S/Z: On the Difficulties of RPG Theory & Criticism

[hawkeyefan]

I think there's an interesting process here. How do you define how stable a rule is in an RPG? Does the referee player change it on a whim, it is as a group, is it present and then accept by the whole?

I think this is an important aspect of game design. Just looking at how much constraint is placed on the GM and at what points in the game is going to give you a clear idea of how the game will play.

 

[Maxperson]

But, the thing is, if you play baseball, you follow the rules as instructions. The rules straight up tell you, these players play these positions. This person pitches, these people, on the other team, bat. You can follow the steps exactly as written down and EVERY game of baseball (presuming they are playing from the same rulebook) will follow exactly the same steps.

There are no steps inherent in most RPG's. When you play an RPG, for example, what's the first step? Character creation? Campaign creation? Something else? Note, those can both be true - some games start with chargen and then proceed, others start with campaign creation and then proceed. Neither is more correct than the other.

And that's just the starting point of an RPG. No two tables start the exact same way. There are always considerable differences between one table and the next. And these aren't cosmetic differences. These are differences that will completely alter how the game plays.

Sure, in baseball, the players change, but, the game never does. You play one side until you get three out and then play the other side. You don't suddenly decide to add sharks to the outfield or play in roller skates half way through. Every game of baseball, from little league all the way through to the pro's plays identically. Baseball is a complete game. RPG's are not.

Pinch hitters. Some pro-games allow them and others don't. All pro games of baseball are not the same. You get more and more rules changes as you go down towards little league.

True, but, the rules of a baseball game define the field to be used. They tell you the distance to between the bases, the distance of the pitcher's mound, so on and so forth. So, the rules of baseball very much do define the field.

Major league fields vary in size.

What's more, there are many different offensive and defensive strategies, methods for hitting, etc. that are not bound by the rules, but which do drastically influence how the games play. A baseball game is much more than just the rules.

 

[Lanefan]

You would consider a fairly minor change to the range of a spell to be an impossible change?

I think @Beleriphon miscounted; there's four examples - s/he mentions the first two are minor then says "the second...is impossible" when probably meaning the third, before referencing the last.

 

[Hussar]

Pinch hitters. Some pro-games allow them and others don't. All pro games of baseball are not the same. You get more and more rules changes as you go down towards little league.



Major league fields vary in size.

What's more, there are many different offensive and defensive strategies, methods for hitting, etc. that are not bound by the rules, but which do drastically influence how the games play. A baseball game is much more than just the rules.

Ok, this is swimming a bit far upfield. And, against my better judgement, I'll try this out.

Note, in the quote you quoted, there is the following line:

"You can follow the steps exactly as written down and EVERY game of baseball (presuming they are playing from the same rulebook) will follow exactly the same steps."

Now, all your examples of different games playing differently because they have different rule books is pretty much moot because, well, I already account for that.

And, you are still missing the point. In order to play a baseball game, or nearly any game, all you do is follow the rules. Start at rule 1, end at rule X and play until the pre-defined win conditions are met. EVERY SINGLE GAME will play the same so long as you are using the same rules. Yes, this team or that team will win. Fair enough. But, the start point and end point will always, always be the same.

At no point in a baseball game can I remove second base. Or choose not to pitch. Or, in fact, do anything not specifically allowed by the rules of the game. The rules of the game are prescriptive.

The rules in an RPG are not prescriptive. They are descriptive. They tell you how to resolve certain actions from the players, but, are certainly not meant as an exhaustive list of every action the player can take. In fact, the rules of an RPG specifically state that they cannot provide an exhaustive list, and thus, are meant as guidelines for the players to use in determining the outcomes of actions.

Put it this way. There are no rules for jumping in AD&D 1e. None. The rules are 100% silent on how far or high a character may jump. Now, in a non-rpg this would mean that jumping was not allowed. You cannot jump in Monopoly. You cannot jump in Catan. While you can jump in baseball, you can only do so at certain times - you cannot jump while pitching for example. But, despite not having any rules for jumping in AD&D, characters most certainly can jump and are often expected to do so.

Thus, we get a range of possible adjudications for jumping in AD&D 1e. From "You jump this far" to "Make a save vs X to jump this far". to whatever else people come up with.

You cannot sit down, read the rule books of an RPG and just start playing. It doesn't work. You need to do a fair bit more work first - choose/create a setting (which is not defined by the rules), choose characters (partially defined by the rules), choose what you are going to do in that setting (certainly not defined by the rules).

Does this make it clearer?

 

[Maxperson]

Ok, this is swimming a bit far upfield. And, against my better judgement, I'll try this out.

Note, in the quote you quoted, there is the following line:

"You can follow the steps exactly as written down and EVERY game of baseball (presuming they are playing from the same rulebook) will follow exactly the same steps."

Now, all your examples of different games playing differently because they have different rule books is pretty much moot because, well, I already account for that.

And, you are still missing the point. In order to play a baseball game, or nearly any game, all you do is follow the rules. Start at rule 1, end at rule X and play until the pre-defined win conditions are met. EVERY SINGLE GAME will play the same so long as you are using the same rules. Yes, this team or that team will win. Fair enough. But, the start point and end point will always, always be the same.

At no point in a baseball game can I remove second base. Or choose not to pitch. Or, in fact, do anything not specifically allowed by the rules of the game. The rules of the game are prescriptive.

The rules in an RPG are not prescriptive. They are descriptive. They tell you how to resolve certain actions from the players, but, are certainly not meant as an exhaustive list of every action the player can take. In fact, the rules of an RPG specifically state that they cannot provide an exhaustive list, and thus, are meant as guidelines for the players to use in determining the outcomes of actions.

Put it this way. There are no rules for jumping in AD&D 1e. None. The rules are 100% silent on how far or high a character may jump. Now, in a non-rpg this would mean that jumping was not allowed. You cannot jump in Monopoly. You cannot jump in Catan. While you can jump in baseball, you can only do so at certain times - you cannot jump while pitching for example. But, despite not having any rules for jumping in AD&D, characters most certainly can jump and are often expected to do so.

Thus, we get a range of possible adjudications for jumping in AD&D 1e. From "You jump this far" to "Make a save vs X to jump this far". to whatever else people come up with.

You cannot sit down, read the rule books of an RPG and just start playing. It doesn't work. You need to do a fair bit more work first - choose/create a setting (which is not defined by the rules), choose characters (partially defined by the rules), choose what you are going to do in that setting (certainly not defined by the rules).

Does this make it clearer?

Yes and no. Let me switch sports for a moment to make what I am saying clearer.

Football also has prescriptive rules. You get 4 downs. If you break the rules you are penalized. You can throw the ball, but some throws are illegal. And so on.

However, despite all the prescriptive rules, there are things outside the rules that have a tremendous impact on HOW the game is played, not just whether there is a winner and a loser. When to play a prevent defense as opposed to a 3-4 defense or a 4-3 or a 3-4 Eagle defense, when to double team a player, key on the run, rush the defenders' weak side, etc.

The number of things outside the rules that you can attempt may not be as large as an RPG, but they exist in games and have an impact. Hell, even in Monopoly I can buy every single property I land on, mortgaging my properties to amass more, or don't do that and keep all my properties unmortgaged to get more income. I can trade or have a philosophy of no trade. These are things that even in a simple game like Monopoly are outside the rules and have an impact on how the game is played.

 

[Beleriphon]

You would consider a fairly minor change to the range of a spell to be an impossible change?

No, sorry that was as @Oofta noted combined with the change to the way levels progress after level 12 when nobody in the group has a character after level 12.

 

[Hussar]

Yes and no. Let me switch sports for a moment to make what I am saying clearer.

Football also has prescriptive rules. You get 4 downs. If you break the rules you are penalized. You can throw the ball, but some throws are illegal. And so on.

However, despite all the prescriptive rules, there are things outside the rules that have a tremendous impact on HOW the game is played, not just whether there is a winner and a loser. When to play a prevent defense as opposed to a 3-4 defense or a 4-3 or a 3-4 Eagle defense, when to double team a player, key on the run, rush the defenders' weak side, etc.

The number of things outside the rules that you can attempt may not be as large as an RPG, but they exist in games and have an impact. Hell, even in Monopoly I can buy every single property I land on, mortgaging my properties to amass more, or don't do that and keep all my properties unmortgaged to get more income. I can trade or have a philosophy of no trade. These are things that even in a simple game like Monopoly are outside the rules and have an impact on how the game is played.

However, none of those things actually impact the rules of the game, or the game itself. That you choose this or that defense has ZERO impact on the rules. Nor, will it change the outcome of the game - at the end of the 4th quarter, one team will be declared winner (or we go into overtime rules). That's what the rules say will happen. And it will happen every single time you play NFL football (note, CFL only has 3 downs and plays on a slightly different field, but, that's neither here nor there). The rules tell you exactly how the game will start and be played. Heck, in NFL, certain defenses and offenses are illegal by the rules.

But, that's my point. The rules tell you where to start and where to finish. They tell you what is going to happen at every point in the game.

RPG's don't work this way. They can't because RPG rules don't tell you where to start or where to finish.

Or, put it another way, what are the rules mandated win conditions for an RPG? Every other kind of game has them. So, where are they for an RPG?

 

[Maxperson]

However, none of those things actually impact the rules of the game, or the game itself.

That's false. It doesn't impact the rules, but it does impact the game itself.

That you choose this or that defense has ZERO impact on the rules.

True.

Nor, will it change the outcome of the game - at the end of the 4th quarter, one team will be declared winner (or we go into overtime rules).

False. It does change the outcome. Picking the correct offenses and defenses drastically alters the outcome. Instead of losing(outcome), you win(changed outcome).

That's what the rules say will happen.

The rules do not pick which team will win.

But, that's my point. The rules tell you where to start and where to finish. They tell you what is going to happen at every point in the game.

That's false. Football rules do not tell you when an End Around will happen, or when a team will rush instead of pass, or when a team will go for it on 4th. So no, they do not tell you what is going to happen at every point in the game.

Which brings you to this..... You're missing OUR point.

The only difference between an RPG and Football is that the rules of Football limit the length of the game. That's it. You can still do things not prescribed by the rules in both games, as I have shown. In fact, in both games doing things outside of the rules that is unbalanced will result in rules changes. In Football the owners get together and vote on a fix. In D&D the game designers decide on a fix and put out errata.

They can't because RPG rules don't tell you where to start or where to finish.

This is the only real difference other than type of game.

Or, put it another way, what are the rules mandated win conditions for an RPG? Every other kind of game has them. So, where are they for an RPG?

It doesn't matter. Not having a win condition doesn't mean that during a football game, things outside the rules that affect the outcome aren't happening. They are. I've proven that.

But, since you asked...

Page 5 of the PHB:

"The group might fail to complete an adventure successfully, but if everyone had a good time and created a memorable story, they all win."

 

[Umbran]

But, that's my point. The rules tell you where to start and where to finish. They tell you what is going to happen at every point in the game.

While I'm not a fan of Maxperson's tone, I have to back him up here - this is incorrect.

The rules tell you whether a given action in play is legal. But the rules do not determine what actions will be taken, and so don't say what it going to happen at every point in the game. Football players have choices. Will the team run or pass the ball? That's what is happening in the game, but which they do is not determined by the rules.

The other way to think of this - Note that football is a game with an end condition that is typically separate from its win condition. A football game typically ends after a specified amount of time of play has passed. Only in the case of a tie does the game end become entwined with the win/loss condition.

Play a one-shot D&D session with a maximum length in time (we only have the game store space until 10 PM!), and we have the same "where to start and where to finish". But clearly, D&D doesn't tell us what is going to happen in between start and end... and neither does football.

Don't mistake "rules constrain actions" with "rules determine actions".

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*