Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Imaro" data-source="post: 9034087" data-attributes="member: 48965">What pages of BitD would the hacking section be in?&nbsp; I have Blades but I don't remember reading that... of course it's been a while since I last looked at it.I think you missed my point.&nbsp; What I took from your post was that you were stating that the claims of trad play being flexible (irrespective of whether non-trad games are or are not) boils down to purely fictional differences as opposed to system and process and even experience differences.&nbsp; In response to that I am asking how you reconcile that view with the actual process/rules/changes in a single trad like D&amp;D that does actually change how a game is played, it's processes and what the experience of play is?EDIT: Also I'm unsure how to take it as anything but a &quot;knock&quot; when you are claiming their diversity of play doesn't amount to actual diversity except in what cloth happens to be draped over them?EDIT 2:&nbsp; I think there is something to be said for the fact that, non-trad games tend to rely on a strict set of principles in order to&nbsp; cultivate a specific experience and that deviating from these principles is considered to be playing the game incorrectly... however with most trad games there aren't strict principles used to cultivate a specific playstyle and more often than not players of those games are encouraged to make the game their own and play in whatever way makes the game fun (as opposed to correct) for them, up to and including adding some of the mechanics and procedures from non-trad games...&nbsp; To me this is at least a part of the perceived differences in flexibility.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Imaro, post: 9034087, member: 48965"] What pages of BitD would the hacking section be in? I have Blades but I don't remember reading that... of course it's been a while since I last looked at it. I think you missed my point. What I took from your post was that you were stating that the claims of trad play being flexible (irrespective of whether non-trad games are or are not) boils down to purely fictional differences as opposed to system and process and even experience differences. In response to that I am asking how you reconcile that view with the actual process/rules/changes in a single trad like D&D that does actually change how a game is played, it's processes and what the experience of play is? EDIT: Also I'm unsure how to take it as anything but a "knock" when you are claiming their diversity of play doesn't amount to actual diversity except in what cloth happens to be draped over them? EDIT 2: I think there is something to be said for the fact that, non-trad games tend to rely on a strict set of principles in order to cultivate a specific experience and that deviating from these principles is considered to be playing the game incorrectly... however with most trad games there aren't strict principles used to cultivate a specific playstyle and more often than not players of those games are encouraged to make the game their own and play in whatever way makes the game fun (as opposed to correct) for them, up to and including adding some of the mechanics and procedures from non-trad games... To me this is at least a part of the perceived differences in flexibility. [/QUOTE]

Verification