Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 9032006" data-attributes="member: 71699">I felt my #709 was on the money, certainly! And among its implications are those you lay out here. Rules supersede norms including those that might have been established e.g. by writing them down, which itself might have occured during the process of play.Stuff thought of in advance (of any given session) can't be used to decide how things go independent of game mechanics. My #709 has said that is true of all RPG. Pursuant to [USER=42582]@pemerton[/USER]'s reading of what you say here, it is responsive to say that there are rules that are always in effect covering every case that arises in play. I'm not yet sure if I find that plausible*. Supposing for the sake of argument it were, then that would be a claim about the expansiveness of rules in certain games, rather than that in some RPGs rules don't supersede norms. (*The claim seems an overly strong one: that in seeking a description|rule match as discussed in #709, one will always be found.)(Interestingly, of course, above we have examples of groups resisting rules that supersede norms they feel strongly about! Reminding that while it's a property of rules that they supersede norms, the following of a rule never resides in the rule.)Anyway - to be clear - I am agreeing with what [USER=42582]@pemerton[/USER] wrote as it matches something I wrote earlier, which applies to all RPG. I'm not sure that what is distinct about no-myth is that the rules must be all-encompassing. Do you think so?I really wonder if it is not something else... some other prelusory goal, lusory means, or facet of the lusory attitude that we should be calling out. [USER=7027139]@loverdrive[/USER] seems to be thinking along those lines.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="clearstream, post: 9032006, member: 71699"] I felt my #709 was on the money, certainly! And among its implications are those you lay out here. Rules supersede norms including those that might have been established e.g. by writing them down, which itself might have occured during the process of play. Stuff thought of in advance (of any given session) can't be used to decide how things go [I]independent[/I] of game mechanics. My #709 has said that is true of all RPG. Pursuant to [USER=42582]@pemerton[/USER]'s reading of what you say here, it is responsive to say that there are rules that are [I]always [/I]in effect covering every case that arises in play. I'm not yet sure if I find that plausible*. Supposing for the sake of argument it were, then that would be a claim about the expansiveness of rules in certain games, rather than that in some RPGs rules don't supersede norms. (*The claim seems an overly strong one: that in seeking a description|rule match as discussed in #709, one will [I]always [/I]be found.) (Interestingly, of course, above we have examples of groups resisting rules that supersede norms they feel strongly about! Reminding that while it's a property of rules that they supersede norms, the following of a rule never resides in the rule.) Anyway - to be clear - I am agreeing with what [USER=42582]@pemerton[/USER] wrote as it matches something I wrote earlier, which applies to all RPG. I'm not sure that what is distinct about no-myth is that the rules must be all-encompassing. Do you think so? I really wonder if it is not something else... some other prelusory goal, lusory means, or facet of the lusory attitude that we should be calling out. [USER=7027139]@loverdrive[/USER] seems to be thinking along those lines. [/QUOTE]

Verification