Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Wandering Monsters: You Got Science in My Fantasy!
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="howandwhy99" data-source="post: 6202548" data-attributes="member: 3192"><p>Calls to religious "higher order" manifestations doesn't remove "higher orders" from existent reality. The DM is reporting on objects existent in the real world of the imagination just as you can tell me how you feel and think (as you are). Within the code used by the DM there can be doors and oak wood. And a door consisting of oak wood. These are existing game content like any other part of the game board. Telling you this is not improvising when DMing. My repetition of a pattern/code enables you as a player to play a game rather than address a fiction. When you attempt another move, I refer back to the code and relay your results.</p><p></p><p>This is to say, D&D is not a story game. Story games use a small set of procedures, rules, for all participants to follow in order to create a fiction. Period. They include no other game designs or game play, and frankly, if the rules get in the way of creating a fiction --story telling-- then they are said to be the problem. Many storygames are not designed to be enjoyable as games and gamers seeking game play tend to stay away from them for that reason. D&D is all about relishing the game play (the success of similar designs in computer game form should proof enough of its value). </p><p></p><p>That last happens only in story games where game play is downgraded and improvisation written in as the game's "objective". (I mean, how exactly does one declare their "absolute inevitability" - narrative creation - as an objective <em>to be</em> attained?) (~They don't of course, there are no objectives in storygames beyond "good story" or "have fun". Are we having fun yet?)</p><p></p><p>I have a game code (a few now) for everything you mentioned. You could probably discern one too if you gave it a chance. </p><p></p><p>Or.. you could understand that he is stating that he didn't include everything for game play, like behavior by Intelligence as mentioned in the Monster Manual. And that the DM will need to further game material to cover it. I think players coming from a ...Type B?, broken game design of the 90s and 00s might have difficulty understanding why the DM isn't supposed to "make things up" when the rules run out. "We've always done it that way" is not justification for "that is the way it must be done". Gygax had incredible insight and intuition for game design, but he left out all sorts of necessary game material until he finally quit the design of D&D for "make it up" Skill Games (in part I believe from the heated and lengthy D&D / GURPS conflict which went on throughout the 1980s.)</p><p></p><p>A good RPG like any good game attempts assumes some prior knowledge of the players. "They read English" and so on. But how a a game mechanic works in code breaking game is known by experienced gamers through playing the game, not prior assumptions of what it appears like outside of game. At best, those are clues. But they can be every bit as much illusions too, traps. It is players' comprehension of the game code or rules which that matters when playing a game.</p><p></p><p>D&D is a board game, it's simply not a finite one. More game board can be generated from the code. And any as of yet unconfigured area of the game board can be determined by players who submit backgrounds, adventure modules, and plenty of other custom designs (races, spells, classes, items, etc.) that the referee then uses to convert game code into a manifestation of the code similar to the submission. After some back and forth clarification of needs the DM needs and desires of the player the final, hidden piece of the game board is attached to the currently generated one. </p><p></p><p>Treat D&D like a game, which is in part an existing state of affairs within a limited environment, and it isn't that hard to play it as a game rather than an exclusively improvisational activity.</p><p></p><p>So I use a different word than you do for this very distinctive use of fiction. I use -Fantasy- as relative to reality. I play a fantasy game, meaning it is existent in my head, but not understood as existing anywhere else in the reality outside of me. It is not a genre of narrative tropes, which makes it so. </p><p></p><p>Truths relative to this fantasy aren't determined, but pragmatically surmised by the players. Pragmatism being a necessary component of all game play. Referees, on the other hand, need to move the pieces of the game upon the board according to the predetermined code the players are seeking to decipher. They move these pieces according to the players' directions, but these are "Directions", not narration. (If the Referee is confused by or hold a multiplicity of definitions for a direction, they need to continue rechecking with the player until the directions are clarified. "This square here?" "Yes, that square there"). </p><p></p><p>Most of the game rules of D&D are about enabling clear communication between players and DM. What passes as D&D rules, and should be, is 99% (100%?) of what designers confusedly call the official rules. This was an error made by Gygax too, especially when he went on to say only the people playing the "official rules" in the AD&D books were actually playing D&D. Dungeons & Dragons isn't any particular DMs code hidden behind the screen. (Nor is it a branding of narrative fictions as popularly held today). It's the rules to be known by all the participants for how to run and play the game. Most of what is taken as rules is code mechanic "suggestions" no DM actually needs to use.</p><p></p><p>--</p><p></p><p>If you recall a few years (5?) ago I talked about the 3 phases of understanding and playing Tic-Tac-Toe. (I believe there are more than 3 now)</p><p>Tic phase is when you learn the game, usually when a child, and play it to win by seeking to reach the game objective first within the rules and field of play as established by the game. </p><p>Tac phase is when you have solved the game. Tic-Tac-Toe is an easily solved game. It has 10,000+ game states, but kids under 10 are able to reach Tac phase. Game Theory is all about Tic and Tac phase and stick to it.</p><p>Toe phase is when you declare there are no such things as X's, O's, a grid, squares, and even quantity like "9" existent in-the-world. It is a variety of narrative absolutism. And because it usually comes last it is confused by those who fully haven't grasped it yet as a "final progression". And not yet another alternative. They are still believing in the Tic and Tac phase understandings <em>actual improvement</em>. </p><p></p><p>The last phase is where a lot of people are in our world, quite self-righteously so in the belief that their current understanding cannot be wrong as it no longer holds to right or wrong, success or failure states. It's a kind of subjectivist extremism which has its own pitfalls like losing grasp of all reality. But it has plenty of positives too.</p><p></p><p>Dungeons & Dragons, as a reality puzzle game, a game that seeks game play first and foremost, places players upon an imaginary fantasy board to enable them to engage wholly within the state of Tic Phase. That's the purpose of it's design. It has some great positives, but drawbacks too. Like engaging with an imagined reality that only exists in other people's heads too much that we might ignore our real one. </p><p></p><p>Even though both ...scopes of action? are incredibly different, they both suffer from losing touch with reality. One treats it like a genre label, the other by growing roots too deeply into the realm of imagination.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="howandwhy99, post: 6202548, member: 3192"] Calls to religious "higher order" manifestations doesn't remove "higher orders" from existent reality. The DM is reporting on objects existent in the real world of the imagination just as you can tell me how you feel and think (as you are). Within the code used by the DM there can be doors and oak wood. And a door consisting of oak wood. These are existing game content like any other part of the game board. Telling you this is not improvising when DMing. My repetition of a pattern/code enables you as a player to play a game rather than address a fiction. When you attempt another move, I refer back to the code and relay your results. This is to say, D&D is not a story game. Story games use a small set of procedures, rules, for all participants to follow in order to create a fiction. Period. They include no other game designs or game play, and frankly, if the rules get in the way of creating a fiction --story telling-- then they are said to be the problem. Many storygames are not designed to be enjoyable as games and gamers seeking game play tend to stay away from them for that reason. D&D is all about relishing the game play (the success of similar designs in computer game form should proof enough of its value). That last happens only in story games where game play is downgraded and improvisation written in as the game's "objective". (I mean, how exactly does one declare their "absolute inevitability" - narrative creation - as an objective [I]to be[/I] attained?) (~They don't of course, there are no objectives in storygames beyond "good story" or "have fun". Are we having fun yet?) I have a game code (a few now) for everything you mentioned. You could probably discern one too if you gave it a chance. Or.. you could understand that he is stating that he didn't include everything for game play, like behavior by Intelligence as mentioned in the Monster Manual. And that the DM will need to further game material to cover it. I think players coming from a ...Type B?, broken game design of the 90s and 00s might have difficulty understanding why the DM isn't supposed to "make things up" when the rules run out. "We've always done it that way" is not justification for "that is the way it must be done". Gygax had incredible insight and intuition for game design, but he left out all sorts of necessary game material until he finally quit the design of D&D for "make it up" Skill Games (in part I believe from the heated and lengthy D&D / GURPS conflict which went on throughout the 1980s.) A good RPG like any good game attempts assumes some prior knowledge of the players. "They read English" and so on. But how a a game mechanic works in code breaking game is known by experienced gamers through playing the game, not prior assumptions of what it appears like outside of game. At best, those are clues. But they can be every bit as much illusions too, traps. It is players' comprehension of the game code or rules which that matters when playing a game. D&D is a board game, it's simply not a finite one. More game board can be generated from the code. And any as of yet unconfigured area of the game board can be determined by players who submit backgrounds, adventure modules, and plenty of other custom designs (races, spells, classes, items, etc.) that the referee then uses to convert game code into a manifestation of the code similar to the submission. After some back and forth clarification of needs the DM needs and desires of the player the final, hidden piece of the game board is attached to the currently generated one. Treat D&D like a game, which is in part an existing state of affairs within a limited environment, and it isn't that hard to play it as a game rather than an exclusively improvisational activity. So I use a different word than you do for this very distinctive use of fiction. I use -Fantasy- as relative to reality. I play a fantasy game, meaning it is existent in my head, but not understood as existing anywhere else in the reality outside of me. It is not a genre of narrative tropes, which makes it so. Truths relative to this fantasy aren't determined, but pragmatically surmised by the players. Pragmatism being a necessary component of all game play. Referees, on the other hand, need to move the pieces of the game upon the board according to the predetermined code the players are seeking to decipher. They move these pieces according to the players' directions, but these are "Directions", not narration. (If the Referee is confused by or hold a multiplicity of definitions for a direction, they need to continue rechecking with the player until the directions are clarified. "This square here?" "Yes, that square there"). Most of the game rules of D&D are about enabling clear communication between players and DM. What passes as D&D rules, and should be, is 99% (100%?) of what designers confusedly call the official rules. This was an error made by Gygax too, especially when he went on to say only the people playing the "official rules" in the AD&D books were actually playing D&D. Dungeons & Dragons isn't any particular DMs code hidden behind the screen. (Nor is it a branding of narrative fictions as popularly held today). It's the rules to be known by all the participants for how to run and play the game. Most of what is taken as rules is code mechanic "suggestions" no DM actually needs to use. -- If you recall a few years (5?) ago I talked about the 3 phases of understanding and playing Tic-Tac-Toe. (I believe there are more than 3 now) Tic phase is when you learn the game, usually when a child, and play it to win by seeking to reach the game objective first within the rules and field of play as established by the game. Tac phase is when you have solved the game. Tic-Tac-Toe is an easily solved game. It has 10,000+ game states, but kids under 10 are able to reach Tac phase. Game Theory is all about Tic and Tac phase and stick to it. Toe phase is when you declare there are no such things as X's, O's, a grid, squares, and even quantity like "9" existent in-the-world. It is a variety of narrative absolutism. And because it usually comes last it is confused by those who fully haven't grasped it yet as a "final progression". And not yet another alternative. They are still believing in the Tic and Tac phase understandings [I]actual improvement[/I]. The last phase is where a lot of people are in our world, quite self-righteously so in the belief that their current understanding cannot be wrong as it no longer holds to right or wrong, success or failure states. It's a kind of subjectivist extremism which has its own pitfalls like losing grasp of all reality. But it has plenty of positives too. Dungeons & Dragons, as a reality puzzle game, a game that seeks game play first and foremost, places players upon an imaginary fantasy board to enable them to engage wholly within the state of Tic Phase. That's the purpose of it's design. It has some great positives, but drawbacks too. Like engaging with an imagined reality that only exists in other people's heads too much that we might ignore our real one. Even though both ...scopes of action? are incredibly different, they both suffer from losing touch with reality. One treats it like a genre label, the other by growing roots too deeply into the realm of imagination. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Wandering Monsters: You Got Science in My Fantasy!
Top