Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 5580095" data-attributes="member: 4937">Only partially.&nbsp;&nbsp; I simply posit that there is not a large dependence of play style on the rules.&nbsp;&nbsp; I don't deny that rules can influence play style, but its just one of several matters.Over the last few years I've had a growing realization that there are two areas of RPG practice that are very much under emphasized when we talk about RPGs.&nbsp; Those areas are how the game master prepares for an RPG session, and the style that we play the game in.&nbsp;&nbsp; I've come to realize that the preparation for a game and the style of the game are quite often completely divorsed from the rules of the game we call 'the system', but that they have a greater effect on how the game is actually played and experienced than the rules do.&nbsp;&nbsp; If you have two games with completely different rules, but the game master prepares for the games in the same manner and the players and game master adopt the same style of play, then the resulting games will largely resemble each other regardless of the differences in the rules.You talk about how going from Rolemaster to 4e has changed your groups play style.&nbsp;&nbsp; But I wonder how much of that is due to rules artifacts, and how much of that is due to perceptions of how the two games are supposed to play.&nbsp;&nbsp; I would presume that the shift from RM to 4e was dictated by a desire to have a different play style, so it would seem rather unlikely to me that your group would immediately thwart itself in that desire.&nbsp; Likewise, I wonder there are now changes in the sort of material that the game master prepares the game.&nbsp;&nbsp; When you state: &quot;but also relating to encounter design and the way that the rules deal with issues of authority over the ingame situation, and the relation of that to action resolution and GM force.&quot;, you are attributing a change to the rules and to a certain extent I'm sure you are right, but I'm equally seeing this as a description of a change in social contract, play style, and game preparation - all of which have a fairly loose relationship to the rules.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 5580095, member: 4937"] Only partially. I simply posit that there is not a large dependence of play style on the rules. I don't deny that rules can influence play style, but its just one of several matters. Over the last few years I've had a growing realization that there are two areas of RPG practice that are very much under emphasized when we talk about RPGs. Those areas are how the game master prepares for an RPG session, and the style that we play the game in. I've come to realize that the preparation for a game and the style of the game are quite often completely divorsed from the rules of the game we call 'the system', but that they have a greater effect on how the game is actually played and experienced than the rules do. If you have two games with completely different rules, but the game master prepares for the games in the same manner and the players and game master adopt the same style of play, then the resulting games will largely resemble each other regardless of the differences in the rules. You talk about how going from Rolemaster to 4e has changed your groups play style. But I wonder how much of that is due to rules artifacts, and how much of that is due to perceptions of how the two games are supposed to play. I would presume that the shift from RM to 4e was dictated by a desire to have a different play style, so it would seem rather unlikely to me that your group would immediately thwart itself in that desire. Likewise, I wonder there are now changes in the sort of material that the game master prepares the game. When you state: "but also relating to encounter design and the way that the rules deal with issues of authority over the ingame situation, and the relation of that to action resolution and GM force.", you are attributing a change to the rules and to a certain extent I'm sure you are right, but I'm equally seeing this as a description of a change in social contract, play style, and game preparation - all of which have a fairly loose relationship to the rules. [/QUOTE]

Verification