Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 4270489" data-attributes="member: 42582">I find both parts of the quoted passage difficult.As to the freedom principle: that sets a very harsh threshold of adequacy for a game system. Just a couple of examples: D&amp;D has no rule for adjudicating the consequences of a character's self-inflicted non-lethal wounds (eg in order to try to avoid conscription, or to persuade another that one was attacked). Nor does it have any rule for adjudicating an attempt by a character to disable another with a debilitating but not-immediately-lethal stomach wound.Off the top of my head I can't think of any RPG that satisfies your freedom principle. Most depend upon an explicit or implicit meta-principle along the lines of &quot;Don't attempt actions of type X because this game doesn't handle those.&quot;As to the two stages: Is the spending of a Fate Point in order to gain certain narrative rights (OGL Conan is one game that permits this) design (ie world creation) or immersion (particpating in the game). What about a game like Runquest, in which character creation and development is itself metagame free and an integral part of play?Your principles and distinctions seem to presuppose that character and world building are almost entirely metagame processes, and that action resolution is an infinitely-flexible non-metagame process, but that presupposition does not hold good for a good many RPGs.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 4270489, member: 42582"] I find both parts of the quoted passage difficult. As to the freedom principle: that sets a very harsh threshold of adequacy for a game system. Just a couple of examples: D&D has no rule for adjudicating the consequences of a character's self-inflicted non-lethal wounds (eg in order to try to avoid conscription, or to persuade another that one was attacked). Nor does it have any rule for adjudicating an attempt by a character to disable another with a debilitating but not-immediately-lethal stomach wound. Off the top of my head I can't think of any RPG that satisfies your freedom principle. Most depend upon an explicit or implicit meta-principle along the lines of "Don't attempt actions of type X because this game doesn't handle those." As to the two stages: Is the spending of a Fate Point in order to gain certain narrative rights (OGL Conan is one game that permits this) design (ie world creation) or immersion (particpating in the game). What about a game like Runquest, in which character creation and development is itself metagame free and an integral part of play? Your principles and distinctions seem to presuppose that character and world building are almost entirely metagame processes, and that action resolution is an infinitely-flexible non-metagame process, but that presupposition does not hold good for a good many RPGs. [/QUOTE]

Verification