Roderick and Ellen Robertson replied:
...
> As Greg has said many times, "Play the story, not the rules".
...
Except that this is sometimes just a cop out.
The whole point of a set of rules is to help. Each rule should have a good reason for its existence. Each rule should embody ideas about what makes the game a good game. Therefore ignoring a rule should be something not done lightly.
I say 'should' because in practice some rules are broken. Consider the conventional GNS distinction: a rule might exist because it makes the game better as a game (e.g. limits powergaming) [G], because it makes the stories told better (e.g. less mechanics) [N] or because it makes games more accurtately refelect the 'real' Glorantha (e.g. makes 'hard' things 'expensive) [S]. If we come across an apparently broken rule, which provides neither G or N benefits, we must conclude that either the rule is really broken, or it provides an S benefit. But which is it? We might have some game-world background that enables us to determine this, but if we don't, asking whether Glorantha follows a particular rule is a valid one.
The fact is, there has nver been an entirely clean distinction between Glorantha background material and game rules and many aspects of Glorantha itself have presented purely in ruels terms.
Powered by hypermail