anyway.



thread: 2013-06-20 : The Sundered Land

On 2013-07-14, Gordon wrote:

Vincent: Hmm - I don’t disagree (marginalia aside) that following rules and pursuing goals are different things, but rereading my post, I can see where you’re pointing.
Let me go back a bit: “If you bring some other goal to the game, some goal that comes into conflict with your dooming the pilgrim, that?s like bringing a goal to Chess that stops you from pursuing checkmate.”  I do bring other goals, and they do NOT (almost ever) come into conflict with pursuing doom/checkmate. In fact (and maybe here’s where I muddied things earlier), those goals, the rules, and the rule-given goals (is that a useful split, rules vs. rule given goals?) all provide invaluable (I’d say) constraints.
For me, thinking about chess and/or Doomed Pilgrim without including that fact is just odd, and it seemed to me that’s what you were attempting.  Actually, that’s what my first maginallia was meant to confirm you WEREN’T attempting, but since then it seems like you are.
I’m trying to agree with greatly limiting the energy around “conflicting goals” (especially implied/unstated) while stressing the importance of additional goals (perhaps implied/unstated).  I understand your “I don’t care” about conflicting goals, I don’t understand it about additional goals.  Am I making any more sense?
John Mc: I’d just say that by my reading of play “follow the goal properly” ... is both clear and yet contains mysteries.



 

This makes...
initials
...go...
short response
optional explanation (be brief!):

if you're human, not a spambot, type "human":