12-27-2014, 05:34 AM | #51 | ||
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
|
Re: Literal vs. Abstract interpretation of GURPS combat and other things
Quote:
Again I think you have to separate difficulty form realism, they are only inherently connected because your inherently connecting them. One is system/gamist* quality, the other is a genre preference/simulationist* quality. We already have cites from people who were part of the this process telling us that increased difficulty was not a factor in this rule. Quote:
*all is lost if we're citing GNS theory I suspect. |
||
12-27-2014, 01:30 PM | #52 | |||
GURPS FAQ Keeper
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kyïv, Ukraine
|
Re: Literal vs. Abstract interpretation of GURPS combat and other things
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by vicky_molokh; 12-28-2014 at 12:19 AM. |
|||
12-27-2014, 04:47 PM | #53 | |
Join Date: Apr 2006
|
Re: Literal vs. Abstract interpretation of GURPS combat and other things
Quote:
As for vocabulary, you've successfully described the variations using common English words, so I'd say you're already set. Admittedly, not all of those situations have single words that clearly describe them, which is a little inconvenient, but that's no reason to confuse matters by tacking extra definitions onto words that shouldn't have them. As an aside, I don't find GNS confusing, but that's not a state I can readily impart to others. :) |
|
12-28-2014, 01:25 AM | #54 | |
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
|
Re: Literal vs. Abstract interpretation of GURPS combat and other things
Quote:
You assuming an inherent driving relationship between two separate qualities, that may not actually exist. "correlation is not causation" Personally I wouldn't bother as IME it's so subjective as to meaningless once it is referenced by more than one role player. |
|
12-28-2014, 01:32 AM | #55 | |
GURPS FAQ Keeper
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kyïv, Ukraine
|
Re: Literal vs. Abstract interpretation of GURPS combat and other things
Quote:
You yourself say it's done for reasons of realism, and then proceed to hint that the relationship lacks causation. Maybe I'm misunderstanding something? |
|
12-28-2014, 05:51 AM | #56 | |
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
|
Re: Literal vs. Abstract interpretation of GURPS combat and other things
Quote:
In short those who want more realism therefore want more complex rules (or certainly rules that deviate from literalist RAW more), that is dependent on causal relationship. I'm suggesting that there is only a correlation between the two, and that even more importantly it's not uniformly in just one direction. This makes your following inferences less relevant to the process. I.e Those who want more realism just want more realism and are not actually thinking in terms of more or less complexity or even making actions harder or easier. Again while Sighted shots might be more restricted they get the follow up buff, unsighted ones now get a buff. The example given was making Sighted shots AoA. You posited that there was an aspect of this precess where those involved had looked at this from a game balance point of view. Only that wasn't the case they had only looked at it from a realism point of view. It was deemed more realistic to make Sighted shots AoA, that was the be all and end all of the process. There was no ulterior or even obvious motivation in regards restricting them by the game system. Now it's been pointed out that this change has acted to distinguish between those making sighted accurate shots having to take more defensive position, which means that those who don't have to fill more aggressive roles. But again that is a point about realism not game balance, even if it has corollary effect on game choices. Last edited by Tomsdad; 12-29-2014 at 02:02 AM. |
|
12-29-2014, 02:55 AM | #57 | |
GURPS FAQ Keeper
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kyïv, Ukraine
|
Re: Literal vs. Abstract interpretation of GURPS combat and other things
Quote:
It also seems to be the case that adding more realism tends to add complexity more often than the opposite. Conversely, adding cinematicism seems much more likely to reduce complexity, similar to the whole 'Roll and Shout!' and '. . . With Spikes!' attitudes. This isn't to say that cinematic rules can't be complex - they can; they're just as likely to be simpler too. I don't think I've ever heard anyone move from MA to Basic or from Basic to Lite, to improve realism. I did hear of people moving to both more and to fewer books when striving to achieve a cinematic feel. That people wanting more realism don't think in terms of game mechanics as an end goal doesn't cancel the fact that the end result will still involve certain changes in game mechanics. |
|
12-29-2014, 03:03 AM | #58 |
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
|
Re: Literal vs. Abstract interpretation of GURPS combat and other things
And when it comes to intent, that's the difference between correlation not causation. Especially as the correlation is not in any one direction, but a side effect of the realism not of making things more difficult.
|
12-29-2014, 03:58 AM | #59 |
GURPS FAQ Keeper
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kyïv, Ukraine
|
Re: Literal vs. Abstract interpretation of GURPS combat and other things
A can cause B without it being intentional.
|
12-30-2014, 05:46 AM | #60 |
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
|
Re: Literal vs. Abstract interpretation of GURPS combat and other things
Yes but your arguing the A effect on B is intentional and generally in one direction (despite examples to the contrary). Moreover you suggesting a two way causal link between realism and difficulty. "Cause" and causal are not synonymous here. You seem to be looking for links that aren't there or haven't been proved It's been a long time since I did serious stats, but I do remember one the core things is it's a lot easier to show correlation than it is to show causation. |
Tags |
abstraction, combat, rules |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|