Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="FrogReaver" data-source="post: 9209558" data-attributes="member: 6795602">I'm really confused with why those wouldn't be considered models.&nbsp; I think you are reading my use of model far too narrowly.<ol>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">A mechanical model simply takes an input and yields a result that has meaning assigned to it.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">I think Pemerton might take you to task for suggesting that anything other than the players generate content as he said &quot;Vincent Baker's point is that mechanics do not author fiction on their own.&quot;</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">Take the D&amp;D mechanic of encumbrance - there is no negotiation by the players as to whether a character is encumbered.&nbsp; The mechanic is clear.&nbsp; However, there might discussion about either a) it's obvious the DM is misremembering the rule or b) the player wasn't tracking weight of items correctly or c) their is some controversy about whether the DM is handling encumberance fairly.&nbsp; Say he only ever mentions Bob's PC as being encumbered while ignoring it entirely for his good friend Kyle.&nbsp; In all these cases there's never a negotiation of the shared fictoin - in cases 1 and 2 it's simply a fact finding mission - a) what was the rule we agreed to? b) what are all the items and their weights my PC is carrying?&nbsp; 3) might could be classified as a negotiation, but it's not one about the shared fiction, it's one about the DM applying the rules more fairly.&nbsp; In any event, the negotiation about what the fiction should say took place when deciding in session 0 to run this game with this DM - because that's where the rules/models were decided upon.</li>
</ol>Yes.&nbsp; I'd call that a model.What's a model to you?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="FrogReaver, post: 9209558, member: 6795602"] I'm really confused with why those wouldn't be considered models. I think you are reading my use of model far too narrowly. [LIST=1] [*]A mechanical model simply takes an input and yields a result that has meaning assigned to it. [*]I think Pemerton might take you to task for suggesting that anything other than the players generate content as he said "Vincent Baker's point is that mechanics do not author fiction on their own." [*]Take the D&D mechanic of encumbrance - there is no negotiation by the players as to whether a character is encumbered. The mechanic is clear. However, there might discussion about either a) it's obvious the DM is misremembering the rule or b) the player wasn't tracking weight of items correctly or c) their is some controversy about whether the DM is handling encumberance fairly. Say he only ever mentions Bob's PC as being encumbered while ignoring it entirely for his good friend Kyle. In all these cases there's never a negotiation of the shared fictoin - in cases 1 and 2 it's simply a fact finding mission - a) what was the rule we agreed to? b) what are all the items and their weights my PC is carrying? 3) might could be classified as a negotiation, but it's not one about the shared fiction, it's one about the DM applying the rules more fairly. In any event, the negotiation about what the fiction should say took place when deciding in session 0 to run this game with this DM - because that's where the rules/models were decided upon. [/LIST] Yes. I'd call that a model. What's a model to you? [/QUOTE]

Verification