Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 8280547" data-attributes="member: 71699">Agreed. I used to run a homebrew dice-less RPG. Rules were thin - one page - but felt like enough to call it a game.In the example above, the majority of written rules were in-fiction rules. There were written process rules listing the elements of a character. I think there were one or two tacit - but consistent - process rules about the flow of play.I've argued that there is a chink in the wall: SP does not necessarily conflict with engaging with the game mechanics. One possible motivation for this is to update the concept. RPG rules have advanced over time - they've become more sophisticated, flexible, resilient, and streamlined. To me, one benefit of thinking about SP today is to apply it in a more sophisticated way. I believe the route to that is to allow that one can be properly doing SP while engaging with all the mechanics. That's the "nettle" I talk about. (I may be mistaking the arguments, but I sense a reluctance to accept that SP can mean SP of all the rules and not solely the fiction. In part because were it only the fiction, then it could not be what we call role-play gaming.)</blockquote>