Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
A rant on ASF
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 2475612" data-attributes="member: 18280"><p>If we are talking about, say ASF, how exactly is it "illogical"? There is nothing illogical in the mechanic itself. There is nothing illogical in stating that different types of spellcasters require different types of gestures when casting spells with somatic components. Nor is there anything illogical in stating that a spellcaster does not need two hands to cast spells (i.e., he needs only one hand free) some types of restriction automatically limit spellcasting, causing a set chance of failure. Admittedly, this should open up invention of armors that do not restrict spellcasters....but, then, there is nothing in the rules that says this cannot be done. What the rules describe are specific types of armors, and the effects of wearing those specific types of armors.</p><p></p><p>Wizards not wearing armor is not particularly Gygaxian, either. As pointed out earlier in this thread, </p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px"><span style="color: Red">The D&D "Legacy flavour" is based upon the game's origins as a tabletop miniatures wargame, coupled with ideas culled from Lovecraft, classic fantasy novels, fairy tales, and mythology. Older versions of D&D actively attempted to provide a form of "retroactive continuity," coming up with reasons why things occurred in these stories the way that they did. Hence, LG paladins were based off of specific models, as were the original ranger, monk, dwarf, elf, and so on. Many things which, at first glance, seem to be surely created just for the game, on further examination come from another source. The 1st Edition DMG actually included a small reading list of game influences.</span></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"><span style="color: Red"></span></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"><span style="color: Red">With some few exceptions, wizard-type characters in mythology, classic fantasy novels, folklore, and fairy tales do not wear armour. Of course, some current fantasy novels have different ideas, as they are influenced by different things (such as modern culture, video games, etc.).</span></p><p></p><p>I suggest that, perhaps, "what people want" is not so uniform as you may think. Even I would hesitate to claim that what I want and what people want are the same thing, and I am fairly unabashed in my hubris. If nothing else, this thread (and many, many more on EnWorld and off) should serve to demonstrate that there is no monolithic "what people want."</p><p></p><p>You say that what you'd like from D&D is a "basic" flavour. I say that such a basic flavour is exactly the opposite of what D&D should offer. Basic flavours are bland and boring, imho...and, if sales figures are anything to go by, in the opinions of the majority of rpgers. GURPS (for example) is great, but it has a "basic" flavour. Compare sales of GURPS to D&D (in any incarnation) and I think you'll find that basic flavour is simply <strong><em>not</em></strong> what people want.</p><p></p><p>RC</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>P.S.: BTW, calling something a "sacred cow" is not a rational argument even if the thing is only present for flavour reasons, and if those flavour reasons began with an earlier system. All you are saying is that you fail to see the value in the thing (which is subjective) and/or that you don't enjoy the flavour (which is also subjective). You can argue like that. You can probably even convince a number of people (given P.T. Barnum's infamous statement that there's one born every minute). But the argument still will not be a rational one, simply because it is not based on an objective evaluation.</p><p></p><p>RC</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Raven Crowking, post: 2475612, member: 18280"] If we are talking about, say ASF, how exactly is it "illogical"? There is nothing illogical in the mechanic itself. There is nothing illogical in stating that different types of spellcasters require different types of gestures when casting spells with somatic components. Nor is there anything illogical in stating that a spellcaster does not need two hands to cast spells (i.e., he needs only one hand free) some types of restriction automatically limit spellcasting, causing a set chance of failure. Admittedly, this should open up invention of armors that do not restrict spellcasters....but, then, there is nothing in the rules that says this cannot be done. What the rules describe are specific types of armors, and the effects of wearing those specific types of armors. Wizards not wearing armor is not particularly Gygaxian, either. As pointed out earlier in this thread, [INDENT][COLOR=Red]The D&D "Legacy flavour" is based upon the game's origins as a tabletop miniatures wargame, coupled with ideas culled from Lovecraft, classic fantasy novels, fairy tales, and mythology. Older versions of D&D actively attempted to provide a form of "retroactive continuity," coming up with reasons why things occurred in these stories the way that they did. Hence, LG paladins were based off of specific models, as were the original ranger, monk, dwarf, elf, and so on. Many things which, at first glance, seem to be surely created just for the game, on further examination come from another source. The 1st Edition DMG actually included a small reading list of game influences. With some few exceptions, wizard-type characters in mythology, classic fantasy novels, folklore, and fairy tales do not wear armour. Of course, some current fantasy novels have different ideas, as they are influenced by different things (such as modern culture, video games, etc.).[/COLOR][/INDENT] I suggest that, perhaps, "what people want" is not so uniform as you may think. Even I would hesitate to claim that what I want and what people want are the same thing, and I am fairly unabashed in my hubris. If nothing else, this thread (and many, many more on EnWorld and off) should serve to demonstrate that there is no monolithic "what people want." You say that what you'd like from D&D is a "basic" flavour. I say that such a basic flavour is exactly the opposite of what D&D should offer. Basic flavours are bland and boring, imho...and, if sales figures are anything to go by, in the opinions of the majority of rpgers. GURPS (for example) is great, but it has a "basic" flavour. Compare sales of GURPS to D&D (in any incarnation) and I think you'll find that basic flavour is simply [B][I]not[/I][/B] what people want. RC P.S.: BTW, calling something a "sacred cow" is not a rational argument even if the thing is only present for flavour reasons, and if those flavour reasons began with an earlier system. All you are saying is that you fail to see the value in the thing (which is subjective) and/or that you don't enjoy the flavour (which is also subjective). You can argue like that. You can probably even convince a number of people (given P.T. Barnum's infamous statement that there's one born every minute). But the argument still will not be a rational one, simply because it is not based on an objective evaluation. RC [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
A rant on ASF
Top