Gaming philosophy conundra

[Anders]

If I play GURPS 3rd edition and replace the rules with new rules from 4th edition one at a time, at which point am I no longer playing 3rd edition?

I am a DM who's writing the perfect D&D campaign. Each time I'm almost finished WotC release a new edition and I have to start over. Am I happy?

There's a trolley that is barreling down a train track, but the track splits into two separate lines. On one train track is an orc. On the other are your party members. You can pull a lever to send the train down to kill the orc, or your party members. If you kill all your party members, you get enough XP to advance a level. What is the morally right action?

[Michael Cule]

If 3d6 fall in the forest with no one to add them up, how do you know if you've criticalled?

If, contrary to Einstein, God does play dice what sort does He/She/It use?

How to apply John Rawl's Veil of Ignorance to the design of a gaming world? (Easier with random character generation, I think. People who design characters are always going to want to create loopholes.)

[sir_pudding]

Can a cleric turn a p-zombie?

[Varyon]

I know these aren't meant to be answered but...

Originally Posted by Anders

If I play GURPS 3rd edition and replace the rules with new rules from 4th edition one at a time, at which point am I no longer playing 3rd edition?

Over 50%. Below 50%, you're playing "3e with some 4e rules." At 50% you're playing "an even mix of 3e and 4e." Above 50%, you're playing "4e with some 3e rules."

If you were going for a "Ship of Theseus" logic puzzle, I think a better question would be "If I play GURPS but replace the rules with houserules one at a time, at which point am I no longer playing GURPS?"

Originally Posted by Anders

I am a DM who's writing the perfect D&D campaign. Each time I'm almost finished WotC release a new edition and I have to start over. Am I happy?

Depends on how much you enjoy building the campaign. It's clearly a lot, given you decide to start over each time a new edition is released, rather than finishing and playing with the older edition.

Originally Posted by Anders

There's a trolley that is barreling down a train track, but the track splits into two separate lines. On one train track is an orc. On the other are your party members. You can pull a lever to send the train down to kill the orc, or your party members. If you kill all your party members, you get enough XP to advance a level. What is the morally right action?

Is the orc female, if so is she hawt, if so is she more or less likely to let you do her than the hawt female members of your party? If you get to the last question and the answer is "more likely," kill the party.

More seriously, the correct action is to disable the Trolley Problem Trap (you brought your Thieves Tools, right?) to get the XP for doing so (and a "party wipe" trap should be worth a lot of XP), then team up with the party to kill the orc and take his/her stuff (which will be in much better condition than it would be if the orc were splattered by a trolley), then convince your party to camp on the tracks, steal all their stuff while they sleep, and reactivate the trap to kill them.

Originally Posted by Michael Cule

If 3d6 fall in the forest with no one to add them up, how do you know if you've criticalled?

Threaten your GM with your dice throwing arm, and you'll crit whenever you want. I mean, would you want to get dice thrown at you by someone who can send them into a desolate forest from your kitchen table?

Originally Posted by Michael Cule

If, contrary to Einstein, God does play dice what sort does He/She/It use?

I believe Revelation 13:18 made it clear God uses 3d6 - "This calls for wisdom. Let the person who has insight calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man. That number is 666." That's obviously a roll of 18, there.

Originally Posted by Michael Cule

How to apply John Rawl's Veil of Ignorance to the design of a gaming world? (Easier with random character generation, I think. People who design characters are always going to want to create loopholes.)

That sounds like a game where the players essentially generate the game world, which is certainly a fascinating concept. In that case, yes, you'd need to randomly generate the characters - or at least randomly generate those aspects that have relevance to the bits of the game world the players designed.

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Can a cleric turn a p-zombie?

If they're animated by a power/spirit that the cleric can Turn, sure. Otherwise, I think a p-zombie is basically a machine made of meat, and clerics generally cannot turn Constructs, so no.

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by Varyon

I believe Revelation 13:18 made it clear God uses 3d6 - "This calls for wisdom. Let the person who has insight calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man. That number is 666." That's obviously a roll of 18, there.

Sounds more like an entry on a d1000 random encounter table to me.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by Rupert

Sounds more like an entry on a d1000 random encounter table to me.

It strikes me as the height of blasphemy to suggest that a divine being would use non-Platonic solids (d10's - or worse, a massive d1000) for dice.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Varyon

It strikes me as the height of blasphemy to suggest that a divine being would use non-Platonic solids (d10's - or worse, a massive d1000) for dice.

Does God's omnipotence enable him to make a thousand-sided Platonic solid (a regular chiliahedron)?

[Anaraxes]

Originally Posted by Varyon

If you were going for a "Ship of Theseus" logic puzzle, I think a better question would be "If I play GURPS but replace the rules with houserules one at a time, at which point am I no longer playing GURPS?"

Ah, but what if you replace the GURPS rule with a houserule that has exactly the same effect?

If the dragon's hoard is reduced by the thief taking one gold coin at a time, exactly when does the pile stop being a hoard?

Do the PCs have free will, or are they being railroaded?

Consider a party that's located in the middle of a room with two treasure chests, one on each side, which are equally valuable. With no rational preference for one chest over the other, the party with free will has no valid reason to make a choice, and so must starve to death when their iron rations run out. (Grimtooth missed this trap.)

The DM has told you that the location of the boss mob in the dungeon will be a surprise. You know that the boss cannot be located in the last room of the dungeon, because then you'd expect the boss to be there. Knowing that the boss can't be in the last room, you then know it also cannot be in the next-to-last room along the corridor. Similarly for the next-to-next-to-last room, and so, the party can show that the boss cannot be located in any room of the dungeon. The boss thus disappears in a puff of logic, the party gets xp for the boss, and can then easily collect all the loot in the dungeon. Since this conclusion is logically inevitable, the party need not even leave their room in the tavern; they simply get xp and loot.

The DM does no prepwork, being completely indifferent to the game, but instead relies only on making things up on the spot during the game as the players ask questions and take actions. Luckily, the GM is very good at remembering whatever he invented, so he never contradicts himself, and he's sufficiently inventive as to always have an answer ready for the players when they ask. Is the GM creating the game, or are the players, by their choice of questions?

[RogerBW]

Originally Posted by Anaraxes

The DM has told you that the location of the boss mob in the dungeon will be a surprise. You know that the boss cannot be located in the last room of the dungeon, because then you'd expect the boss to be there. Knowing that the boss can't be in the last room, you then know it also cannot be in the next-to-last room along the corridor. Similarly for the next-to-next-to-last room, and so, the party can show that the boss cannot be located in any room of the dungeon. The boss thus disappears in a puff of logic, the party gets xp for the boss, and can then easily collect all the loot in the dungeon. Since this conclusion is logically inevitable, the party need not even leave their room in the tavern; they simply get xp and loot.

When the boss turns out to be in the second room, the party is surprised.

Originally Posted by Anaraxes

The DM does no prepwork, being completely indifferent to the game, but instead relies only on making things up on the spot during the game as the players ask questions and take actions. Luckily, the GM is very good at remembering whatever he invented, so he never contradicts himself, and he's sufficiently inventive as to always have an answer ready for the players when they ask. Is the GM creating the game, or are the players, by their choice of questions?

In yesterday's game, the progression could be summarised something like: GM: someone is attacking people in Underground stations. Players: OK, we'll set a trap in a disused station. How about this one that was used as an air defence HQ during WWII? Ooh, ten years ago it was sold to a Ukrainian businessman who said he'd convert it into housing, but nothing's happened. Now we're definitely going there. GM: OK, so when you go there…

Hadn't planned it, but I want to encourage my players to come up with things like this.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by whswhs

Does God's omnipotence enable him to make a thousand-sided Platonic solid (a regular chiliahedron)?

Perhaps, but I suspect my head would explode if I ever were to behold it.

Originally Posted by Anaraxes

Ah, but what if you replace the GURPS rule with a houserule that has exactly the same effect?

That's not a houserule, that's plagiarism.

Originally Posted by Anaraxes

If the dragon's hoard is reduced by the thief taking one gold coin at a time, exactly when does the pile stop being a hoard?

This is just a question of what is the minimum number of things in a pile of stuff to be defined as a "hoard." Once the number of coins in the hoard is below this value, it's not a hoard.

Originally Posted by Anaraxes

Do the PCs have free will, or are they being railroaded?

Neither - they're under control of whimsical entities whom they cannot understand the motives and methods of. Said entities are perhaps overly fond of jokes involving natural - but potentially-embarrassing - bodily functions.

Originally Posted by Anaraxes

Consider a party that's located in the middle of a room with two treasure chests, one on each side, which are equally valuable. With no rational preference for one chest over the other, the party with free will has no valid reason to make a choice, and so must starve to death when their iron rations run out. (Grimtooth missed this trap.)

This would only apply for a party that is without free will and is running based on a precise program that doesn't have any way of deciding what to do between two equally valid options. If any part of the above is untrue, they'll go to one chest, then the other (or even just split up, with part of the party going to one and part to the other), and return with their loot.

Originally Posted by Anaraxes

The DM has told you that the location of the boss mob in the dungeon will be a surprise. You know that the boss cannot be located in the last room of the dungeon, because then you'd expect the boss to be there. Knowing that the boss can't be in the last room, you then know it also cannot be in the next-to-last room along the corridor. Similarly for the next-to-next-to-last room, and so, the party can show that the boss cannot be located in any room of the dungeon. The boss thus disappears in a puff of logic, the party gets xp for the boss, and can then easily collect all the loot in the dungeon. Since this conclusion is logically inevitable, the party need not even leave their room in the tavern; they simply get xp and loot.

Given they've logicked themselves into believing there is no room in which the boss could be, the boss can be in any room, as it will be a surprise ("But we determined it was impossible for him to be here!").

Originally Posted by Anaraxes

The DM does no prepwork, being completely indifferent to the game, but instead relies only on making things up on the spot during the game as the players ask questions and take actions. Luckily, the GM is very good at remembering whatever he invented, so he never contradicts himself, and he's sufficiently inventive as to always have an answer ready for the players when they ask. Is the GM creating the game, or are the players, by their choice of questions?

Both - the GM is creating the game based upon the actions of the players. It's an exercise in cooperative storytelling, even if the players don't realize it.