I want the rules to be enforceable upon the GM. Otherwise, the ability to enforce an objective, simulationist setting is lost.

"Mother may I" destroys my immersion. I want the stuff on my character sheet to work the same way, every time, immune to GM illusionism and narrativism. Otherwise, we're not gaming, it's just some dude making stuff up. That's important, but the making stuff up is the meat and good, simple elegant rules are the bones.

Good rulings need good, transparent rules sets. I don't want a "GM as storyteller"experience. I want a setting represented by rules and I want the rules, not GM fiat, as my tools to interact with that setting.

This is for sandbox RPGs. Storygame RPGs are a different beast.

Quote from: Kaiu Keiichi;695444I want the rules to be enforceable upon the GM. Otherwise, the ability to enforce an objective, simulationist setting is lost.

"Mother may I" destroys my immersion. I want the stuff on my character sheet to work the same way, every time, immune to GM illusionism and narrativism. Otherwise, we're not gaming, it's just some dude making stuff up. That's important, but the making stuff up is the meat and good, simple elegant rules are the bones.

Good rulings need good, transparent rules sets. I don't want a "GM as storyteller"experience. I want a setting represented by rules and I want the rules, not GM fiat, as my tools to interact with that setting.

This is for sandbox RPGs. Storygame RPGs are a different beast.

What if your character wants to attempt something that is not explicitly allowed by the rules?

I have yet to see an rpg ruleset that covered everything.

Gm's make judgment calls and make stuff up all the time.

I can't imagine not doing that.

The rules don't tell a gm what the evil lich king is going to do to ravage your homeland.  

If you are saying its fine for a gm to make stuff up, but when your pc gets hit with magic missile you want the missiles to always do 2-5 damage, I tend to agree.

Quote from: taustin;695201No. They don't. You can keep claiming otherwise, while stomping your feet, hands over ears, shouting "I CAN'T HEAR YOU" for as long as you want, but no, they don't.

You are wrong, and you can yadda yadda etc. and you'll still be wrong -- just a bit more extravagantly asinine than you already are.

Quote from: CRKrueger;695158My question would be, if the GM is so good that he could pull off a hidden-mechanics game, and all the players trust him, why do you need mechanics to begin with?

How good the GM is, is beside the point. The question, why do you need mechanics, is independent. Hobby gaming didn't start compiling algorithms to "make up for crap GMs"; it started compiling algorithms to save labor.

Doing without such formalisms started in professional kriegspiel as a reaction against crap abstractions. RPG history starts with the benefit of combining good tools with GM judgment a recognized wisdom.

Quote from: Kaiu Keiichi;695444I want the rules to be enforceable upon the GM. Otherwise, the ability to enforce an objective, simulationist setting is lost.

Not at all in the long accepted meaning of simulation. Why the fuck should the GM screw with that, whereas the players supposedly won't? Giving players complete and perfect knowledge of the universe a priori, rather than needing to discover the laws, is just the opposite of simulating their roles -- the central concern of a role playing game (as opposed to a mathematical model in which the player has no role).

Giving the players the power to dictate the laws of the universe goes even further afield, and that's what you get when they are permitted to "enforce" an abstraction that in fact is not simulative (or is poorly so) in a particular case, over riding the GM adjudication that is the main point of having a GM in the first place! Why not go play a computer game, if a damned robot is what you want?

QuoteI want the stuff on my character sheet to work the same way, every time, immune to GM illusionism and narrativism.

Illusionism and narrativism are not retarded by players having not only lots of numbers written on sheets of paper but also a fat stack of "rules" books (which, if they're from White Wolf, plainly inform them to expect illusionism and narrativism).

QuoteOtherwise, we're not gaming, it's just some dude making stuff up.

You are falsely conflating games in which you are not privy to all the machinery with games in which the machinery does not function predictably. It simply is not a true equation.

The sloppy thinking in this thread blows my mind. Personal preference is one thing, but I conclude that, in its insularity from its roots the RPG hobby has over the past 40 years accumulated a staggering ignorance.

I agree that Amber (or Lords of Olympus, or from what I've read of it LoGaS too) can be played this way.  It doesn't always start out that way, but in my experience within about one session or so, the players are never thinking in terms of the game mechanics any more, just in terms of what their characters can do.

RPGPundit

It does seem like one of the major objections is missing out on rolling the dice (or shifting the burden of dice rolls to the GM), so I agree that a diceless system which is simple for the GM to administer would work best in this sort of mode - partly because it'd take a lot of the load off of the GM, partly because if the players already buy into the idea of a diceless game they've implicitly bought into the idea of not rolling the dice themselves and are probably open to considering having less direct manipulation of the mechanics too.

Quote from: RPGPundit;695944I agree that Amber (or Lords of Olympus, or from what I've read of it LoGaS too) can be played this way.  It doesn't always start out that way, but in my experience within about one session or so, the players are never thinking in terms of the game mechanics any more, just in terms of what their characters can do.

RPGPundit

Thats a beautiful thing, and really nails down why I feel excessive mechanics ruin immerssion for me.

Quote from: Kaiu Keiichi;695444I want the rules to be enforceable upon the GM.

:rotfl:

Y'know why this is so funny? Because you whine and complain about other referees while you yourself appear to be a fucking trainwreck when it comes to the rules.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;695989:rotfl:

Y'know why this is so funny? Because you whine and complain about other referees while you yourself appear to be a fucking trainwreck when it comes to the rules.

Touche!