Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="FrogReaver" data-source="post: 9229963" data-attributes="member: 6795602">It’s fine if they mean something else. I just want to be specific there.&nbsp; If they mean something else they are either saying ‘try’ is not a valid intent or that honoring an intent of ‘try’ means a lot more than letting them try.&nbsp; Both seem really strange stances to me, but they can mean whatever they want.&nbsp; It just seems there would be a better way of describing that.Indeed!&nbsp; The kinds of valid action declarations inform the players about the things they can intend to do with their actions, such that a player playing by the rules and groups norms will only ever have intentions they can actually have in that game. What we see occurring is intentions from other games getting smuggled across games - and both sides do this. It’s the crux of most arguments about how various games function. D&amp;D player introduced to Story Now games - since a player in d&amp;d typically cannot intend to do more than try, it feels like something else is going on when the player of another game describes intending to recall knowledge and success doesn’t mean he tried well, but that he gets to introduce facts about the thing he is trying to recall knowledge about.&nbsp; The difference there is in intent, not having and not having intent, rather how the intent differs in both. Likewise from the story now player perspective, if the intent in d&amp;d is only to try and he’s used to being allowed more elaborate intents, then it can almost seem like d&amp;d doesn’t really involve intent play and especially not the kinds of intents he’s used to. And this all goes back into how some jargon is being codified to describe one game type despite another game type doing the same kinds of things as defined by natural albeit in different ways. That’s what’s so frustrating about dealing with this specific set of jargon. If you define the difference between 2 games around intent (or whatever), then it’s really hard for me to explain how my game features intent albeit in a different way (or whatever concept you are associating with only one game and not the other).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="FrogReaver, post: 9229963, member: 6795602"] It’s fine if they mean something else. I just want to be specific there. If they mean something else they are either saying ‘try’ is not a valid intent or that honoring an intent of ‘try’ means a lot more than letting them try. Both seem really strange stances to me, but they can mean whatever they want. It just seems there would be a better way of describing that. Indeed! The kinds of valid action declarations inform the players about the things they can intend to do with their actions, such that a player playing by the rules and groups norms will only ever have intentions they can actually have in that game. What we see occurring is intentions from other games getting smuggled across games - and both sides do this. It’s the crux of most arguments about how various games function. D&D player introduced to Story Now games - since a player in d&d typically cannot intend to do more than try, it feels like something else is going on when the player of another game describes intending to recall knowledge and success doesn’t mean he tried well, but that he gets to introduce facts about the thing he is trying to recall knowledge about. The difference there is in intent, not having and not having intent, rather how the intent differs in both. Likewise from the story now player perspective, if the intent in d&d is only to try and he’s used to being allowed more elaborate intents, then it can almost seem like d&d doesn’t really involve intent play and especially not the kinds of intents he’s used to. And this all goes back into how some jargon is being codified to describe one game type despite another game type doing the same kinds of things as defined by natural albeit in different ways. That’s what’s so frustrating about dealing with this specific set of jargon. If you define the difference between 2 games around intent (or whatever), then it’s really hard for me to explain how my game features intent albeit in a different way (or whatever concept you are associating with only one game and not the other). [/QUOTE]

Verification