Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 8386065" data-attributes="member: 16814">This reads, and correct if wrong, that you're saying that rules exist to prevent GMs from just killing or doing horrible things to PCs.&nbsp; I mean, I have lots and lots of disagreements with this, but I'd prefer a petard of your own making -- if this is true, how do you square it with the clear statement that rules are free to be changed or ignored by a GM if it serves the story?&nbsp; How can rules be a bulwark against GMs going off the rails while at the same time GMs are fully authorized to ignore them?Rules exist to define the space of play -- what play will be about and where play will occur (for D&amp;D, on paper, with dice, and in our imaginations).&nbsp; They then provide a way to resolve conflicts in that space -- who gets to say what happens and how.&nbsp; I mean, we can look to Monopoly to see this -- the rules state play takes place on the board and with cards and with fake money.&nbsp; They establish roles and responsibilities (the banker, a player).&nbsp; They establish the order of play, and they establish how to resolve conflicts in play by saying what happens when and who has a say.&nbsp; So, when I land on an unpurchased space, and everyone wants something to happen, the rules say that it's the player whose turn it is gets to decide first -- do they purchase the property at the listed price or do they refuse.&nbsp; If they refuse, the rules establish how the space will be auctioned off -- someone must purchase the space before play continues.&nbsp; There are, of course, many other rules, but none of these rules exist with a primary purpose of stopping a player from setting fire to the board.&nbsp; Similarly, no rules in D&amp;D exist to stop a GM from burning their game to the ground.&nbsp; Because that's not the point of the rules -- it's not to primarily stop GMs who are just making it all up as they go from making up wrong things.&nbsp; The rules exist to establish the play spaces, how play progresses, and how to resolve conflicts in that space.&nbsp; Combat isn't there to stop a GM from just declaring a party dead to ogres, but to resolve the difference of opinion in what should happen next.&nbsp; It acts on all parties.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ovinomancer, post: 8386065, member: 16814"] This reads, and correct if wrong, that you're saying that rules exist to prevent GMs from just killing or doing horrible things to PCs. I mean, I have lots and lots of disagreements with this, but I'd prefer a petard of your own making -- if this is true, how do you square it with the clear statement that rules are free to be changed or ignored by a GM if it serves the story? How can rules be a bulwark against GMs going off the rails while at the same time GMs are fully authorized to ignore them? Rules exist to define the space of play -- what play will be about and where play will occur (for D&D, on paper, with dice, and in our imaginations). They then provide a way to resolve conflicts in that space -- who gets to say what happens and how. I mean, we can look to Monopoly to see this -- the rules state play takes place on the board and with cards and with fake money. They establish roles and responsibilities (the banker, a player). They establish the order of play, and they establish how to resolve conflicts in play by saying what happens when and who has a say. So, when I land on an unpurchased space, and everyone wants something to happen, the rules say that it's the player whose turn it is gets to decide first -- do they purchase the property at the listed price or do they refuse. If they refuse, the rules establish how the space will be auctioned off -- someone must purchase the space before play continues. There are, of course, many other rules, but none of these rules exist with a primary purpose of stopping a player from setting fire to the board. Similarly, no rules in D&D exist to stop a GM from burning their game to the ground. Because that's not the point of the rules -- it's not to primarily stop GMs who are just making it all up as they go from making up wrong things. The rules exist to establish the play spaces, how play progresses, and how to resolve conflicts in that space. Combat isn't there to stop a GM from just declaring a party dead to ogres, but to resolve the difference of opinion in what should happen next. It acts on all parties. [/QUOTE]

Verification