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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8937450" data-attributes="member: 42582">I'm not sure I have a clear grasp of what is meant by "a scaffolding of regulatory and constitutive rules that have a linkage from fictional position (and thus the fiction) to the regulatory and constitutive rules". Does this mean the same as "a scaffold of regulatory and constitutive rules that are linked to the fiction, including by taking fictional position as input"?IF so, then I think I've said much the same, maybe in this thread and also in the "theory thread" thread: I personally don't think we need to take up controversial positions pertaining to the metaphysics of artefacts and the metaphysics of tools in order to successfully analyse RPGing.For instance, a RPG ruleset is an abstract object. But it is at least arguable that tools are concrete things. Certainly the most paradigmatic tools and other artefacts (hammers, knives, chairs, computers, etc) are concrete things.It is probably more consistent with the standard approaches to rules and conventions - and also with the Lumpley principle - to say that the rules of a RPG are constituted (in part at least) by the purposes of those whose play is guided by them, and hence that it is not a case of a common tool being wielded differently (which makes sense for concrete things which are literally wielded) but rather of different practices yielding different games.Thus when we talk about, say, both [USER=6696971]@Manbearcat[/USER] and I playing 4e D&D, what we are really referring to is similarity classes of games rather than literally the same game. But because we can talk reasonably useful about those similarity classes, as I said I don't think we really need to settle these issues to analyse RPGing.Well unsurprisingly I think that Ron Edwards is pretty consistent with what I'm saying (given how much I've learned from reading him).I'm not really able to assess your comparison of rigidity: Edwards obviously has many many forum posts, blogs etc actually outlining practical techniques for RPGing, which give me a sense of how flexible his thinking is. I don't think I've ready many of your posts of this sort.</blockquote>

Verification