Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Social Pillar Mechanics: Where do you stand?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9296612" data-attributes="member: 6790260"><p>Nothing, and such things <em>used in moderation</em> are in fact very good and helpful. (Good Skill Challenge rules absolutely should include such things.) But the critical bit is what I italicized: <em><strong>used in moderation</strong></em>. If you'll permit the turn of phrase, that's the exception which completes the rule.</p><p></p><p>By which I mean: No one argues that a foolish, bullheaded application of rules without context, or judgment, is somehow a wonderful and noble thing. And yet rules are still useful. How do we resolve this conflict? In exactly the same way as we explain why having tools is useful to a craft like carpentry, even though being <em>confined to</em> only doing the things your tools can do would be foolish and destructive to the craft. The mere existence of a tool does not mean that it <em>must</em> be used in every context. The fact that the tool is not appropriate to all contexts, and indeed may never get used in any of a variety of projects, emphatically does not mean that the tool is somehow bad, or wrong, or worthy of being gotten rid of.</p><p></p><p>Instead, well-made tools, tools that work well for what they're made to do, are a powerful aid. Instead of viewing the circular saw with suspicion and opposition because you don't <em>absolutely need</em> it, the carpenter looks at such a tool for what it will make <em>easier</em> to do, when it is useful to use it, and what ways it might enable new approaches she could not use before.</p><p></p><p>Rules are tools. They are made to <em>do</em> something. They can be made badly, like any tool, but that simply reminds us to demand well-made rules. They are not useful in every circumstance, and even when they might be used, other tools (or even no tools at all) may be the wiser choice. Rules cannot tell you when it's wisest to use any given rule. They can help you think about it, but you still have to <em>do</em> the thinking. That we can, and sometimes <em>should</em>, avoid using a particular rule does not mean the rule is worthless. It means that human decision-making is still important, even when there are rules.</p><p></p><p>So the question is no longer, "why do we have this if we don't always use it?" Instead, we should ask other things: </p><p>"What does this do for us? Is that worth doing?" </p><p>"How well does this do what it was made to do?" </p><p>"How easy is it to know when to use this, and when not to use it?" </p><p>"Are there other ways we could achieve the same ends?"</p><p>etc.</p><p></p><p>And when you start asking these questions formally--with measures and testing and actual <em>analysis</em>--you have begun the process of real, actual design, and not just being an auteur fiat declaring whatever you like.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 9296612, member: 6790260"] Nothing, and such things [I]used in moderation[/I] are in fact very good and helpful. (Good Skill Challenge rules absolutely should include such things.) But the critical bit is what I italicized: [I][B]used in moderation[/B][/I]. If you'll permit the turn of phrase, that's the exception which completes the rule. By which I mean: No one argues that a foolish, bullheaded application of rules without context, or judgment, is somehow a wonderful and noble thing. And yet rules are still useful. How do we resolve this conflict? In exactly the same way as we explain why having tools is useful to a craft like carpentry, even though being [I]confined to[/I] only doing the things your tools can do would be foolish and destructive to the craft. The mere existence of a tool does not mean that it [I]must[/I] be used in every context. The fact that the tool is not appropriate to all contexts, and indeed may never get used in any of a variety of projects, emphatically does not mean that the tool is somehow bad, or wrong, or worthy of being gotten rid of. Instead, well-made tools, tools that work well for what they're made to do, are a powerful aid. Instead of viewing the circular saw with suspicion and opposition because you don't [I]absolutely need[/I] it, the carpenter looks at such a tool for what it will make [I]easier[/I] to do, when it is useful to use it, and what ways it might enable new approaches she could not use before. Rules are tools. They are made to [I]do[/I] something. They can be made badly, like any tool, but that simply reminds us to demand well-made rules. They are not useful in every circumstance, and even when they might be used, other tools (or even no tools at all) may be the wiser choice. Rules cannot tell you when it's wisest to use any given rule. They can help you think about it, but you still have to [I]do[/I] the thinking. That we can, and sometimes [I]should[/I], avoid using a particular rule does not mean the rule is worthless. It means that human decision-making is still important, even when there are rules. So the question is no longer, "why do we have this if we don't always use it?" Instead, we should ask other things: "What does this do for us? Is that worth doing?" "How well does this do what it was made to do?" "How easy is it to know when to use this, and when not to use it?" "Are there other ways we could achieve the same ends?" etc. And when you start asking these questions formally--with measures and testing and actual [I]analysis[/I]--you have begun the process of real, actual design, and not just being an auteur fiat declaring whatever you like. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Social Pillar Mechanics: Where do you stand?
Top