anyway.



thread: 2014-07-25 : RPGs Have Objects, Q&A

On 2014-07-25, Gordon wrote:

Well, there’s the “supplant” thing here, but it is perhaps unimportant. And I’d love to know why “The Trouble with RPGs.”

But what I’d really like to know more about is dealing with the ambiguous - the complexity. Acknowledging that there are multiple objects is one thing, but dealing with how that impacts design seems like a big deal. A big deal that isn’t addressed by looking at one object, one context for strategies and style.

Or the complexity of understanding/communicating the procedures. Or of knowing if something is, or isn’t, or was but now isn’t, “strategically sound.”

I mean, I’m liking what’s building here - and thanks so much for posting it - but every time I start imagining using it, I find myself going “But what about ...” What about conflicts/overlaps/support from multiple objects? What about objects not “of the game”, but of the players? What about objects that only emerge in gameplay (perhaps due to design, or perhaps not)? What about the fact (I’d say) that at most moments of play, in most RPGs, the set of at least potentially strategically sound decisions is HHUGE?

Of course, no reason I shouldn’t just swat away on my own at the Furies of complexity chasing me through Achaea, but I am curious as to if they (perhaps in some personal variation?) pester you and if so, where you’ve stashed them for this series of posts.



 

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

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