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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="howandwhy99" data-source="post: 6202603" data-attributes="member: 3192">Some fools gave me a degree in it, go figure. I apologize if you don't hold the opinions I thought you did. I went back and reread the first of those two posts and thought it assumed too much in the "you" usage.Let's just skip it then and stick to RPGs.There is no shared fiction being constructed or utilized during game play or in reference with the rules. Rules addressing a shared fiction don't have a place in an RPG. That's my direct point. Games reference a game construct, they require a field of play, but not a narrative. Try playing the text of Moby Dick as a game. Treating a game like a narrative is losing the purpose of why it was written, like hanging a tuba in an art gallery.There are.Yes, and those same atheist proponents suggest these properties are existent, but fictional when treated as references to other parts of existence. For the sake of treating them as a code it is their existence which matters, not any reference. The players are determining how to break down a "door" as constructed by game mechanics and existent in the DMs imagination. This is why they keep asking him or her questions about it in the form of perceptions and actions by their PCs (also existent in the DMs imagination). They do this as that's where the thing they are inspecting exists.No. Game definitions refer to game content, not common language understandings of the world outside our heads. As a code, each DM uses whatever shared language he has with the players to refer to it. But everyone understands the terms themselves are game specific. The GM refers to a door like any Chess player talks about a King. Dealing with people is dealing with mental states. A person is running the game. The DM has no reason whatsoever to create their code according to common use definitions for constructions of it. My "door" may be a zebra-striped, 8-legged giraffe-like creature I draw so the players understand its configuration. This gameboard is a manifestation of the code, mapped, hidden behind a DM screen, and used by DM whose imprint of it is the actual code to be deciphered.There is a game construct termed a "door" within the game that is.Yet neither of those two are denying the existence of the object. They are treating the object as a reference to a fiction and labeling the referent "fiction". Like I could call anything a fiction by claiming I don't see it anywhere except for my imagining of it.And D&D is a "fantasy game of your imagination". It's right there, all three words.The physicist is positing based upon his experiences in the actual world. His posits are called fictional by you (rather than speculative, which is what they are called as fiction an assertion of falseness) because he isn't sure that what he posited is actually what will happen. However, no one is denying the world is actual. You agree with that, right? The D&D player engaged in deciphering the DM's code never quite gets there, but she has actual interaction with the DM telling her the results of her attempt via the construct of her PC. To do this the DM running D&D must actually have a code in mind, so it can be played. You personally may call the Players' suppositions about the construct of the game "fictions", but the procedures of the game aren't designed for creating one. They are to enable the players to engage in game play (think Tic phase).Yes, there is a codified action procedure for the DM to follow, though not for the players to make decisions within as they do not know it. This code covers everything a Player could express to them. (btw, "Say Yes" does too). The code I use is like our universe. At any given moment in time it is finite, but it has the potential to go on without end. We are neither everywhere in it or every when. As actual reasoning (and people) are not infinite, the openness of this design is to enable players to stretch out from their current ways of thinking and get creative. However, there is a highly complex game code is to insure an extraordinary array of attempted actions have unique consequences in the game which will cascade out into its future states, never being written off or hand waved away. It's just like the consequences of previous moves are retained throughout any instance of play with a board game.There can be if there are wasps, ants and spiders in your game (which D&D includes). This is an old argument which doesn't hold up. It's thinking my in-game samurai sword should behave like I understand real samurai swords do rather than 1d8 hit points damage.Yeah, they shouldn't be making presumptions like that though, should they? And yes, there should be code for that stuff.A game construct's real world possibility isn't relevant. The DM relates the changing game board moved per the rules. And breaking and drowning things are hardly uncommon in most RPGs. They have rules for both in 3.x. Also, just because a publisher offers you suggestions for creating a code behind a screen doesn't mean those are all you are limited to. By your interpretation, yeah. I think the old guard kind of kicked in after awhile and started simply improvising stuff behind the screen. And that might have led to others seeing it as a authorized mode of play. I have no desire to try and emulate them, but I not ashamed to say I like their adventures and convert them for my games.Role playing is learning to perform the pattern of a social role. They require a hidden board to play.If you as a referee are in the position of deciding what a player is going go do: STOP. Ask them. Here is the positioning of the creatures you can see. Or, you hear breathing to your left, right, and front. Or, your blind and deaf, but what direction given your facing are your attacking with the sword? I have a map with the pieces on it behind the screen. I can adjudicate from well enough. Lareth flees due to morale rules. Fights according to predetermined combat strategies given quite a number of factors. How pragmatic solids, liquids, and gases operate in relation to gravity is pretty standard magic system rules. Drowning for air breathing submerged creatures is pretty common too.The board is imaginary (no quotes as it's not under contention that it is imaginary), but it is actual, not a fiction. It is what the players are referencing, not something outside the referee. It's best to begin with the board small and generate it larger as play progresses to when PCs can explore it faster and further. It's limited in potential, like players are limited to their own finiteness in what they can express to attempt.</blockquote>

Verification