Search results

I think the bigger point is that simplifying almost always means you are giving up something. In your hypothetical example of simplification without any loss, there will be a vanishingly small number of people who will prefer the complex version for the sheer love of complexity and I'll agree...

Specifically, the claim was that the tropes they emulate are those of "D&D-derived fantasy". They can't have been designed to emulate something that would only come into being once it was derived from their existence.

Even if that's the case, it's not the existence of mechanics that have been around since the 1970s (eg, classes, levels and hit points, which are the examples that were given for genre reinforcing rules) that are the result of recent pop culture.

Yes, when I chose the word recursive, I was thinking of a conversation like this; - D&D mechanics are designed to emulate a genre. - Oh, what, genre? - The genre of games that use D&D mechanics. I probably should have just said circular, rather than recursive because, as you point out, there...

For the record, I agree with the sentiment behind @Fenris-77's comment, even if I'd use a different term.

Recursive is the word I'd use.

This is the reality. Not all the wild scenarios being thrown about in this thread.

Only if you assume there are constant disputes that can't be resolved amicably. And, if there are constant disputes that can't be resolved amicably, with people constantly wanting different things, the issue isn't who has right of veto. More likely, in @Zardnaar's games, disputes are rare and...

I think a huge part of the disconnect is the people talking about their power of veto rarely actually use that power, and never use it to ruin other people's fun because (assuming they're part of a functional group), it's simply rarely or never needed and they of course have no desire to ruin...

I presume it's any time they're unwilling to compromise and someone has to make a final decision. This doesn't mean any time there is conflict, as I would presume that, most of the time, they're quite happy to compromise and don't have people constantly forcing disputes. This is pretty much how...

Templars as warlocks feels reasonable to me, but I don't play 5e at all or have more than a superficial idea how warlocks actually work, so I'm happy to leave discussion/argument of those specific technical details to someone else. I can see how it might be problem if they're just arcane wizards...

Oh, I know it happened in the novels and it should be possible just based on the way the setting describes it. My comment was the that mechanics not allowing it was a problem. I do believe Defilers and Preservers is one I never looked at, so no surprise I missed it if it's in there. No, they...

"Later DS products." Was this is in the Veilled Alliance? I don't recall seeing anything along these lines in any 2e-era material, although I'm happy to accept it could be somewhere I've missed

Oh, yeah, if you're using what D&D calls arcane magic in Dark Sun, you are drawing power from living things and, if you're not intentionally careful about it, you're destroying plants. That part shouldn't be optional.

It was the case in the official AD&D implementation that a magic user is either a defiler or a preserver, with no option to choose after the class is selected. As far as I'm aware, 3e and 4e worked the same way. I personally consider this a huge failure of the system.

There is absolutely nothing notable or morally upstanding in doing the only thing you could possibly do. Edit: to be clear, you're entitled to want a simple, black and white game where being less than perfectly heroic is not an option. I may feel that turning Dark Sun into that game would be a...

I agree 100%. In my Mythras version of Dark Sun, defiling is easier and more powerful by far. A preserver who sticks with it gets some payoff way down the track but, for the most part, you preserve because it's the right thing to do, not because it's easy.

I've been arguing people can do what they want with it, but I strongly believe Dark Sun is a great setting for heroic PCs and a pretty mediocre one for evil, cruel and/or selfish ones. Being evil in Dark Sun is easy. Answering the call and striving to make the world a better place? Being the...

But if you have rules for defiling then people can use them. The author can't prevent their use by PCs. How is WotC going to stop people from playing them? This is the thing I'm saying they literally can't do. This position really makes no sense at all to me. Rules for Clearly Evil Villain...

There are a small number of publishers sometimes making absolute statements in their games about how their games are allowed to be played. I have also seen people state that if Dark Sun was rereleased then WotC must tell people that certain things are absolutely not allowed to be included in...