NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="woodelf" data-source="post: 2114334" data-attributes="member: 10201">That's one POV. I disagree. In fact, the more gamelike an RPG is, the less i like it. Rules that "facillitate gameplay" often actively detract from my RPing experience. Rules that don't match/provide the underlying physics of the world, likewise, tend not to interest me--unless the rules are so light/loose that they don't do that sort of stuff at all (IOW, OtE works just fine for me, because it's not about the behavior of the world at all).One: you've just talked with another. Perhaps with a slightly different POV than fusangite, but more similar to his POV than yours.Two: there's tons of them hanging out on r.g.f.advocacy, RPGNet, and The Forge, among other places--*and* i've met them in real life, and there are enough of them to drive sales of quite a few RPGs that accept that premise.I don't think he's referring to modelling real-world physics--i certainly am not. I'm saying that the rules model *a* world, and that that world's natural laws are essentially defined by the mechanics of the game.I also don't think that this is the only way to approach RPG mechanics. To use a concrete example: you can take escalating hit points in D&D to either be a literal model of the physics of the world (more powerful warriors can absorb more physical abuse), or a purely game construct (the hero is no tougher, just more skilled, luckier, or granted greater script immunity). Sometimes i prefer the former; sometimes the latter. In my particular case, i generally prefer the former when dealing with crunchy systems, and the latter when dealing with very light systems. Thus, D&D3E, frex, drives me batty because it generally doesn't model the physics very well, but is fairlyl detailed.I agree that what you do is more important than what the game designer provided--and that goes for the rules, too. As to which is more important, i don't think you're actually picturing a fluff-free game, based on what you say. Look at the D&D3E PH, minus the fluff: no description of what an elf looks like, how one behaves, or what they believe. Just that bulleted list of game rules to define one. Likewise, as much as half of every spell description would go away. The D&D3E core rules are *full* of fluff--probably 1/3 to 1/2 the wordcount. And, for that matter, those same rules are, for the most part, *based* upon the fluff--note how the fluff is basically the same as AD&D2, but the crunch is almost completely different. It's *because* the fluff says that an elf is around 5' tall and 110# that the rules classify her as "medium size".Now, i'm not saying that you can't also change those bits, or that you don't, just that fluff is far more pervasive than you seem to imply, and is far more encompassing than just bad game fiction (which, i, too, hate--in fact, i pretty much don't even bother reading it any more, even in setting books that i otherwise love).</blockquote>

Verification