>From: "Jeff Richard" <richaje_at_...>
>
>Fwiw, I have no trouble "fudging" if it results in a better story.� A
>good story that keeps my players interest and keeps them involved is
>the social contract AFAIAC, not the rules mechanics.�
Then I wouldn't call that fudging, either. Rather, the only thing that I think anyone is opposed to, whether you call it fudging or not, is when you break the rules of the group to accomplish your goals. If your group's rules are that the GM can do whatever he likes, for instance, then, yeah, that's the social contract. Many groups play sans any mechanics. But they do so by agreement.
The rules aren't just what's in the book, but whatever you agree to play by.
At this point, the arguments are getting pretty semantic, and getting a bit far from HQ and into more general theory territory - likely my fault for bringing up some of these ideas. Let's do what we can to keep things on topic. If people want to discuss other things with my by private mail, or in other more appropriate venues, by all means let me know.
Mike
Powered by hypermail