Quote from: Exploderwizard;674372What flaming. Don't make the mistake of my refusal to debate gibberish as flaming. Carry on.

I've never seen you try to debate anything. Only pontificate, namecall, and generally be obnoxious.

Which, I guess, means I'm your hero.

Quote from: Bill;674420You don't have to bend rules to be creative. But I believe that there are situations where the rules limit creativity in an undesireable manner.

The original premise was that the rules always limit creativity. I'm not the only one to disagree with that. I'm not the only one to point out that remaining within the rules can, in fact, spur creativity.

You're not backtracking. I doubt you'll admit it.

Quote from: taustin;674549I've never seen you try to debate anything. Only pontificate, namecall, and generally be obnoxious.

Which, I guess, means I'm your hero.

LOL!  I suppose you're not paying attention to the issues Bill and I are debating.

Oh wait, that would mean paying attention to posts that don't recognize you as the center of attention.

Run along. Adults are speaking.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;674495How? The rules are completely silent on the issue. The whole concept of rulings comes from approaching the game from a stance of "anything the rules do not specifically forbid is possible"

Thus allowing monks to use oil would be bending the rules.

If you approach the game from the perspective of "anything the rules do not specifically allow is forbidden" you will get a lot more moments of game lock-up as things not specifically addressed come up in play. (As your examples prove).

Can you clarify the above?

Do you mean if the rules are silent on somehting the gm is free to do whatever they like? if so I agree.

However, it seems odd to say the gm may suddenly make shields protect everyone in a city if the gm pleases, but not to let a monk use oil because it is in print.

Sorry if I am misinterpreting you here.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;674556LOL!  I suppose you're not paying attention to the issues Bill and I are debating.

I see a lot of noise from you, but nothing that a reasonable person could call "debate."

Quote from: Exploderwizard;674556Run along. Adults are speaking.

You should do that, yes.

Quote from: Bill;674557Can you clarify the above?

Do you mean if the rules are silent on somehting the gm is free to do whatever they like? if so I agree.

However, it seems odd to say the gm may suddenly make shields protect everyone in a city if the gm pleases, but not to let a monk use oil because it is in print.

Sorry if I am misinterpreting you here.

Like any other rule in print, if the group concensus is that it should be ignored because the game is more fun without it then so be it.

The hypothetical situation was that the rule existed and the group agreed to play by it. If the group had elected to nix the restriction then it wouldn't have been an issue at all.

Make sense?

Quote from: taustin;674553The original premise was that the rules always limit creativity. I'm not the only one to disagree with that. I'm not the only one to point out that remaining within the rules can, in fact, spur creativity.

You're not backtracking. I doubt you'll admit it.

Rules do limit creativity. Always. That is an objective fact.
Limit does not mean remove.


Rules can be use creatively; that is also an objective fact, independent from the above.


What is not true, in my opinion, is that using rules spurs greater creativity than using less rules.



What's creates more opportunities for creativity? Paints and a blank canvas, or a color by numbers where you must follow the numbers?

Quote from: Exploderwizard;674560Like any other rule in print, if the group concensus is that it should be ignored because the game is more fun without it then so be it.

The hypothetical situation was that the rule existed and the group agreed to play by it. If the group had elected to nix the restriction then it wouldn't have been an issue at all.

Make sense?

Yes, that makes sense.

Not something I would generally think about, because players seem to like how I bend rules. At least, no one has ever said "Bill! WTF!!!"

Quote from: mcbobbo;674478And this is from SKR's 'File Off the Serial Numbers':

"
INTRODUCTION: GRAB A FILE AND GET TO WORK
The key to making your games memorable is being able to think on your feet. Creating NPC stat blocks is a time-consuming task for GMs. This PDF shows you how to use existing monster stat blocks as if they were unique NPC stat blocks. A typical hardcover monster book has 200–300 pages of stat blocks. A clever GM can use many of those monster stat blocks as stand-ins for unusual and higher-level humanoid NPCs. For example, say your party of 5th-level PCs goes in a different direction than you expect, and you suddenly need a CR 5 NPC for the party to fight. A barghest is a Medium CR 5 monster with good physical stats and some magical abilities; by describing the barghest as a "burly cultist," you're able to use the its game stats without your players knowing the barghest's abilities and weaknesses—and you've saved yourself the 30 minutes needed to create a level 6 NPC. That's what this book is for: to help you use stats you already have, so you can save time and focus on running the game and having fun instead of wasting time with math. Just find a monster of the right CR, describe it as an appropriate PC-classed humanoid, and roll with it. Not only does this let you repurpose monsters, it keeps know-it-all players from metagaming monster knowledge based on a creature's description."

"Just use Quartermaster Form QB2732N, and write in 'pizza oven' where it says 'machine gun.'"

Quote from: mcbobbo;674478And this is from SKR's 'File Off the Serial Numbers':

"
INTRODUCTION: GRAB A FILE AND GET TO WORK
The key to making your games memorable is being able to think on your feet. Creating NPC stat blocks is a time-consuming task for GMs. This PDF shows you how to use existing monster stat blocks as if they were unique NPC stat blocks. A typical hardcover monster book has 200–300 pages of stat blocks. A clever GM can use many of those monster stat blocks as stand-ins for unusual and higher-level humanoid NPCs. For example, say your party of 5th-level PCs goes in a different direction than you expect, and you suddenly need a CR 5 NPC for the party to fight. A barghest is a Medium CR 5 monster with good physical stats and some magical abilities; by describing the barghest as a "burly cultist," you're able to use the its game stats without your players knowing the barghest's abilities and weaknesses—and you've saved yourself the 30 minutes needed to create a level 6 NPC. That's what this book is for: to help you use stats you already have, so you can save time and focus on running the game and having fun instead of wasting time with math. Just find a monster of the right CR, describe it as an appropriate PC-classed humanoid, and roll with it. Not only does this let you repurpose monsters, it keeps know-it-all players from metagaming monster knowledge based on a creature's description."

This should be something like that "What Men Know About Women" book, which consisted of blank pages.

Basically just same sentence for 200 pages "Just swap the names dummy".

Quote from: Bill;674562Rules do limit creativity. Always. That is an objective fact.
Limit does not mean remove.


Rules can be use creatively; that is also an objective fact, independent from the above.


What is not true, in my opinion, is that using rules spurs greater creativity than using less rules.



What's creates more opportunities for creativity? Paints and a blank canvas, or a color by numbers where you must follow the numbers?

Isn't it also a truism though that for most people restrictions breed creativity? Sure in theory a blank piece of paper gives you the most freedom to think up stuff, but in reality telling people to paint a particular subject or in a particular style tends to be much more inspiring by giving you a baseline to work from.

Quote from: soviet;674596Isn't it also a truism though that for most people restrictions breed creativity? Sure in theory a blank piece of paper gives you the most freedom to think up stuff, but in reality telling people to paint a particular subject or in a particular style tends to be much more inspiring by giving you a baseline to work from.

I think what you're going for is more toward the necessity is the mother of invention angle.

Which is quite accurate for the subject matter when you consider the most basic of rules a necessity for gameplay that GMs and players can both relate to.

Quote from: soviet;674596Isn't it also a truism though that for most people restrictions breed creativity? Sure in theory a blank piece of paper gives you the most freedom to think up stuff, but in reality telling people to paint a particular subject or in a particular style tends to be much more inspiring by giving you a baseline to work from.

Depends on the restrictions.

Tic tac toe is very restrictive.

Free form roleplay is possibly too unrestricted.

But I see your point.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;674605I think what you're going for is more toward the necessity is the mother of invention angle.

Which is quite accurate for the subject matter when you consider the most basic of rules a necessity for gameplay that GMs and players can both relate to.

My reply below applies here as well. You guys make a good point.

Quote from: taustin;674553The original premise was that the rules always limit creativity.

I doubt they always limit creativity, simply because few statements like that are universally true. However, rules certainly can limit creativity. Here's one example, if you play AD&D by Gygax's rules that forbid NPCs from selling magic items to PCs, you cannot create a PC magic item merchant -- which is certainly a limit on player creativity (and on GM creatively as this provision rules out lots of settings).

Generally (and in my experience), the more rules there are in a game system (especially nit-picky ones), the more the GM and Players are constrained to play in settings and styles close to those of the game designer. Whether you consider this a limit of creativity or not is personal opinion. I certainly do consider it a limit on creativity -- especially in games like TSR D&D which are supposed to be open to whatever setting the GM can dream up.