Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 9279805" data-attributes="member: 71699">The boundary between principles and rules is permeable, so that there are entities along it that are ambiguous. Views are likely to vary widely as to whether to count such entities principles or rules. There are also entities far from the boundary. Views will more often accord on identifying those as either principles or rules.So I do not say that my &quot;strong distinction&quot; is as to the clear identification of entities along the boundary as principles or rules; rather it is as to the features of those away from the boundaries. I'm not sure what tells us when an entity along the boundary goes one way or another. I assume that's down to some other sort of norm, and thus cohort-specific.I can say what to count as the game of Chess, what to count as Chess-like, and what to count as not-Chess. I can list game properties associated with Chess and get far enough away from them to feel confident of agreement. But I can't say exactly where games stop being Chess-like and start being something else for all cohorts. And even if I think I can identify a TTRPG, I'm reminded of Baker's observation that &quot;TTRPGs are no more fundamentally alike than video games, sports, or any other arbitrary game category.&quot;</blockquote>

[QUOTE="clearstream, post: 9279805, member: 71699"] The boundary between principles and rules is permeable, so that there are entities along it that are ambiguous. Views are likely to vary widely as to whether to count such entities principles or rules. There are also entities far from the boundary. Views will more often accord on identifying those as either principles or rules. So I do not say that my "strong distinction" is as to the clear identification of entities along the boundary as principles or rules; rather it is as to the features of those away from the boundaries. I'm not sure what tells us when an entity along the boundary goes one way or another. I assume that's down to some other sort of norm, and thus cohort-specific. I can say what to count as the game of Chess, what to count as Chess-like, and what to count as not-Chess. I can list game properties associated with Chess and get far enough away from them to feel confident of agreement. But I can't say exactly where games stop being Chess-like and start being something else for all cohorts. And even if I think I can identify a TTRPG, I'm reminded of Baker's observation that "TTRPGs are no more fundamentally alike than video games, sports, or any other arbitrary game category." [/QUOTE]

Verification