Rule Zero and Perceptual Slip

Check this out

The initial claim was that, if you want the game to work, if you want it to be a complete, functional entity, Rule Zero is required.

So, assuming that continued, enjoyable function of the game is the primary reason for rules to exist, then they’re best served by having a Rule Zero, because without that one rule, the rest of the rules do not achieve their goal in the case of Exalted. Functionality is absolutely a requirement of a complete game system.

Read the rest of the post.

It had me going for awhile while having the sense of wrong in the back of my head.

The wrong is in the initial expectation – who is to provide the ‘complete’ game?

I like to think I follow a very common trend in that the person who made the product supplies all of the product.

However, what if you blur the desire of wanting a complete game? Blur it so much that you want a complete game – no matter who makes it complete? And oh look, here’s rule zero – and ‘I want a complete game’ and hey, I’ll use rule zero and hey look, you need rule zero if you want a complete game.

Except it’s not ‘want a complete game’ in any sort of standard, day to day sense. It’s ‘want a complete game’ in a sort of burning desire, do whatever it takes, doesn’t matter who does it just get it done, way.

I see this sort of…issue(?) around alot. I wonder if I’ve broken into the unconcious part of it this time?

Short update

Few,  it’s been awhile since I posted here.

I think with my other blog, as the readily apparent monetized content ideas started to run out I switched to using it more as a personal blog…and so I didn’t bring my more personal things here.

So,  does anyone know of a good blog listing service?

On to development – currently I’m looking more toward actual fiscal return, if you didn’t already guess. This is less about trying to get a ‘good’ design and instead something that greases the wheels of income. It grants a distance that leads to an interesting perspective – for all the roleplayer designers who will go on about how awesome this or that game is, none of it comes down to any real fiscal traction in the real world. What is a ‘good’ game, how can I make one and sell it to you?

Oh, RP designers will answer and talk and waffle on and on – they love having you by the ear cause you need this. But really, seemingly, all they want to do is talk about what is a ‘good’ game – they don’t want to play a good game or buy one, they want to talk and talk and talk.

That’s the perspective I gained from looking at fiscal systems rather than RP systems – RP designers only want to talk about what’s good. They don’t want to give any concrete examples, it’s all left in handwavery vagueness which, if you ask about it, of course, involves more talk. And more talk. It just ends up a talk trap that goes nowhere concrete.

I suppose that’s not even a bad thing in itself, if they don’t want to go anywhere concrete – it’s just the acting as if they are in the process of making something real, that’s the issue.

Of course the general audience for things outside RP, is actually pretty nacisitic, with each individual confusing their own preferences for ‘how to do things’, thus it’s a completely unnurturing environment out there for discovering your own path – one of the reasons I blundered into talk traps, I guess.

I’ve got some ideas for what might be called the survivalist creator, I’ll see if I can line some up for those of you in a similar position to myself, some time in the future. Probably duplicate posts on both my blogs.

Oh, and I have a web comic called dungeons and abstractions! I find it amusing, and I don’t think I’m a unique snowflake!