thread: 2014-07-17 : Strategy vs Style

On 2014-07-17, Levi wrote:

With you.

Attempting to put my thoughts spurred by last time in this language:

I feel like there's a significant deal to be said in the games we play about the distinction between moves that are legal (what you can say and expect to have effect) and moves that are explicitly endorsed (by hard-coding them with additional rules, or otherwise calling them out).

And, interestingly, how that doesn't always line up with what's strategically sound.  Sometimes, some of the strategically sound moves *aren't* what's called out, and that has weird effects. 

Extreme example: Joe looks at the special system for Thing X, and decides to do something else that doesn't *quite* fit the Thing X category, because he likes GM judgement and ad-hoc application better than the special system.  That's a...  Legal, strategically sound...  Weird thing.

(All this being an aside, really, but it's where my head goes with this.)


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

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