Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 2115716" data-attributes="member: 18280">Obviously.Don't mistake a refutation of an argument (i.e., a refutation of the general statement that game rules are not analogous to physics within the context of the game world) as an argument that the original analogy (game rules as analogous to game world physics) is worth obsessing over in actual game play.  Some statements ("From time to time the GM of games I'm in changes the rules. For instance our GM ruled you couldn't trip with an attack of opportunity. At no point did I feel the rules of the universe had changed, merely the rules of the game.") require a level of dissection to component parts to determine whether or not they apply to the question at hand.Language is inherently inexact.  The statement, "At no point did I feel the rules of the universe had changed, merely the rules of the game" refutes the statement "The game rules are the 'rules of the universe,' determining what is possible and what is not. When a new case occurs (i.e., new rules are added), it amounts to a new discovery in the physics of the game setting." only if one accepts one of two basic assumptions:(1)  The viewpoint of the player is essentially the same as the viewpoint of a fictional character in the game, or (2)  The universe of the player is essentially the same as the fictional universe of a fictional character in the game.Clearly, we have little worry that most of us accept (2) as a reasonable assumption.  No one really believes (I hope) that the World of Greyhawk is a real place, or that they might find a portal to the Forgotten Realms ala Elminster.  All that remains is to examine assumption (1).I contend that this:"First off, I hope you can concede that there is a difference between the perspective of the player, and the fictional perspective of the character which that player controls. From the player's perspective, the rules of the game have changed. No one is suggesting that real-world physics change because of this. However, from the fictional perspective of the PC, he is no longer able to do something he was able to do yesterday. That is, fundamentally, a shift in the way the world works. This would be true whether or not the change was actually "noticed" by anyone in that setting."represents a fairly reasonable examination of that assumption.I'm not exactly sure what this has to do with "the lives and resurrections the Jasper the Wimp," unless you are trying to claim that a carefully structured campaign setting with strong flavor text (i.e., lots of meat on dem bones) somehow leads to wimpy, easily killed characters who get brought back to life a lot?RC</blockquote>

Verification