thread: 2010-06-14 : A Bit of Hardcore
On 2010-06-17, Paul T. wrote:
Rafael,
It sounds like you've only ever played games where dice rolls always have the potential to ruin the story or stop it short.
Is that so? Because, if that's the case, you can see how a natural consequence is that you always *need* the GM there to remove those glitches.
If THAT still rings familiar to you, can you see that a natural conclusion is that the GM ability to override the dice ' (or any other mechanical) result is vital for "realism", "good story", and similar things you may want out of a game?
Note that they all come from that original situation: you're playing games where die rolls (and other mechanical elements) have the potential to ruin verisimilitude, believable drama, and similar things.
The community of designers that Vincent is a part of are largely interested in developing games where the dice (and all other rules and mechanics) exist to move the game in directions that are *less fun* if left up to the GM (or the group).
From that point of view, if the dice are ruining the story, verisimilitude, or whatever, they shouldn't be there. The whole premise of this kind of design is that their presence is to inject fun, believability, or drama into the game. The idea that they would ruin it is anathema to this school of thought—we're starting from an entirely different assumption.
