Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 9687200" data-attributes="member: 42582">No. I didn't say that. I said that it could.Here's an actual example: D&D does not care about the nature of injury suffered when a person gets hurt, and has no rules for representing this. Other RPGs do: for instance, Rolemaster, RuneQuest, Burning Wheel.AD&D does not care about the degree of attention a character is paying while walking along. 5e D&D does, with its "other activities" rules: <a href="https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/dnd/basic-rules-2014/adventuring#OtherActivities" target="_blank">https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/dnd/basic-rules-2014/adventuring#OtherActivities</a>I am not posting about what is good or bad. I am trying to analyse the way game rules work, by paying careful attention to how they work, and how they relate actual events at the table to imagined events in the fiction.You have no basis for inferring that, given that I posted this:As I posted, if the D&D surprise rules satisfy the standard set out in the manifesto, then so do all RPG rules. But I don't think that is what the author of the manifesto intended.I note, as did the authors of RQ and RM 40+ years ago, that D&D comes nowhere near meeting the "minimisation" requirement.I also note that the manifesto does not agree with what you say here. It says that the only function of rules is to model in that fashion.</blockquote>