Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9014993" data-attributes="member: 6790260">While rudeness is a concern, my greater issue is the loss of game that comes from employing such a sweeping notion.Rules set the baseline expectations. Every game, even board games, can be adjusted to suit the players' needs. Consider, for example, how many variant/house rules there are for UNO, many of which players don't necessarily know are house rules and which ger criticized with, for example, the online playable version as being &quot;not real UNO.&quot;So, what to make then of it when something goes out of its way to tell you, &quot;None of these rules matter. They're all diaphanous cobwebs to be brushed aside at any time for any reason.&quot; In that context, &quot;game&quot; ceases to have meaning. This is the reason why critics make comparisons to (and I know I'm going to get some flak just for mentioning it) &quot;Mother May I.&quot; Because when there are no rules, when structure is made of Play-Doh and someone (be it one person or multiple) can just decide to upend everything because they've found a way they think fits better, you're left having to flounder in the dark for how to act, or (in some ways worse) having to try to read the coordinating player's mind, not just about what is worth doing, but how to even do things in the first place.Tactical infinity at the cost of zero depth: you can do whatever you want, but you'll have no idea how and even less idea what impact it will have, because the &quot;rules&quot; are merely suggestions and the coordinating player (DM with &quot;unilateral&quot; and &quot;absolute power&quot;) takes such pains to remind you of that fact.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 9014993, member: 6790260"] While rudeness is a concern, my greater issue is the loss of [I]game[/I] that comes from employing such a sweeping notion. Rules set the baseline expectations. Every game, even board games, can be adjusted to suit the players' needs. Consider, for example, how many variant/house rules there are for UNO, many of which players don't necessarily know are house rules and which ger criticized with, for example, the online playable version as being "not [I]real[/I] UNO." So, what to make then of it when something goes out of its way to tell you, "None of these rules matter. They're all diaphanous cobwebs to be brushed aside at any time for any reason." In that context, "game" ceases to have meaning. This is the reason why critics make comparisons to (and I know I'm going to get some flak just for [I]mentioning[/I] it) "Mother May I." Because when there are no [I]rules[/I], when structure is made of Play-Doh and someone (be it one person or multiple) can just decide to upend everything because they've found a way they think fits better, you're left having to flounder in the dark for how to act, or (in some ways worse) having to try to read the coordinating player's mind, not just about what is worth doing, but [I]how[/I] to even do things in the first place. Tactical infinity at the cost of zero depth: you can do whatever you want, but you'll have no idea how and even less idea what impact it will have, because the "rules" are merely suggestions and the coordinating player (DM with "unilateral" and "absolute power") takes such pains to remind you of that fact. [/QUOTE]

Verification