Quote from: Willie the Duck;1040190Subtract the 'nuclear' bit and that was a great episode of M*A*S*H -- bomb landed in the compound and the instruction manual for disarming it had that almost word-for-word (and thus they set off the bomb, but it was a propaganda leaflet-bomb).

"We have to evacuate!"
"I think I just did."

If I ignore 80% of the rules in a game, and I actually playing it?

Quote from: Willie the Duck;1040072On a meta level, all TTRPGs are 'about' having fun playing them.

This is true of all recreational activities, therefore too broad a constraint for useful discussion.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;1040072Beyond that, one can only really talk about what they urge, incentivize, or promote.

This on the other hand is perfect, so let's go with that.

In my experience combat heavy rulesets lead to character building minigames, putting rules before reason, and encounters which take hours to resolve.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1039884Bluffing appears NOWHERE in the rules of poker.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1039946Bluffing is a tactic that emerges from the rules. Bluffing wouldn't be a thing if there was no raising/calling rules in Poker.

Bluffing is an inevitable result of following the rules as written, and such a fundamental part of Poker that it's impossible to make a rule against it. There isn't even a way to determine if bluffing is actually taking place.

Quote from: TJS;1039887They went a long way toward constraining any advantage that a player might be able to get by creative or lateral thinking or approaches to a situation and drew it all back to a series of skill roles.  Anything you wanted to do to resolve the situation - make a skill role.  Come up with a clever plan to avoid the need to avoid making a role in situations you're not suited for?  - nope, that's just colour - make a skill role.

Quote from: WillInNewHaven;1039920Mechanics for resolving negotiation, persuasion and such reduce the amount of  roleplaying required and the people who don't bother,  because "it's just color" make it less enjoyable for some others and possibly themselves.

These are examples of how rules can make a game not about something.

And combat heavy rules can very much make a game not about anything else.

Quote from: Tod13;1040140I knew a guy whose job it was to proofread nuclear munitions manuals for problems like "remove the detonator." next page "But first disconnect explosive bolts A and B".

You can never have too much water in a nuclear reactor.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;1040367This is true of all recreational activities, therefore too broad a constraint for useful discussion.

Which I think perfectly encapsulates the nature of trying to make declarations regarding what a TTRPG is 'about.'

Quote from: Willie the Duck;1040368Which I think perfectly encapsulates the nature of trying to make declarations regarding what a TTRPG is 'about.'

How Postmodern of you.

A game is about what happens at the table, and rules are designed to guide that in a specific, consistent, and reliable way. Of course you can't force anyone to follow a set of rules, but you can make reliable predictions as to what will happen if they're followed.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;1040617How Postmodern of you.

A game is about what happens at the table, and rules are designed to guide that in a specific, consistent, and reliable way. Of course you can't force anyone to follow a set of rules, but you can make reliable predictions as to what will happen if they're followed.

So in other words, 'what they urge, incentivize, or promote?'

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1039884Bluffing appears NOWHERE in the rules of poker.  Not everybody needs to be led around by their dinkie.

Is laughing and going "Hell, yeah!" when you get a flush in the rules?

Quote from: soltakss;1040630Is laughing and going "Hell, yeah!" when you get a flush in the rules?

Only in DnD 3.PF and HERO 8 editions. (It produces modifiers for your next hand, of course.)

Quote from: Opaopajr;1040680Only in DnD 3.PF and HERO 8 editions. (It produces modifiers for your next hand, of course.)

That sounds like a Fate thing - which does have rules for sabotaging yourself now for future meta bonuses.

Quote from: Luca;1039835If you spend most of your allotted page count for an aspect of your product which you see as secondary, you've failed as a designer.

No. This little fallacy has been beaten to death, buried, raised from the dead, beaten to death again and then re-buried.

You have rules to cover the things you think need covering. Combat tends to be one of those things that needs covering. Talking to NPCs does not. And the combat rules in D&D actually take up not all that much page count. If we are using "page count" as some sort of measuring stick then monsters and then spells beats out all that.

In Moldvay Basic Spells uses 4 pages, Combat uses 5, Treasure uses 6, Chargen uses 9, Monsters uses 16.

Quote from: Omega;1040713No. This little fallacy has been beaten to death, buried, raised from the dead, beaten to death again and then re-buried.

You have rules to cover the things you think need covering. Combat tends to be one of those things that needs covering. Talking to NPCs does not. And the combat rules in D&D actually take up not all that much page count. If we are using "page count" as some sort of measuring stick then monsters and then spells beats out all that.

In Moldvay Basic Spells uses 4 pages, Combat uses 5, Treasure uses 6, Chargen uses 9, Monsters uses 16.

If role-playing is the most important thing in role-playing games why would anyone think that is something that needs not to be covered?

Quote from: Ras Algethi;1040716If role-playing is the most important thing in role-playing games why would anyone think that is something that needs not to be covered?

For the same reason that the diplomacy rules in Diplomacy cover only 174 words.  People are assumed to know how to talk.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1040724For the same reason that the diplomacy rules in Diplomacy cover only 174 words.  People are assumed to know how to talk.

Yet the rules do set out when to discuss their plans/schemes. So it does actually tell them to interact and when.

Good try though. Was wondering where you'd go after that poker nonsense was put out to pasture.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1040724For the same reason that the diplomacy rules in Diplomacy cover only 174 words.  People are assumed to know how to talk.

We never won a game of Diplomacy.

Quote from: Omega;1040713No. This little fallacy has been beaten to death, buried, raised from the dead, beaten to death again and then re-buried.

You have rules to cover the things you think need covering. Combat tends to be one of those things that needs covering. Talking to NPCs does not. And the combat rules in D&D actually take up not all that much page count. If we are using "page count" as some sort of measuring stick then monsters and then spells beats out all that.

In Moldvay Basic Spells uses 4 pages, Combat uses 5, Treasure uses 6, Chargen uses 9, Monsters uses 16.

How many of those spells are purely combat spells? how much of that treasure is just upgraded combat equipment? how many character options are purely combat focused? How many of those monsters are fleshed out in a noncombat setting? are there actually rules for tricking, taming, or otherwise integrating those monsters for noncombat uses, or do they just exist as obstacles for the PCs to stick with their pointy metal sticks? (actually this is half serious, I haven't picked up a D&D book for a very long time)

Quote from: Ras Algethi;1040725Yet the rules do set out when to discuss their plans/schemes. So it does actually tell them to interact and when.

Good try though. Was wondering where you'd go after that poker nonsense was put out to pasture.

Congratulations, you've just made it utterly obvious that you've never actually played Diplomacy.

(q.v. "ultracrepidarianism")