I really hate whenever I try to explain how some bad rules can be abused and immediatelly get someone say shit like “If this happens in your group, change it” as if that would solve the problem. And whenever it is not soemthing you witnessed personally, then it means it never happens and could never happen.

  • frezik@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    What we infer from it all is that someone is using a rule in a way that’s detrimental to the group. We may want to change the rule, or it may be time to have a talk, or it may be time to kick them out.

    As far as assumptions go, that cuts both ways All I’m saying is that we don’t take any of the options above off the table.

    • Susaga@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Quick question: Who do you mean by “them”? Who are you saying to kick?

      Because the only information given is that an exploit exists. Nobody has said, at any point, that anyone has used an exploit at a table where the others found it to be detrimental. You invented that scenario. You invented the person acting badly, and you specifically imagined them to be toxic and ruining everyone’s fun.

      A person who doesn’t exist cannot be kicked. A ruleset that exists can be changed. And changing a ruleset doesn’t mean I can’t also kick a person.

      • frezik@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        If nothing has happened, then nothing needs to be done. I sometimes float exploits in the rules past my friends for various games, but make it clear I have no intention of playing that way.

        I even tested something in Terraforming Mars this past weekend. I made it clear with the group ahead of time that I wanted to try something, what the strategy was, and how I would be playing. They were all fine with it, and it turned out the strategy was broken as hell. Won by 12 points against a fairly experienced group. It’s also a boring way to play that game and I wouldn’t care to do it again.

        That’s also how I know that it’s fruitless to expect rules to avoid these situations entirely. They must be handled socially. Any other tool is inadequate.

        • Susaga@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Prevention is better than cure, dude. Take your vaccine so you don’t get the disease. Set up a fire escape so you don’t burn to death. Lock your door so people don’t walk in and steal your TV. Avoid Stabby Johnson so he doesn’t stab you.

          And if you notice a flaw in a game system, do what you can to fix it.

          If you are aware of a potential problem and do nothing to stop it, then you are responsible for it if it happens. You can’t expect to avoid tragedy entirely, but you reduced the risk of THAT tragedy by a good amount, and that’s not worthless. A seatbelt won’t always save you, but you’re absolutely fucked without one.

          For someone trying to keep all options on the table, you sure are quick to remove all options from the table.

          • frezik@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            What are you even on about? If there’s a flaw in the system, the best that can be done is make it clear to the group that we shouldn’t abuse this, and hope the official rules are changed at some point.