Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Pedantic" data-source="post: 8967251" data-attributes="member: 6690965">We need some other tool to talk about this, because you're describing things in terms of competition, when that's just not relevant, and I honestly kind of resent being presented as Spike when I'm closer to Johnny. The interesting thing was that the players got to make a decision and see the outcome. If there was a 1 in 8 chance of total success and that's the universe we live in... That's fine? The game is unbounded, there's more choices. You can't have an interesting game without a reliable board state, and if that's a possibility, it is what it is.I think you're missing my point. Go is a game with a single action and 361 objects that can be interacted with. The rules can be printed on an index card, and it has a number of board states that is so far outside of the human capacity to consider quantity as to be meaningless. We play games written in books. It's not at all hard for those books to turn the phrase &quot;a 10 ft high hewn stone wall across a 7 ft pit too dark to see the bottom of&quot; into upwards of 50 declarable actions before asking for more detail or clarification on the situation. All possible board states is a vast and ridiculous territory already.I think the GM should ideally be engaged in creation, and making decisions for NPC actors. Resolution is an impartial function of the mechanics.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Pedantic, post: 8967251, member: 6690965"] We need some other tool to talk about this, because you're describing things in terms of competition, when that's just not relevant, and I honestly kind of resent being presented as Spike when I'm closer to Johnny. The interesting thing was that the players got to make a decision and see the outcome. If there was a 1 in 8 chance of total success and that's the universe we live in... That's fine? The game is unbounded, there's more choices. You can't have an interesting game without a reliable board state, and if that's a possibility, it is what it is. I think you're missing my point. Go is a game with a single action and 361 objects that can be interacted with. The rules can be printed on an index card, and it has a number of board states that is so far outside of the human capacity to consider quantity as to be meaningless. We play games written in books. It's not at all hard for those books to turn the phrase "a 10 ft high hewn stone wall across a 7 ft pit too dark to see the bottom of" into upwards of 50 declarable actions before asking for more detail or clarification on the situation. All possible board states is a vast and ridiculous territory already. I think the GM should ideally be engaged in creation, and making decisions for NPC actors. Resolution is an impartial function of the mechanics. [/QUOTE]

Verification