Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 9257714" data-attributes="member: 71699">It feels like a good idea to start by being certain what is meant by &quot;principles&quot;. Here is Baker's list from AWBarf forth apocalyptica.
Address yourself to the characters, not the players.
Make your move, but misdirect.
Make your move, but never speak its name.
Look through crosshairs.
Name everyone, make everyone human.
Ask provocative questions and build on the answers.
Respond with fuckery and intermittent rewards.
Be a fan of the players’ characters.
Think offscreen too.
Sometimes, disclaim decision-making
Here are some added by DWDraw maps, leave blanks
Embrace the fantastic
Make a move that follows
Think dangerous
Begin and end with the fictionAgainst which can be contrastedYou can change people’s normal social system with principles. “Your right to say what your character does ends at my character’s skin. You can say your character punches mine, but I get to say how it affects my character.”Presupposing &quot;property rights&quot; is an accurate characterisation of the immediately above, to my reading the &quot;principles&quot; in AW go beyond that. One option is to suppose he considered and intended different sorts of principles to apply to freeform. That might be true, but the text is too scanty to go on. To me, it feels like there is work to do to say what &quot;principles&quot; really covers for TTRPG. Only then could one say whether an ultralight ruleset can/cannot incoporate principles that have the sort of consequences I am thinking of.I'm interested in whether you agree with the above observations, or in any case in your thoughts around what &quot;principles&quot; are in TTRPG?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="clearstream, post: 9257714, member: 71699"] It feels like a good idea to start by being certain what is meant by "principles". Here is Baker's list from AW [INDENT]Barf forth apocalyptica.[/INDENT] [INDENT]Address yourself to the characters, not the players.[/INDENT] [INDENT]Make your move, but misdirect.[/INDENT] [INDENT]Make your move, but never speak its name.[/INDENT] [INDENT]Look through crosshairs.[/INDENT] [INDENT]Name everyone, make everyone human.[/INDENT] [INDENT]Ask provocative questions and build on the answers.[/INDENT] [INDENT]Respond with fuckery and intermittent rewards.[/INDENT] [INDENT]Be a fan of the players’ characters.[/INDENT] [INDENT]Think offscreen too.[/INDENT] [INDENT]Sometimes, disclaim decision-making[/INDENT] [INDENT][/INDENT] Here are some added by DW [INDENT]Draw maps, leave blanks[/INDENT] [INDENT]Embrace the fantastic[/INDENT] [INDENT]Make a move that follows[/INDENT] [INDENT]Think dangerous[/INDENT] [INDENT]Begin and end with the fiction[/INDENT] Against which can be contrasted [INDENT]You can change people’s normal social system with principles. “Your right to say what your character does ends at my character’s skin. You can say your character punches mine, but I get to say how it affects my character.”[/INDENT] Presupposing "property rights" is an accurate characterisation of the immediately above, to my reading the "principles" in AW go beyond that. One option is to suppose he considered and intended different sorts of principles to apply to freeform. That might be true, but the text is too scanty to go on. To me, it feels like there is work to do to say what "principles" really covers for TTRPG. Only then could one say whether an ultralight ruleset can/cannot incoporate principles that have the sort of consequences I am thinking of. I'm interested in whether you agree with the above observations, or in any case in your thoughts around what "principles" are in TTRPG? [/QUOTE]

Verification