Pretty much what Starfox said. The way I've always heard "system mastery" used is that it's a player's knowledge of how that game system works and how to best exploit it. It doesn't necessarily imply knowledge of how other game systems do things differently. Quite likely they do know what the flaws or limits of the system are, insofar as they know how best to break the game. Some players take this knowledge as an impetus to look for alternatives or patch over the flaws, but some do not. They instead revel in the power it gives them over the game, to be able to snap it in twain over their knee whenever they so desire, and if a new edition fixes their favorite flaws they will not rejoice in the improvement of the game but instead whine at the loss of their power over it. I've known people like this, and I'm sure you have as well, even if only online. How many people, when 4E came out, were upset not about the actual flaws of the new edition but instead mainly that it was different, or that the wizard was no longer the most powerful class?
Maybe we just have fundamentally different ideas of what system mastery means, in which case this discussion probably isn't ever going to be fruitful. But in my experience, someone can have system mastery and still not be a good player. In fact, the only person that ever got ejected from our gaming table for making the game unpleasant for everyone else was, in fact, the one with the most system mastery.
We clearly do. Because "Able to exploit the game" in this era just means "able to do a few google searches" and requires no mastery whatsoever as I understand the word.
I am just so very tired of "you spend time knowing the system, that makes you bad" arguments.
We clearly do. Because "Able to exploit the game" in this era just means "able to do a few google searches" and requires no mastery whatsoever as I understand the word.
Knowing the system doesn't make someone bad, but nor does it automatically make them good, either at RPG design or as a player in general. I know from experience that it's possible for someone to have intimate and detailed knowledge of the rules of D&D and still remain not only blind to its flaws, but deeply invested in keeping those flaws around to maintain their own advantage at the expense of the people that they play with.
