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
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Supposing D&D is gamist, what does that mean?
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="Thomas Shey" data-source="post: 8639964" data-attributes="member: 7026617"><p>That absolutely can be a thing, but I think that usually gets worked out pretty early by the difference between RAW and what I call RAU (Rules As Understood). Even gamist-centric groups have, effectively, unstated conventions they go by (which often will end up in house rules once someone notices that its not RAW, or alternatively everyone just adjusts to going back to RAW).</p><p></p><p>(As an example, Fragged Empire has a bleeding rule. In my hurry to read it at an early point in process, I read it as cutting in when an attribute went to zero from critical damage. As it turns out, it happens when the attribute goes to negative (i.e. -1 or worse). No one had apparently noticed the difference between what I was doing and/or took my word for it (often a mistake because, well, I'm sometimes sloppy) and what the rules said (possibly because it doesn't come up all the time) but as soon as someone on the FE Discord mentioned it in passing, I checked and found out I'd been doing it wrong and brought it to everyone's attention. Since the RAW rule was more benign to PCs, no one was at all upset, but its gone the other way too and people have mostly just shrugged).</p><p></p><p>However in the example at hand, this is still only a problem because the players and the GM aren't on the same page, and the GM was unwilling to cut any slack for that. Nothing about being gamist precludes understanding that mistakes and misunderstandings happen. Even back in my Hardcore Young Gamer days when it became obvious that I and the players were effectively using different rules sets regarding Fireball, I'd have said "Okay, this particular one time we'll have it work your way since you did this thinking it did, and the whole tactical setup you chose was based on it. But we need to thrash out whether we want to go by the book or do a houserule before its used again" and everyone would likely have just nodded and gone along.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Again, that's about a failure to communicate, however, which can be a problem all over gaming. Its only a massive problem if the GM and players don't recognize that things can go awry there. Again, the simple response would be "You could have asked first. Do you want to back up and change your mind there?" I mean, not to put to fine a point on it, but nothing about GMing for gamists requires you to be a jerk.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Or, frankly, because the clarity wasn't as good as it could be, so you asked. This doesn't completely address the issue--its one of those cases where you don't want to just do this one-off because consistency is kind of virtue--but it does prevent it from turning into a problem from most POVs.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Well, yes, like the unspooling lightning bolts, that was one of those rules designed to just be a pain in the ass, which early D&D was known for.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Thomas Shey, post: 8639964, member: 7026617"] That absolutely can be a thing, but I think that usually gets worked out pretty early by the difference between RAW and what I call RAU (Rules As Understood). Even gamist-centric groups have, effectively, unstated conventions they go by (which often will end up in house rules once someone notices that its not RAW, or alternatively everyone just adjusts to going back to RAW). (As an example, Fragged Empire has a bleeding rule. In my hurry to read it at an early point in process, I read it as cutting in when an attribute went to zero from critical damage. As it turns out, it happens when the attribute goes to negative (i.e. -1 or worse). No one had apparently noticed the difference between what I was doing and/or took my word for it (often a mistake because, well, I'm sometimes sloppy) and what the rules said (possibly because it doesn't come up all the time) but as soon as someone on the FE Discord mentioned it in passing, I checked and found out I'd been doing it wrong and brought it to everyone's attention. Since the RAW rule was more benign to PCs, no one was at all upset, but its gone the other way too and people have mostly just shrugged). However in the example at hand, this is still only a problem because the players and the GM aren't on the same page, and the GM was unwilling to cut any slack for that. Nothing about being gamist precludes understanding that mistakes and misunderstandings happen. Even back in my Hardcore Young Gamer days when it became obvious that I and the players were effectively using different rules sets regarding Fireball, I'd have said "Okay, this particular one time we'll have it work your way since you did this thinking it did, and the whole tactical setup you chose was based on it. But we need to thrash out whether we want to go by the book or do a houserule before its used again" and everyone would likely have just nodded and gone along. Again, that's about a failure to communicate, however, which can be a problem all over gaming. Its only a massive problem if the GM and players don't recognize that things can go awry there. Again, the simple response would be "You could have asked first. Do you want to back up and change your mind there?" I mean, not to put to fine a point on it, but nothing about GMing for gamists requires you to be a jerk. Or, frankly, because the clarity wasn't as good as it could be, so you asked. This doesn't completely address the issue--its one of those cases where you don't want to just do this one-off because consistency is kind of virtue--but it does prevent it from turning into a problem from most POVs. Well, yes, like the unspooling lightning bolts, that was one of those rules designed to just be a pain in the ass, which early D&D was known for. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Supposing D&D is gamist, what does that mean?
Top