Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 4993775" data-attributes="member: 18280">That would actually be an example of "A".  Pretty much sums up a rejection of the notion of a game, then.  The argument becomes one of terminology.  I am curious, though, as to whether or not you could sample me a commercial RPG (i.e., something I could examine) where you believe that the win conditions are not tied to the events of the game.I suspect that your analysis of any such ruleset is incomplete, but I would be more than happy to learn that I am wrong.Oh, I like "shooting the breeze", too.  I just don't mistake it for a game.I suspect that we would agree that your game is a game, that we are effectively "talking past each other".  I suspect from your statements that in your game you are not distinguishing between what I called the "framework" and the "story of the game".  As a result, you view the outcome as known where only the outcome of the framework is known.For example, in a game modelled off of the original Star Trek series, the status quo would be the expected outcome of every "episode" (adventure).  The status quo is effectively the framework; the events of the adventure are the "story of the game".  So, the events when the USS Enterprise encounter the Tholians are unknown (this is what the game is about), but that the USS Enterprise will survive its encounter with the Tholians, with major crew intact, can be known.In order to achieve this effect, the GM can do any of the following with the victory conditions of the episode:(1)  Not have them involved with the survival of the USS Enterprise or the crew.  I.e., the question being resolved in the game is, can Captain Kirk et al prevent the Tholians from destroying Outpost K-11?  Or, can the USS Enterprise get the Tholians to negotiate a peace treaty with the Gorn?(2)  Make the Tholian threat to the USS Enterprise & crew so small that the odds of failure are infintesimally small.(3)  Prepare (or wing) a deux ex machina solution to prevent the Tholians from destroying the USS Enterprise & crew should the PCs fail.Out of these options, (1) is probably the most satisfying, and I believe it is what you mean when you say that the Batman/Joker outcome is known.  In this case, though, the "story of the game" (aka, "How are the victory conditions resolved?") have nothing to do with the USS Enterprise being destroyed, and are still completely open to all sorts of possible outcomes.I believe that you are imagining that I am saying "everything must be in doubt" for a game to exist.  I am not.  All that must be in doubt is the outcome of the victory conditions.  I believe that what you are calling "the focus of a particular game" is the area of the game on which the victory conditions are predicated.The "events of the game" do not have to be encounters; they are whatever choices are meaningful for the resolution of the victory conditions.  In your tradgedy game example, for instance, the HOW of your death is predicated on the game situations you face.  The victory conditions are, presumably, to meet conditions that make your (known aforehand) sacrifice either worthwhile or satisfying in some other way.  The game (or game scenario) must have some means (even if subjective) of quantifying that value, of opposing that value, and of making the choices that lead to increasing that value something more than a simple checklist.  The unknown aspect of the game -- the thing that makes it a game -- is attempting to increase that value (competing against other players or the game itself, depending upon the nature of the game).As a result, the outcome of the tragedy game is not that you are going to die.  The framework is that you are going to die.  The outcome is rather what value you manage to achieve prior to dying, or through the act of dying.I would agree.  It is, simply put, easier to quantify certain kinds of victory conditions than others, and most games make use of those easily quantifiable data.  Heck, this shouldn't be surprising, when a lot of people playing games with less easily quantifiable data are not even aware that they are meeting victory conditions, or that the outcome of the game is not the framework, or that the outcome is even in doubt!RC</blockquote>

Verification