Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Pedantic" data-source="post: 9696528" data-attributes="member: 6690965">This is... Strange. Like, the reason systems are interesting is to present challenges that can be honestly engaged with. If you're not going to do that, you're not playing a game at all, and the whole point of the activity is different. Plus, why would you want the "gamers" there if you're not going to play a game?This is just absolutely alien to me. Rules can't "get in the way" unless maybe they're poorly implemented/designed. They might be fiddly, but they ultimately are the structure of the thing. Getting them out of the way is also not to do the thing. I can understand a preference for simplicity, but that's an expensive design requirement and constrains the space you can build gameplay in.I think my position is maybe best understood by attaching RPGs to the same spectrum board games live in. I think of them as different in quantity, presenting more board states, unbounded play and so on, but not findamentally different in kind. It's still a surprise to me how often the understanding of "game" in the field is coming from improv or theatre instead. It feels increasingly to me that's the angle designs and often players approach from.</blockquote>