Payn's Ponderings; System mastery and the concept of fair fight.

[FrogReaver]

I know a power gamer who doesn't come up with his own ideas, just uses an online guide.

He's pretty good at checking with his GM where the guide says he probably should do, but doesn't do so otherwise - he seems to lack the basic understanding to determine for himself whether something is close to, or even over, the line. And heaven forbid that the GM should interpret something differently to the guide.

Rules disagreements aren’t really about fairness.

His GM runs published adventures, which the power gamer generally stomps all over. And then criticises the GM for not providing enough of a challenge.

For most levels of criticism I’d consider that a minor problem. Most likely it’s just a weird way to brag about how good he is doing. But it’s not a fairness issue at least in the context of the game. It might be an unfair criticism, but that’s not the kind of fairness that’s being talked about.

I find his approach to the game completely weird - and I'm a power gamer myself. So maybe we have different approaches to fairness?

Maybe? I think it’s more that people are misapplying the word fair for unrelated concepts.

 

[Micah Sweet]

And let's clear something up. Relatively unpopular. The game has been around for a very long time and still sells a lot of books. It's just not in D&D's league.

I sometimes feel that some folks see TTRPGs as "vastly unpopular" or "D&D", with little to nothing (maybe Pathfinder?) in between.

 

[Piperken]

It is really important early on to establish the ground rules of what is considered fair.

This is what we do when we go to where the board games are and ask, "would you like to play Chutes and Ladders [Snakes & Ladders]?" If the answer is "yes!" then you play. If the answer is "no," suggest a different game with a rule set that players will vibe with. If the answer is "well, I'm/we aren't sure, we haven't played that game before," or "maybe, we only played it once" then perhaps play, and if they seem interested, offer to teach them.

Expectations for every body in each case will adjust.

Obviously, with ttrpgs players' game experience with a game will vary, so it may require more nuance. "Would you like to play D&D?" Ah, well what versions of D&D do you like? What kind of character do you feel you might want to create (or build)? Are you more interested in investing in campaign, or do you only have the time and energy to participate in a one-shot, or a short adventure? Do you all want to have a lot of or not much combat? How do you feel about house rules. And so on.

 

[Emerikol]

<snip>
Obviously, with ttrpgs players' game experience with a game will vary, so it may require more nuance. "Would you like to play D&D?" Ah, well what versions of D&D do you like? What kind of character do you feel you might want to create (or build)? Are you more interested in investing in campaign, or do you only have the time and energy to participate in a one-shot, or a short adventure? Do you all want to have a lot of or not much combat? How do you feel about house rules. And so on.

To a degree all that stuff is important. Since D&D has so many different playstyles, you can't just say D&D. Well you can but if you find you are able to play with just about anyone then you've probably embraced whatever the default is for that edition. Even then you will probably be quietly veto'd by people who do have opinions about something.

I find that my style is popular with some segment but a big enough one that I don't have to play anything else. Either that or people like my style enough to at least consider it one of their options. I think I do offer a lot as a DM, an immersive world is a big one. But I still like to provide some kind of campaign intro up front so that I avoid clashes at the gaming table.

 

[Ashley Cartwright]

The system master is drawn in by the complexities and the puzzle of building the right character, deck, force that can trump the game itself, fairly or not, based on the ruleset.

If it follows the rules of the game, it is fair by definition.

 

[payn]

If it follows the rules of the game, it is fair by definition.

By definition, yes, but by intention or spirit is often in question. Game designers are fallible, system mastery design is often imbalanced with intent to allow exploitation. When is it working as intended or a mistake isnt as easy as definition level of correctness in my experience.

 

[Theory of Games]

This seems more like a "Rules As Written vs. Rules As Intended" thing. Intentions and expectations should be addressed in Session Zero so everyone is on the same page, yeah?

 

[payn]

This seems more like a "Rules As Written vs. Rules As Intended" thing. Intentions and expectations should be addressed in Session Zero so everyone is on the same page, yeah?

It certainly can/should be discussed at session zero. However, the focus intent of this discussion was more on the motivation for the reason you (general) play. I think a fair match is at least on the radar of most gamers, but its not always a priority. Same for system mastery. Its interesting to see when folks lean heavily to one motivation over others, and how it can impact their playstle and preferences.

 

[Ashley Cartwright]

By definition, yes, but by intention or spirit is often in question. Game designers are fallible, system mastery design is often imbalanced with intent to allow exploitation. When is it working as intended or a mistake isnt as easy as definition level of correctness in my experience.

If the rules written in the book don't match the rules the designers intended to write, then they should not have released the product until it was in working order.

It also doesn't matter if there's some error or typo in the rules. As long as everyone is playing by the same rules (no matter what those rules are), and all options are equally available to everyone, it is fair.

(By way of analogy, if Akuma is a thousand times more powerful than any other character in Street Fighter, Street Fighter is still fair as long as everyone has the option of picking Akuma, or no one does.)

This seems more like a "Rules As Written vs. Rules As Intended" thing. Intentions and expectations should be addressed in Session Zero so everyone is on the same page, yeah?

The only way to discover someone's intent is to read the words they wrote.* If you think the words mean the authors intend X, then you think the words mean X. That's what meaning is. Rules as intended is rules as written, which is rules as interpreted. They all mean the same thing - whatever meaning arose in your mind as you read the words.

When people say rules as intended, what they actually mean is "This is what I think the rules mean, and I believe that I understand the rules better than everyone else."

*Someone will probably respond with something about sage advice, forum threads, twitter posts, or other clarifications external to the rulebook. This doesn't change anything I've said. In each of those cases, you discovered what the designer intended by reading what he wrote. It makes no difference if the words appear on the internet or in the book. There is no other method of discovering a person's thoughts - you must engage in communication using language in some medium. And people can have honest disagreements about the meaning of words in a twitter post just as easily as they can about the words in a book.

 

[payn]

If the rules written in the book don't match the rules the designers intended to write, then they should not have released the product until it was in working order.

If what ifs were fifths, we'd all be wasted.

It also doesn't matter if there's some error or typo in the rules. As long as everyone is playing by the same rules (no matter what those rules are), and all options are equally available to everyone, it is fair.

(By way of analogy, if Akuma is a thousand times more powerful than any other character in Street Fighter, Street Fighter is still fair as long as everyone has the option of picking Akuma, or no one does.)

I wouldnt enjoy such a game as Akuma or any other character, becasue there isnt a fair expectation of the game. Thats my preference though, despite the definition of fair being met or not.