Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 9257724" data-attributes="member: 71699">I mean that I don't view the consequence of principles or rules in TTRPG to be inevitable, but rather to define and encourage behaviour in fulfilment of a sense of duty or obligation around rule-following.When I observe how the content of game texts is conveyed into play, I see some rules that almost everyone follows, some that many follow but far from all, some that few follow, and some that it is unusual to ever see followed. And of course, I see rules that some folk follow one way, and others another.I regard the following of rules in TTRPG to be probabilistic or predictive: the presence of the rule in the text (along with other text such as examples) predicts at some level of probability it's enactment in play. So when I write about mediating cues I use language such as &quot;compel and constrain&quot; to indicate that it is not the case that the rule guarantees the behaviour, or predicts with certainty the form the behaviour will take. Rather I see the rule as normative or deontic in effect.I think you could see the principles of AW in the form of ideals toward which to strive. I see their presence in the game text as implying an obligation or duty to do so. Perhaps that is wrong, and one should suppose that there is no obligation but only an anticipated embracing of ideals. The way folk talk about social contracts and expectations around the table make me come down in favour of obligation.If there is a better way to see this or term to use, I'll be happy to improve my understanding!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="clearstream, post: 9257724, member: 71699"] I mean that I don't view the consequence of principles or rules in TTRPG to be inevitable, but rather to define and encourage behaviour in fulfilment of a sense of duty or obligation around rule-following. When I observe how the content of game texts is conveyed into play, I see some rules that almost everyone follows, some that many follow but far from all, some that few follow, and some that it is unusual to ever see followed. And of course, I see rules that some folk follow one way, and others another. I regard the following of rules in TTRPG to be probabilistic or predictive: the presence of the rule in the text (along with other text such as examples) predicts at some level of probability it's enactment in play. So when I write about mediating cues I use language such as "compel and constrain" to indicate that it is not the case that the rule guarantees the behaviour, or predicts with certainty the form the behaviour will take. Rather I see the rule as normative or deontic in effect. I think you could see the principles of AW in the form of ideals toward which to strive. I see their presence in the game text as implying an obligation or duty to do so. Perhaps that is wrong, and one should suppose that there is no obligation but only an anticipated embracing of ideals. The way folk talk about social contracts and expectations around the table make me come down in favour of obligation. If there is a better way to see this or term to use, I'll be happy to improve my understanding! [/QUOTE]

Verification