作者：Troy_Costisick

最近在一篇名为《What are the Three Timescales in RPGs?》的文章中我讨论了几个单词，但却未定义它们，而我将在本文做出解释。我将讨论的两个术语是指令和程序。

指令或方向规则是游戏的一般准则。从根本上看来，指令能够回答“Big Three”中的第一个问题：游戏是关于什么？指令是基于玩家的能力并朝着一个共同的目标而作用于群组中。他们在Social Contract中为什么是可行的游戏以及什么不是设置了参数。一些指令较大。他们会通过自上而下的角度提供如何游戏的建议。我将其称为宏观指令。

一些例子：

Dungeons and Dragons(from yahoo)

《龙与地下城》：杀死怪物并夺走它的物品。

《Dogs in the Vineyard》：使一个城镇摆脱罪孽与恶习。

《Sorcerer》：喂养自己的恶魔同时避免失去自己的人性。

《Prime Time Adventures》：使用电视/电影作为灵感探索一个主题。

《Vampire: The Eternal Struggle》：探索吸血鬼是什么样子。

《My Life With Master》：逃离一种不正常的关系。

《Apocalypse World》：决定你会为了获得自己所需要的东西牺牲什么。

《Inspectres》：解决一起超自然的犯罪并与其它代理相竞争。

有时候这也被称为游戏的“目标”，但是我认为有些设计师并未真正摸清楚这一词的内涵。

指令为其它的所有规则设下了布景。就像在《龙与地下城》中，如果没有地牢进行探险，战斗机制也就不再有意义。在《Sorcerer》中，如果未将角色与恶魔维系在一起，人性规则也是扯谈。

指令也会提供基于微观尺度描绘某些内容的建议。就像有关《被遗忘的国度》的大量文字内容。那里有许多关于DM该如何扮演Elminster或Drizzt的建议。《龙与地下城》中的规则列也是微观指令的另一个例子：“这便是Lawful Neutral的含义。”对于更多独立例子，让我们着眼于你在《Dogs in the Vineyard》中的手枪：这点很重要，规则表示你只能在一些事情对自己极其重要时才能使用它。在《Sorcerer》中关于失去自己的人性时该怎么做的机制也是一种微观指令。有时候，指令在文本中也被叫做“游戏建议”或“指导”。如果你知道这些名字，你就应该能够理解我所说的。

我认为指令是RPG游戏中非常困难的一部分。如果战斗规则并不能发挥作用，我们便能够轻松地注意到。如果你不小心略过了Chargen（游戏邦注：字符生产器协议）中的一步，那么这种疏忽在游戏过程中将变得很明显。但是《DitV》并不是一款火爆的西方RPG，或者如果你正在玩《Prime Time Adventures》并希望看到住在Buffyverse会是怎样的，你便很容易犯错。

另一方面，程序是更加具体的存在。程序是一种按部就班的机制，即引导着玩家通过某些过程去创造某些内容。Chargen便是一个例子。所以战斗机制，解决任务，解决冲突，投掷咒语，复原，升级，海螺壳叙述等等都是一种程序。

一些游戏中的例子：

《龙与地下城》：战斗

《Capes》：叙述规则

《Call of Cthullu》：总体检查

《Dogs in the Vineyard》：城镇创造

《Shock》：解决冲突

《Rolemaster》：阻力循环

《Ars Magica》：创造剧团

该列表并不详尽。典型的游戏将拥有许多不同的程序，并且每个程序都有自己的最终产品。

我认为程序能让新玩家更轻松地掌握，因为它们总是会使用项目符号列表，标号步骤或者其它明显的方式罗列出来。玩家在一开始可能会因为一小部分程序内容感到困惑，但是在玩了几个步骤后他们便能解决所有的疑惑。

所以它们各自存在怎样的误区？

对于指令来说，你必须确保一致性，而对于程序，你则需要支持它们。你不能只是单方面地让玩家描述自己的角色，然后提供刺激他们朝着不同方向前进的机制。《龙与地下城》便是一个经典的例子。让我引用自己一款游戏中的例子进行说明。

在《Ember Twilight》的核心规则中我们包含了一个游戏建议区块。在该区块中我们讨论了英雄是文学和传说中一些有缺陷的人。然后我们告诫玩家在游戏过程中牢记这一点。但是我们并未给予他们任何机制去支持游戏。结果便是，玩家通常都会忽视该建议。而如果他们遵循了这一建议，通常也只是因为凑巧。对于程序模拟必须足够明确，它们必须能够加强你的指令。确保玩家能够理解程序是游戏设计中最困难的一部分，因为它对写作技巧具有非常高的要求。

程序通常都会受益于例子，轶事，表格以及插画等等。并不是所有人在看到指令组时便能够获得理解，所以你可以添加一些有趣的轶事或图标帮助玩家理解。

同样地，你还必须设计程序去做你希望它们能做的事。如果你希望谈判成为玩家间互动在的重要部分，你便不能设置像“滚动一个d100。如果结果少于你的魅力属性，你便算取得成功”这样简单的程序。你需要设置一个能够创造2个以上玩家间相互对话的程序，并刺激他们去传达角色所讲的话。你应该不断回头检查程序，确保它们能够真正支持你所期望的游戏类型。

（本文为游戏邦/gamerboom.com编译，拒绝任何不保留版权的转载，如需转载请联系：游戏邦）

What are the Different Types of Rules?

by Troy_Costisick

Heya,

Recently, in an article entitled “What are the Three Timescales in RPGs?” I tossed around a couple words without defining them.  I’ve gone back to that article and linked it to the future, to this article where I explain them.  I should have defined them then, so I’m making up for it now.  The two terms I’m talking about are Directives and Procedures.

Directives, or directional rules, are general guidelines for play.  Basically, directives answer the first question of the Big Three: What is this game about?  Directives rely on a player’s ability to cooperatively work with the group toward a mutual goal.  They set up the parameters in the Social Contract for what is acceptable play and what is not.  Some directives are big.  They give advice on how to play the game from a top-down point of view.  I call them macro-directives.

Some examples:
-Dungeons and Dragons: Kill monsters and take their stuff.
-Dogs in the Vineyard: Rid a town of sin and vice.
-Sorcerer: Feed your demon while not sacrificing your humanity.
-Prime Time Adventures: Explore a theme using a TV/Movie as inspiration.
-Vampire: The Eternal Struggle: Explore what it’s like to be a vampire.
-My Life With Master: Escape from a dysfunctional relationship.
-Apocalypse World: Decide what you’re willing to sacrifice to get what you need.
-Inspectres: Solve a supernatural crime while competing against other agencies.

This can sometimes be called the “object” of the game, but I think some designers would have a problem with the connotation of that word.

Directives give context to all the other rules.  Combat mechanics in D&D wouldn’t make much sense without a dungeon to explore.  The humanity rules in Sorcerer are empty without the demon your character bound.

Directives can also be advice on how to portray something on the micro scale.  For instance, think of the reams of literature about Forgotten Realms.  There’s plenty of advice out there on how a DM should play someone like Elminster or Drizzt.  Alignment rules in AD&D is another example of a micro-directive: “This is what Lawful Neutral means…”  For a more indie-centric example, think about resorting to your pistol in Dogs in the Vineyard: it is a big deal and the rules say you should only do it when something is VITALLY important to you.  The mechanics on what to do when someone loses their Humanity in Sorcerer are also micro-directives.
Sometimes, directives are called “play advice” or “guidance” within a text.  If you know them by that name, you should understand what I’m talking about.

I think directives are the hard part of an RPG.  If the combat rules don’t work, it’s easy to see.   If you accidentally skipped a step during Chargen, the oversight will become evident during play.  But missing that DitV is not a guns-blazing style western RPG or that if you are playing Prime Time Adventures to see what it would be like to live in the Buffyverse, you’re doing it wrong are easy mistakes to make.

Procedures, on the other hand, are much more concrete.  Procedures are step-by-step mechanics that lead the players through some kind of process in order to produce something.  Chargen is an example.  So are combat mechanics, task resolution, conflict resolution, spell casting, recuperation, leveling up, conch shell narration, and so on.

Some examples from games:
-D&D: Combat
-Capes: Narration Rules
-Call of Cthullu: Sanity Checks
-Dogs in the Vineyard: Town Creation
-Shock: Conflict Resolution
-Rolemaster: Resistance Roll
-Ars Magica: Troupe Generation

That list is hardly exhaustive, even within those games.  The typical game will have many different procedures, each with its own end product.

I think procedures are easier for new players to grasp since they are (usually) laid out in a coherent way with bulleted lists, numbered steps, and sometimes visual representations.  Small aspects of procedures can be confused by players at first, but after a few sessions they will usually iron out all the bugs.

So what are the pitfalls of each?

For directives, you must be consistent and your procedures must support them.  You cannot tell the players to portray their characters one way then give them mechanics that incentivize doing the exact opposite.  The classic example of this is D&D and the number of Heartbreakers that imitated it.  Let me cite an example from one of my own games.

In the Core Rules for Ember Twilight, we include a play advice section.  In that section we talk about heroes are flawed people in literature and legend.  Then we admonish players to keep that in mind as they play.  But we didn’t give them any mechanics to support that play.  Consequently, this advice was almost always ignored by the players.  When they did follow it, it was usually just by accident.
For procedures, you must be clear and they must reinforce your directives.  Making procedures understandable is one of the hardest parts of game design to master because it requires good writing skills.  I’ve talked about how to design good mechanics in “How Can My Game Better Teach Mechanics” part 1 and part 2.

Procedures often benefit from having examples, anecdotes, charts, and/or illustrations to help.  Not everyone can learn just by reading a set of instructions, so including fun anecdotes or graphics can be a big help.

Also, you must design procedures that actually do what you want them to do.  If you want negotiation to be a big part of the interaction between players at the table, you cannot have a procedure for checking the success of a negotiation be something as simple as “Roll a d100.  If the result is less than your Charisma stat, you succeed.”  You need to set up a procedure that creates a back-and-forth dialogue between two or more players and incentivizes them to narrate what their characters say.  Always go back and double check your procedures to make they actually support the kind of play you envisioned for your game.(source:blogspot)