Forum changes: Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.
Started by Walt Freitag, June 03, 2003, 05:43:07 PM
Quote from: II agree that "fidelity to a set of rules" doesn't seem to have much meaning, yet if we're talking about the fidelity associated with exploration of system, it's where we end up... The problem is what sort of fidelity goes along with "exploration of system."
Quote from: Mike HolmesI've never understood System as one of the five elements. If system is the means by which we determine what happens in-game, then it's all of play, and encompasses the other elements. So if the system says that color shall be thus and such, and the GM is responsible for seeing that it occurs, color is part of the system. OTOH, I can see exploration of Mechanics, which is what I assumed was what Ron meant before he rightly defined System in it's larger role. Ron can you clarify once again what you mean by Exploration of System?
Quote from: Ron EdwardsRolling to hit is a great example of Exploration of System. We have turned to some methodology in order to imagine what is happening in the game world. This methodology necessarily includes all the formal mechanics, but "formal" is often locally defined. In the case of rolling to hit, that local definition just means, "follow the written rule." Most of the time, I think, we can stick with this simple understanding. However, that simple understanding isn't sufficient. For instance, a rule or method might be in the book, but the group ignores it (e.g. weapon's Speed Factor or whatever the hell it was called in my old AD&D books). That omission is part of System for that group. Similarly, just deciding that "he hits," without rolling or using other formal indicators, is System too, insofar as someone is designated as The Buck-Stopper (the guy who decides). To say that System therefore applies to all moments of play is perfectly correct. I should also say that System can be highly, highly prioritized, and that's often the case when it's formalized through text, and when, for that group, that text's integrity is a big reason for why they're using it. As you know, GURPS included this idea as a big part of its marketing strategy back in the 80s, and JAGS, EABA, and Pocket Universe all provide (in my view) an improved and even more committed version of this strategy. Does that help?
Quote from: I...Does that mean all consensual use of System is exploration of System? Gah. Wouldn't that make any functional play in any system Simulationist? In The Pool, I might know the perfect Premise-addressing thing to narrate, but the die roll says I don't get to narrate; using ( = exploring?) the system apparently has priority.
Quote from: John KimThis doesn't seem right to me. "Exploration" to me implies learning. Thus, for example, if a D&D group goes through a dungeon module, they are exploring setting. However, if after they complete the module, they play it again, there is much less exploration going on. If they keep playing through that module twelve more times, there is really no exploration left. Now, I can see some games being exploration of system, like say Rolemaster or Champions. Through play, you learn nuances of the complex system which you didn't before. However, I don't think that simply using the system constitutes exploration. For example, a hit roll in Call of Cthulhu is very cut and dried. After your first game (at most) of CoC, there is no longer any exploration of system in rolling for your attack.
Quote from: RonI'm using the definition of Exploration from my essay. This seems to have tripped you up a few times already in discussion, John. It just means imagining stuff in the process of role-playing.
Quote from: Jason (cruciel)Funny thing about Exploration of System...I've got the same confusion over Situation (isn't all roleplaying about what happens?) So, to answer my own question, and maybe yours: I think what I've forgotten is that all Exploration elements are present in play, saying you are prioritizing System doesn't mean it's your singular focus (like GNS would be), but instead it is saying that the player is committing more attention to how it influences the events in the shared imaginary space. For example, prioritizing Explore:System may be nothing more complicated than devoting more thought to how the movement rules work (System) than what the character looks like when running (Color).
Quote from: MikeExcept that by the larger definition, how you determine Color is via system. How you determine Situation is via system. How you determine setting is via system. I mean, if the system is that the GM is arbiter of the setting as he ususally is, then isn't the GM creating a setting detail like a palace just a use of system? Better put, give me an example of using the system that's not also one of the other four. I mean if rolling to hit is a great example of exploring system, isn't that just altering situation as well? Or do we mean simply resolution systems, and not system overall? If the group ignores a rule, haven't they just drifted to a new rule that says that this situation isn't covered by resolution mechanics? That it's covered by GM fiat, or something like that? Isn't that system? I'm not getting it, Ron.
Quote from: RonThe way I see it, if you have Character, Situation, Setting, and Color, then nothing happens. That's right, even if you have Situation. It's all frozen without System.
Quote from: MikeRight. So either you explore System, or nothing happens. Which means that you are always exploring system in play. How can one prioritize system, if it's always already in use?
Quote from: Ron"Use" and "prioritize" aren't the same things. I'm kind of puzzled, man. All of the five elements are "always in use." Prioritizing them is a matter of which causes which, or which receive more energy and attention than the others - not a matter of which get used at all and which don't. I was under the impression that the Sim essay was pretty clear about that.
Quote from: Ralph (Valamir)Ron I think the problem Mike is having is that this discussion seems to have inflated system into something that is no longer 1 of the 5, but rather above the remaining 4. i.e. Instead of [Social Context [Exploration of the 5 [GNS]]] it now appears to be: [Social Context [System [Exploration of the 4 [GNS]]]
Quote from: John Laviolette (talysman)I'm betting Ron would say the same thing about any of the elements of Exploration... if you have Setting, System, Situation and Color, but no Character, you have no play.
Quote from: MikeRon, that's a semantic argument. Forget "Use". Insert your term. How does one prioritize system or give it more energy? If it's always given attention, then how can it have less attention given to it? Try examples. I really can't imagine what you're talking about if it's not resolution systems or mechanics. For example, do you mean to say that if I am the GM, and am describing the setting, that I'm prioritizing setting then? Ralph, you are correct that I have a problem with that discussion, and what it entails, but it's based on this current problem in understanding.
Quote from: RonJohn wrote, QuoteI'm betting Ron would say the same thing about any of the elements of Exploration... if you have Setting, System, Situation and Color, but no Character, you have no play.And he'd win that bet.
QuoteI'm betting Ron would say the same thing about any of the elements of Exploration... if you have Setting, System, Situation and Color, but no Character, you have no play.
QuoteHow can system be both the means for allocating credibility to assertions about a shared imaginative space, and an element of the space being imagined?
QuoteCharacters exist in a Setting (or, if you will, the Setting contains Characters) - the interaction between these two things creates Situation. System introduces the time axis. Meanwhile, Color affects and glues together all of the above.
Quote from: Ron EdwardsHi Ralph,What's being missed is that we have to be discussing real play.
QuoteI am not saying you can't privilege System the way you and Mike are doing; I'm saying, "So what?" and shrugging, as the same point applies to each of the others.