Do you agree with this?
>>47138144
I would have said "above all else have fun"
But eh, the rest is ok
>>47138144
Yes
>>47138144
>If the rules don't say you can't do something, you can
Dropped.
>Minmaxing and munchkinism aren't problems with the game
Dropped. This type of argument is typically used to prop up poor, easily broken systems [IE: Pathfinder]
>>47138144
No.
>>47138275
desu, I think WoD, especially OWoD is far more easily broken. In part because its dice system doesn't work as the designers imply it would.
>>47138144
I agree with 1, 2, 4, 8, 9 and 11.
The rest is either wrong or poorly worded.
>If the rules don't say you can't do something, you can
>There are no official answers, just official opinions.
These two seem very off. I mean, we have Errata for a damn good reason and the former is silly indeed.
>When dice conflict with the story, the story always wins.
Eeeeehhh...that feels like it could easily end up a bad justification by bad GMs. More accurately 'If you don't want to have a chance for stuff to go odd, don't bring dice into the picture'
>>47138144
>>If the rules don't say you can't do something, you can.
I guess that means I can eat lava, shit diamonds, and piss healing potions. The rules don't say he can't, so I guess he can.
>>47138144
No, I don't.
>Min/maxing aren't problems with the game
Yes they fucking are. Case in point, Exalted 2e and 3e. They design their game so that you are heavily punished for NOT min-maxing. Then when you min-max they cry that you're the problem.
To say min-maxing isn't a problem with the game is to say that all RPG systems are equally good, and that's plain wrong.
>>47138144
>When dice conflict with the story, the story always wins
What? Then why'd you roll dice in the first place, dipshit? If you don't want your story to change based on a die roll, don't roll the die.
This entire image feels like it comes from some kind of Storyteller system game.
>The books contain the answers to all things
>There are no official answers, only official opinions
You can't have both of these. Pick one.
>>47138144
Mostly. The min maxing one i slightly disagree with, and the one about books containing all the answers can definitely be wrong some times. There are some really shitty books out there
>>47138144
>Rules are written on paper
Generally I agree, but there's room for contention with things like this and most rules exist for a reason, in game and out.
>Rules are suggested guidelines
Literally repeating the first line.
>If the rules don't say you can't do something, you can
Bullshit. This is justification for rules-lawyering behavior by faggots trying to eek out an advantage.
>No official answers, only official opinions
Wrong, especially because it conflicts with the next line.
>When dice conflict with the story, the story always wins
Choo-choo. Serious answer - players should be allowed to influence the story through their actions. This conflicts with a later rule further down and with the one above it because enforcing the story creates an official answer to the story.
>Min/maxing & Munchkinism are problems with the player, not the game
Almost entirely agree.
>The GM has full discretion power over the game
Directly conflicts the rule below it. If the GM has full authority then they're not working with the players.
>The GM works with the party, not against
Obviously agree.
>A game that isn't fun isn't a game anymore
Again, obviously agreed.
>The books contain the answers to all things
No, and this directly contradicts the other rules that say the GM is always right and has full fiat to do as he wishes.
>When the above doesn't apply, make it up
Agreed, but fuck you for even listing the other rules.
Half of this shit is awful, the other half common sense, and half of all of them contradict the other half.
>>47138144
1. Yes, although the fact this is depicted on stone is ironic.
2. Of course.
3. DEAR FUCKING CHRIST GET OUT OF MY HOUSE
4. I understand the spirit of this one, but it's a bit to subjective for me. If the GM and rules are in agreement and the player can't make a case for their point, then that position basically becomes official. Game rules are always in development sure- but this sounds like a justification for the retarded rule 3.
5. Absolutely- but don't be a bitch and contest every bad outcome the dice offer in the name of 'story'.
6. Yes and no. Good role-players will chose not to take the best min/maxed option in favor of making interesting or flawed characters- but it is also a problem with the system if it's just broken and shit.
7. Agreed- but kind of conflicts with 3 and 4???
8. Agreed, but that works both ways- and the moment the players expect things their way at his expense of storytelling or verisimilitude they are in the wrong.
9. Best rule on here.
10. What? This patently conflicts with 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6; and is also just patently wrong if the book isn't complete/well written.
11. Erase 10, replace with this what the fuck.
overall stupid and wrong try again.
>>47138144
>"have fun" isn't the first sentence
>promotes rules-lawyering
And part about "you can't do something" should be replaced with "roll dice only if you can't progress the story without it"
It's kind of silly to make a list of rules that says the rules don't matter isn't it?
Also I would disagree with like half of those, and a fair amount of them are outright contradictory.
As a DM I always try to ensure that my players have fun, but I always play my encounters like I'm playing the monsters.
>>47138144
>Manifesto
Off the bat? No.
>1
Sure.
>2
Dubious.
>3
No.
>4
If you're not going to listen to the answer, why ask?
>5
Literally depends on the system. That's always a DM discretion call, because sometimes a bad roll can create a new, more interesting story.
>6
If a system forces a character to min-max to succeed at all, I'd say the system is wrong.
>7
That's kind of his job, but there are some things a DM doesn't have control over, like player character decisions.
>8
Sometimes you need to use a stick when a carrot fails. Also, the natural fallout of a decision should be considered by the player when making a decision. The DM asks 'are you sure' for a reason.
>9
Okay.
>10
Contradicts #5 and #7
>11
Good.
Number 3 is the mindset that gets those "It's fantasy, so internal consistency and the laws of physics don't apply even though I haven't used any kind of supernatural ability to negate them"
