Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Snarf Zagyg" data-source="post: 8194618" data-attributes="member: 7023840">Interesting post. I am sure it will be uncontroversial. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Speaking for myself, when I hear variations of the &quot;Systems/Rules Matter&quot; mantra, I tend to get worried. I think that there are two ways to view that statement:1. Weak statement. To me, the idea that the rules matter is, in a certain way, both trivially true and banal. It is unexceptional, in my mind to make &quot;weak assertion&quot; arguments that differences in the rules can impact gameplay.2. Strong statement. This is where I get worried, because (to an extent), I feel similar to when an athlete says, &quot;It's not about the money.&quot; When I see people making strong &quot;system&quot; arguments, I try to hold on to my wallet, because I feel that they are usually trying to sell me on something- a theory or a game. Which is fine, for them, but I don't need to be theory-splained as to why the game I enjoy doesn't work in theory, while whatever they are selling is the only real way to have fun. &quot;System matters&quot; inevitably means that because it matters, some systems are better than others, and let me tell you why these systems are better .... Put another way- some people care deeply about systems. Which is wonderful. But the elevation of systems and theory over practice doesn't work for everyone. Some people place their priorities in other places, which is fine as well.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Snarf Zagyg, post: 8194618, member: 7023840"] Interesting post. I am sure it will be uncontroversial. :) Speaking for myself, when I hear variations of the "Systems/Rules Matter" mantra, I tend to get worried. I think that there are two ways to view that statement: 1. Weak statement. To me, the idea that the rules matter is, in a certain way, both trivially true and banal. It is unexceptional, in my mind to make "weak assertion" arguments that differences in the rules can impact gameplay. 2. Strong statement. This is where I get worried, because (to an extent), I feel similar to when an athlete says, "It's not about the money." When I see people making strong "system" arguments, I try to hold on to my wallet, because I feel that they are usually trying to sell me on something- a theory or a game. Which is fine, for them, but I don't need to be theory-splained as to why the game I enjoy doesn't work in theory, while whatever they are selling is the only real way to have fun. "System matters" inevitably means that because it matters, some systems are better than others, and let me tell you why these systems are better .... Put another way- some people care deeply about systems. Which is wonderful. But the elevation of systems and theory over practice doesn't work for everyone. Some people place their priorities in other places, which is fine as well. [/QUOTE]

Verification