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
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
With Respect to the Door and Expectations....The REAL Reason 5e Can't Unite the Base
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="Mallus" data-source="post: 5992539" data-attributes="member: 3887"><p>I think it's more fair to say the old editions allowed for many playstyles. One way they did this was by focusing on the <em>results</em>, not on the processes that led to those results.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Possibly, though I'm not sure about the 'vast majority' part - but note that saying "we <em>used</em> the rules as if they were a process sim" is a very different from "the rules were <em>intended</em> to be and <em>written as</em> process simulations". They clearly aren't. Which is why D&D combat lacks, and has always lacked, things like hit location rules, or exact descriptions of how saving throws operate. It's also why Gygax himself kept stressing the abstract nature of the rules. </p><p></p><p>To run AD&D as a process simulation, you have to <em>add</em> those elements to the game, just as you described in your posts above, by deliberately interpreting the results the system provides in a specific way. </p><p></p><p>In other words, the DM (and players) need to create a specific <em>association</em> between the mechanics and the fiction. The rules/system <em>do not care</em>, and do not make those associations for you. It's up to you. </p><p></p><p>Which is what I posted in this thread a few days ago. You've been kinda making my point for me. </p><p></p><p></p><p>I believe Gygax's own words in the AD&D DMG about the combat system demonstrate this to be false. Realism was never a design priority for him.</p><p></p><p></p><p>From my perspective, focusing on process simulation makes having fun with any edition of D&D more difficult. It's easier to enjoy if you "let go and let Gygax <insert other designer's name here>" <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" />.</p><p></p><p>A quick example: in 3e, which is usually described as the most process-simulation oriented edition of D&D, what happens when a rogue with Evasion saves against a Fireball centered on them and takes no damage from it? Describes the process. </p><p></p><p>Does the rogue leap clear of the blast? No, a REF save doesn't grant movement (and exact tactical positioning is important in 3e -- saying the rogue leaped away might have worked in AD&D, which was generally looser about positioning, at least in practice).</p><p></p><p>Does the rogue take cover? No, cover is not required in order to make a REF save/use Evasion. </p><p></p><p>What's happening in the fiction? How do you marry the mechanical result with the scene? How do you make this congruent with process simulation? The rogue evaded a giant spherical volume of fire which they were at the center of <em>by not moving</em>. </p><p></p><p>(and people kvetch about Come and Get It...)</p><p></p><p>To my mind, all you can do is heed the immortal (and paraphrased) words of the MST3K theme song: </p><p></p><p>"Say to yourself it's just a game. You should really just relax".</p><p></p><p>Now I'm criticizing anyone's play style or preferences. Please don't take that away from what I wrote. I'm only to illustrate the complicated, and, well, arbitrary, relationship between the D&D rules and anything that can be meaningfully called "process simulation".</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mallus, post: 5992539, member: 3887"] I think it's more fair to say the old editions allowed for many playstyles. One way they did this was by focusing on the [i]results[/i], not on the processes that led to those results. Possibly, though I'm not sure about the 'vast majority' part - but note that saying "we [i]used[/i] the rules as if they were a process sim" is a very different from "the rules were [i]intended[/i] to be and [i]written as[/i] process simulations". They clearly aren't. Which is why D&D combat lacks, and has always lacked, things like hit location rules, or exact descriptions of how saving throws operate. It's also why Gygax himself kept stressing the abstract nature of the rules. To run AD&D as a process simulation, you have to [i]add[/i] those elements to the game, just as you described in your posts above, by deliberately interpreting the results the system provides in a specific way. In other words, the DM (and players) need to create a specific [i]association[/i] between the mechanics and the fiction. The rules/system [i]do not care[/i], and do not make those associations for you. It's up to you. Which is what I posted in this thread a few days ago. You've been kinda making my point for me. I believe Gygax's own words in the AD&D DMG about the combat system demonstrate this to be false. Realism was never a design priority for him. From my perspective, focusing on process simulation makes having fun with any edition of D&D more difficult. It's easier to enjoy if you "let go and let Gygax <insert other designer's name here>" :). A quick example: in 3e, which is usually described as the most process-simulation oriented edition of D&D, what happens when a rogue with Evasion saves against a Fireball centered on them and takes no damage from it? Describes the process. Does the rogue leap clear of the blast? No, a REF save doesn't grant movement (and exact tactical positioning is important in 3e -- saying the rogue leaped away might have worked in AD&D, which was generally looser about positioning, at least in practice). Does the rogue take cover? No, cover is not required in order to make a REF save/use Evasion. What's happening in the fiction? How do you marry the mechanical result with the scene? How do you make this congruent with process simulation? The rogue evaded a giant spherical volume of fire which they were at the center of [i]by not moving[/i]. (and people kvetch about Come and Get It...) To my mind, all you can do is heed the immortal (and paraphrased) words of the MST3K theme song: "Say to yourself it's just a game. You should really just relax". Now I'm criticizing anyone's play style or preferences. Please don't take that away from what I wrote. I'm only to illustrate the complicated, and, well, arbitrary, relationship between the D&D rules and anything that can be meaningfully called "process simulation". [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
With Respect to the Door and Expectations....The REAL Reason 5e Can't Unite the Base
Top