NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 9708488" data-attributes="member: 71699">That's somewhat of a misreading as I'm speaking about how people follow rules. It seems like a modest claim to say that folk adhere to some rules more strongly than others, and more strongly in some situations than in other situations.EDIT To call my description a "trad" framing as you do, would be to deny that players of other modes of play can put rules in force for themselves. As I don't think you want to deny that, it seems safe to say you misread my post.I think I see where the misstep occurred. I went on to apply the notion to the topic that I thought you were addressing, so that you could see some possible implications. I took you to be addressing your critique to DMs so I did too! You did after all reference DM about a dozen times in your post... virtually in every paragraph.That isn't apposite, because as I clarified above the observation applies to how every individual at the table puts rules in force for themselves. To play, to referee, to follow rules voluntarily, as in a game, necessitates putting rules in force for yourself. This notion comes from Reiland, who writesto perform a rule-constituted action is to perform an antecedently existing action while enacting or putting the rule in force for ourselves or accepting it as being in force constitutive rules are distinctive in being in force for us if we enact/accept them, having a certain special sort of content, and being enacted/accepted for a special reasonAll I add is that the weight or strength they are put in force for ourselves is observably variable. I take it you've no real objection to this notion... it was the (unwarranted/mistaken) jump from there to "framing that the game is the DM's game" that worried you. (Although it'd be interesting to understand your reasoning if you do think it's wrong to say participants in a game put rules in force for themselves!?)So my question was (and is) - have you considered this aspect and how it would nuance arguments like the one that DMs should be free to unilaterally modify the rules of the game? Stressing that I put forward no argument for any particular arrangement of GM empowerment. I aim only to indicate some nuances to have in mind while considering how participants (GMs included) follow rules.</blockquote>

Verification