Category:Gamebreaking: Difference between revisions
1d4chan>NotBrandX mNo edit summary |
1d4chan>Kirbanzo No edit summary |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
There will always be fa/tg/uys that will say "nuh-uh! you're not allowed to do that!" and try to "prove" we can't abuse the rules to have the wrong kind of fun. Try to keep those naysayers to the discuss page for each article, or to their own subsection named 'counterarguments' or 'no fun allowed' instead of letting them inject <nowiki><s>strikeout</s> or '''boldface'''</nowiki> scolding into the article. | There will always be fa/tg/uys that will say "nuh-uh! you're not allowed to do that!" and try to "prove" we can't abuse the rules to have the wrong kind of fun. Try to keep those naysayers to the discuss page for each article, or to their own subsection named 'counterarguments' or 'no fun allowed' instead of letting them inject <nowiki><s>strikeout</s> or '''boldface'''</nowiki> scolding into the article. | ||
[[Category:Categories]] | |||
Revision as of 03:29, 24 February 2021
The more complex a system, the more likely you'll have inconsistencies or even contradictions. When trying to make a simulation, the more detail you add will have the ironic effect of making mismatches appear huge.
These articles are for straining game rules into something nonsensical but technically legal. Sometimes they highlight a problem in the rules that needs fixing, and sometimes they are just amusing intellectual exercises.
There will always be fa/tg/uys that will say "nuh-uh! you're not allowed to do that!" and try to "prove" we can't abuse the rules to have the wrong kind of fun. Try to keep those naysayers to the discuss page for each article, or to their own subsection named 'counterarguments' or 'no fun allowed' instead of letting them inject <s>strikeout</s> or '''boldface''' scolding into the article.
Pages in category "Gamebreaking"
The following 33 pages are in this category, out of 33 total.