotiated imagination. In order for any thing to be true in game, all the participants in the game ... have to understand and assent to it. When you're roleplaying, what you're doing is a) suggesting things that might be true in the game and then b) negotiating with the other participants to determine whether they're actually true or not... Mechanics might model the stuff of the game world, that's another topic, but they don't exist to do so. They exist to ease and constrain real-world social negotiation between the players at the table. That's their sole and crucial function.[/indent] The difference between these two view matters to design. It helps explain the difference between (for example) 3E and 4e. It also explains the difference, in AD&D, between rolling to open a door (if you make the roll, your PC was able to muscle open the stuck door) and rolling a saving throw (if you make the roll, you and/or the GM have liberty to explain how it was that the threat to your PC was avoided/negated). I think it would be a pity for WotC to lock it itself into a simulationist approach to mechanics by default, rather than because a deliberate view has been formed that this is what is best for the game. Others' views? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Monte Cook on what rules are for
Top