the_fantastic_ms_fox (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
the_fantastic_ms_fox) wrote2008-04-23 06:21 pm
the_fantastic_ms_fox) wrote2008-04-23 06:21 pm
I add what to my what and compare it to what now?
I'm reading through and reflecting upon RPG supplements for White Wolf, GURPS and D&D. I'm thinking do they actually expect me to remember any of this? Did I used to play this?
Talk about complicated! If I wanted to memorize charts and tables, I'd be an accountant - that way, they pay you.
I like the idea of RPGs, but they often fall so short. Many RPG writers earn the reputation as a hobby for obsessives - there's no other way to learn many of these systems.
It's ironic, seeing as someone with a basic (i.e. rank novice) background in math, or computer programming, or organization, or especially computer game design, should be able to go over these rules and shake their head: these don't make sense. These numbers don't add up. These probabilities are wacked. Some people can't play this; most won't.
I can see what is at work here. There is an attempt to build a controlled system that models the world and shepherds a story through it; mediating conflicts; arbitrating disputes.
However the longer the attempt, the more stringent the modelling; the more rules, the less accurate modelling it does:
- people can't remember enough rules to play it (no players = no game = no modelling)
- the more rules there are, the more holes there are when rules intersect
- the more attempts there are to control, to automate, the more control slips though
Other ways are necessary; simpler ones.
There are many things like this. Our tax system comes to mind.
Talk about complicated! If I wanted to memorize charts and tables, I'd be an accountant - that way, they pay you.
I like the idea of RPGs, but they often fall so short. Many RPG writers earn the reputation as a hobby for obsessives - there's no other way to learn many of these systems.
It's ironic, seeing as someone with a basic (i.e. rank novice) background in math, or computer programming, or organization, or especially computer game design, should be able to go over these rules and shake their head: these don't make sense. These numbers don't add up. These probabilities are wacked. Some people can't play this; most won't.
I can see what is at work here. There is an attempt to build a controlled system that models the world and shepherds a story through it; mediating conflicts; arbitrating disputes.
However the longer the attempt, the more stringent the modelling; the more rules, the less accurate modelling it does:
- people can't remember enough rules to play it (no players = no game = no modelling)
- the more rules there are, the more holes there are when rules intersect
- the more attempts there are to control, to automate, the more control slips though
Other ways are necessary; simpler ones.
There are many things like this. Our tax system comes to mind.