In writing a lot of this, I realize I approach Amber in a world-setting sort of way rather than focus on the players. To me, the rules need to conform to the world rather than serve to only limit the players in some sort of way. I still hold that rules are there to define the game itself and what the players can or can’t do. But the rules are there specifically to define what the world is like and the players would be limited that way, as well as everything else in existence.
-Michael Zack, Amber Diceless RPG Yahoo!Group
This is such a false dichotomy to me – not to mention that he pretty much contradicted himself there.
The rules define the world: absolutely.
The rules should not serve only to limit the players: huh? We’re… talking about the same game, right?
The players must work within the bounds of the world, or we’re playing free-form MUSH again, only we’re face to face with the other players and not staring at text on a screen.
This is what makes sense to me: The rules define the world. The players must work within those rules – the rules of the world, the rules of the game – to accomplish anything.
Breaking the rules means breaking the game – especially in Amber, where the rules are flimsy things already. And working within rules means limits. It means you can’t use the Pattern to ‘happen’ to have exact change in Amber. It means you can’t just stroll up to Wixer and give him a pat on the head, because the Primal plane is not that simple to get to. It means you can’t go up to Tir on any given night, no matter the condition of the moon.
Unless, of course, that’s part of the plot. But then it’s a plot point, not somethign the players have decided on just because it would be convenient, which seems to be what this guy is espousing.
This is the last of the thought-provoking snippets from the extended flamewar on the Amber Diceless RPG Yahoo!Group. Now back to your regular programming… 