Manbearcat
Legend
Fair enough! I think in the end, yes, there will be rules that enter into the picture in some way. So a game that is designed and playtested will be better able to articulate a somewhat reliable set of rules. But I also always ask, what rules can be taken away from a game and have it still work. This came up somewhere in a discussion on starter sets for games...why are the starter sets so often a much better and clearer articulation of the rules than the main rulebook?
I also find it interesting with OSR games how much of them are taken up with random tables. Like, what is Mork Borg really? Because it's not a bunch of rules. It's mostly random tables, a bare-bones setting, and evocative (or annoying, depending on your pov) graphic design. Supplemental rules have been cobbled together by the community in various zines and unprintable pdfs.
I think my most succinct answer to random tables is it allows GMs to offload creative energy onto something else while avoiding all 3 of the below.
As a whole, here are my thoughts best put together. In the absence of system architecture (conflict/action resolution rules that sufficiently interact with situation and yield satisfying decision-points and have governing principles/best practices of sufficient zoom/resolution to inform them), the GM will do this in any given moment of play:
1) GM storytelling
2) Conch passing
3) The GM is going to have to devote significant cognitive workspace to continually build out system in the course of play (devise > stress test > iterate).
All 3 of these are system. Tables fall under 3. So if GMs don’t want to conch pass or storytell, they’re going to be devoting a lot of table time and a lot of cognitive workspace to 3.
Some GMs love that. Some GMs love to mix 1 and 3 in equal parts. Maybe they also like a smidgeon of conch passing (historically this happens in low/zero stakes moments of play that are characterization/color-heavy like 45 minute campfire musings/laments or drunken tavern hooliganism or bakery/dress window shopping shenanigans).
I get it.
I’m just saying the useful analysis of prospective FKR GMs and players starts there.
This is what will happen as a result of your collision with this (presently…not so much after session 8) rules-minimalist game. The implications of GM Storytelling are x. The implications of Conch-passing are y. The implications of rules development/stress-testing/iterating live during play are z. Enjoy as your table sort this stuff out in its own unique way.