thread: 2013-10-28 : A Question about Objects
On 2013-10-28, Nick wrote:
Great! Thanks Vincent.
Re which is the object: I think I see. What I haven't yet got is how to apply that to the design process. I can see what the fun part of my game, the reason-to-play, will be, and what jobs I'll need players to do. Then I can see whether the rules support those things. But if "the object" could be either of those or something else entirely, I'm not sure where to look to see if my rules make it so.
This comes with other questions like:
- Surely if it's that flexible, there can be more than one object?
- Do I need to know the object up-front, or will it emerge from the design process?
... but I suspect they're all variations on the same not-yet-understanding.
(I'm not asking you to answer those questions, unless you want to! That's just where my head's at. They're probably best answered by trying things in practice.)
Re rules-contention: Sure, it'd be easier to just ask you (in AW) or to just do something and look at it (in EPYC) - but most of the time the end result wouldn't be as good. I take time and care, following the rules, to get a better result. (Much like a recipe, in fact!)
That said, maybe your "it's fun even though the object is given" is in fact the same as my "better result"; different names for the same thing.
