Over in Where (sp) you there when the swine-ified your game?, J Arcane wrote:

Quote from: J ArcaneRules are not, and can never be, infallible.  It's the Golden Rule of almost every RPG ever printed.  If a rule doesn't work for this situation, change it, tweak it, ignore it, whatever.

So ... what about the people who play RPGs by the rules, and have fun doing so?  Is their experience compatible with the claim that rules can never work as written?

Quote from: TonyLBOver in Where (sp) you there when the swine-ified your game?, J Arcane wrote:So ... what about the people who play RPGs by the rules, and have fun doing so?  Is their experience compatible with the claim that rules can never work as written?

Don't twist his words.  He didn't say they can't work, he said that they aren't perfect.

Well, if someone plays through an entire game according to the rules, doesn't that mean that the rules didn't fail?

I guess I'm wondering what "infallible" or "perfect" is meant to mean, objectively, above and beyond "Works 100% for a given group."

I don't know what he exactly meant by those two words, but I do know that it is possible for people to play a game by the book and have fun with it. It almost has to be this way. I think beyond that there is a tradition to house rule to your needs that's built into the hobby itself and that explains the rest.

Quote from: TonyLBWell, if someone plays through an entire game according to the rules, doesn't that mean that the rules didn't fail?

assuming everthing went well, yes for that session it didn't fail.

QuoteI guess I'm wondering what "infallible" or "perfect" is meant to mean, objectively, above and beyond "Works 100% for a given group."

Infallible in this context would mean that the rules always work proberly for every possible situation. Which is impossible.

I don't really like fudging, but you know, you can always avoid breaking the rules by selecting rules which cover so little that there isn't much to break.

One person's "flexibility" is someone else's incompleteness.

Quote from: McrowInfallible in this context would mean that the rules always work proberly for every possible situation. Which is impossible.

Well shoot that's a pretty high bar to set in the first place isn't it? I can much more handle the rules working consistently within itself. The rules don't have to work properly for every situation, they just have to be predictable in performing and results. I think that's done by plenty of games.

Quote from: RedFoxDon't twist his words.  He didn't say they can't work, he said that they aren't perfect.

Bingo.

No ruleset is perfect.  Ever.  

We make the rules do what we need to do, and when the rules don't serve well for that, we change them, ignore them, or get new rules.  

Every book I have ever read has some variation of this fundamental point in it somewhere.  It's the Golden Rule of Roleplaying:  You and your fun are more important than the rules.

Well, no rules system is perfect, because people have different definitions of perfection.

Make a system gearheads like and storytellers will quail in horror at the reams of charts and design rules. Make a system the storyteller like and gearheads will groad at the lack of detail....

Quote from: Dominus NoxMake a system gearheads like and storytellers will quail in horror at the reams of charts and design rules. Make a system the storyteller like and gearheads will groad at the lack of detail....

And then you make Burning Wheel....

Quote from: JamesVWell shoot that's a pretty high bar to set in the first place isn't it? I can much more handle the rules working consistently within itself. The rules don't have to work properly for every situation, they just have to be predictable in performing and results. I think that's done by plenty of games.

I think the point is that no game system handles everything that can be done in the course of all games played. A good game system works 99% of the time. This doesn't mean that because 1% of the time the rules fail that the game is bad or not fun.

Some folks use systems which they like even though they encounter problems with it. Now, changing to a systems which addreses these problems is not really an option for various reasons, but they make their prefered system work, most of the time. Maybe not all the time, but it just depends on the group, not really the rules.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: McrowI think the point is that no game system handles everything that can be done in the course of all games played.

How would you prove or disprove that assertion?

It seems to me that when people play (for instance) a multi-year campaign in a game system and never once fudge the rules, your saying "Oh, that rule system must have failings that would force them to fudge, they just don't happen to have come across them" starts to ring a bit hollow.

But I suppose that short of actually having an infinite number of roleplayers play an infinite number of games, it's hard to prove that a system that can handle everything is really possible.

Do you have some evidence to prove that it's impossible?  Or is it just a war of passionate assertions?

Well, Tony was directly opposing the claim that rules can't be infallible to the alternative, that there are people who play strictly by the rules and have fun. I'd say that makes those rules infallible.

I think rules can be infallible, but it depends on the group. Basically if you're ready to roll with the blows and accept whatever the rules give you, and you have fun that way, then they're infallible. On the other hand if your fun is influenced by your attachment to the imaginary events in the game, and that they should turn out a certain way for the sake of thematic continuity, investment in a given PC, or the viability of the GM's prep-work, then the rules might not work for you.

On the third hand, there might be a set of rules that are incomplete in the right areas so that the framing or interpretation of rules-effects will always be done flexibly through someone (or the group), who then takes responsibility for ensuring that things are fun both going in and coming out of the rules. Examples: Everway, Polaris, and (I'm guessing) Heroquest.

Quote from: TonyLBDo you have some evidence to prove that it's impossible?  Or is it just a war of passionate assertions?

bingo.

Plus, odds are against a game being able to handle every situation correctly for the way every group plays their game.  Statistcally speaking it sounds unlikely.