Where is my Freaking Mule?!

[Rechan]

You do realize everyone's story isn't based upon the LotR... right?

You do realize that was an example, not the sole basis for my view of Fantasy Gaming, right? An illustration from a source everyone is familiar with.

In alot of Sword & Sorcery fantasy, money is a very real concern for the protagonists.

I guess that's why in Conan d20, the only thing money is for is to motivate PCs - as soon as they get it, it gets taken away by the handwave of "You spent it on ale and whores!" No, seriously, that's what the game says.

You assume alot about what constitutes heroic fantasy, and not all of it may be correct.

Exactly where am I making assumptions about what I called Heroic fantasy? I said:

1. It must be a SGN thing.
2. I haven't seen any books or movies where equipment and precise money amounts are relevant to success outside of Survival Horror.
3. Unless it's story relevant, I don't care.
4. I don't make players do book keeping unless that book keeping is very pertinent to what is going on in the story.
5. GP being divorced from the Magical Item economy would mean very little outside of the Economics Minigame in D&D, considering the game has always revolved around combat.

So, to sum up:

GP/Equipment isn't important to me and here's what I do in my games.

So... what exactly are you replying to? The only assumptions I made is that caring about Economy and mundane equipment must be a Simulationist thing.

Whose edition warring at this point in the thread?

There has been a LOT of '4e vs 3e'. So my post has been a reply to the entire thread? So the post didn't reflect the last six posts previous on page 14.

 

[Imaro]

You do realize that was an example, not the sole basis for my view of Fantasy Gaming, right? An illustration from a source everyone is familiar with.

I guess that's why in Conan d20, the only thing money is for is to motivate PCs - as soon as they get it, it gets taken away by the handwave of "You spent it on ale and whores!" No, seriously, that's what the game says.

Yet that example is used to base a whole what is and what isn't important in D&D argument, thus I'm assuming any other examples you use to further your point will share the characteristics of LotR that you posted, if not why limit yourself and your argument to that singular example.

Good for the Conan game, but in games based on Stormbringer, Hawkmoon, Lankhmar, Corum, etc. money is important. Conan != all Sword and Sorcery, especially one particular version of it for an rpg

Exactly where am I making assumptions about what I called Heroic fantasy? .

Moreso about what is "important" in heroic fantasy... by giving only an example that supports your view you minimie the fact that the very things we are discussing now, can and have been important in heroic fanatsy... as far as it being a simulationist thing... that is highly debatable... it all depends on what you take away from the genre and what it's tropes are.

There has been a LOT of '4e vs 3e'. So my post has been a reply to the entire thread? So the post didn't reflect the last six posts previous on page 14.

Sorry about that, I tend to read the most current posts in it before making generalizations and posting what may be a slightly inflamatory post. Was it really just the last 6 posts that didn't have anything to do with edition warring?

 

[Rechan]

Yet that example is used to base a whole what is and what isn't important in D&D argument.

It isn't "What's important in D&D" as "What is/isn't important to me". I don't know how many more "I" and "in my game" I have to pepper a post with before people get that I'm not making commentary about their games. The only time I start talking about "What D&D is" happens in my second post, where I say "D&D is what the system is made to do".

Mundane equipment was very relevant in Gygaxian style 1e, because equipment let you do various pixelbitching. Having the 10' pole meant you could touch things 10' ahead and whatnot.

as far as it being a simulationist thing... that is highly debatable... it all depends on what you take away from the genre and what it's tropes are.

I think economy = simulationism. If it was Narrativism modeling trope, then there wouldn't be GP totals for items; what's important is "at this point in the story you're scraping, so you only have enough to scrape; here's what you find".

 

[GnomeWorks]

I also am continually stunned people care about this kind of thing. Prices of non-magical mundane gear? Wut?

Oh joy. Here comes the badwrongfun brigade.

I was going to quote you and reply to various parts of your posts... but you know what? I don't care.

There is no point in having this discussion with you, Rechan, until you lose the high-and-mighty tone. D&D is more than capable of supporting my ideal method of play, and is more than capable of supporting yours, at well, at the same time.

But calling my preferred style "pixelbitching," slamming it with emphasis because you just don't get it, claiming that the things I care about are never relevant, and presenting an attitude that is clearly unwilling to attempt to understand my point of view? You're just trolling.

Your trolling irritates me.

 

[Imaro]

It isn't "What's important in D&D" as "What is/isn't important to me". I don't know how many more "I" and "in my game" I have to pepper a post with before people get that I'm not making commentary about their games. The only time I start talking about "What D&D is" happens in my second post, where I say "D&D is what the system is made to do".

Mundane equipment was very relevant in Gygaxian style 1e, because equipment let you do various pixelbitching. Having the 10' pole meant you could touch things 10' ahead and whatnot.

Fine then I guess my point is... I find it just as hard to believe that you have no idea why this could be important to others... especially since the 1e comment, and the fact that if desired... any of the editions can be played this way... as you find it surprising that some people do want these things.

I think economy = simulationism. If it was Narrativism modeling trope, then there wouldn't be GP totals for items; what's important is "at this point in the story you're scraping, so you only have enough to scrape; here's what you find".

See, it doesn't have to boil down to "economy simulation"... what if we want to roleplay a night on the town, I can easily see a reason for tracking the things the PC's have carefully in order to provide the genre tropes of the good time, but still limited to how much you actually have. That's not simulating an economy it's roleplaying your good time (as well as whatever bad things happen along the way) until your money runs out (I've found new players really like doing stuff like this, go figure.)... and those with more money can have a better time.

Also because I have these things on hand, I don't have to write down everything or record the prices I pull out of the air in order to keep the versimilitude of my game up. But that's just one of many reasons I wouldn't mind having something like this.

 

[Bluenose]

Also because I have these things on hand, I don't have to write down everything or record the prices I pull out of the air in order to keep the versimilitude of my game up. But that's just one of many reasons I wouldn't mind having something like this.

Verisimilitude isn't enhanced by having every version of something cost the same thing everywhere. At the very least I expect a price range that depends on quality, and then I'll have to adjust it for the particular circumstances. Which means if I'm interested in keeping track of things I have to write them down anyway. And if I don't and one of the players calls me on it, I make up an explanation on the spot. As far as I'm concerned, improvisation is an important GM skill.

 

[korjik]

Some how this turned into an edition war. No, 4e doesn't do more than combat well. But saying that is assuming that prior editions did it much better. No. 3e may have sucked less at doing it, but that's not a compliment! We're here saying that the feces smell of 4e is worse than the vomit scent of 3e. Neither are pleasant.

I firmly believe that D&D is a niche game, designed with the intention to do one thing and do it well: killing things and taking their stuff. That is what the lionshare of the rules has revolved around since the Boxes. Trying to make D&D do all other kinds of things, or EXPECTING it to, is trying to turn a round peg into a square peg so it fits in the square hole, or expecting the round peg to go in the square hole in the first place.

Let's say I want to run a game where Everyone is a Diplomat/Courtier in a king's court. I couldn't attempt it with 1e, period, nor 2e. With 3e, it would be reduced to Intimidate/Bluff/Diplomacy vs. DC, Charmed Person, and Profession: Diplomat. The end. 4e is no better. Compare that to all the combat options that existed, compare all the rules-relevant info on a character's sheet that relates to combat vs non-combat. Now convince me that D&D is a robust system that obviously can handle Diplomats and Dandies for session after session with lots of rules to make their characters different. This is not a flaw of editions, this is a flaw of relying of D&D.

If System X is not build to facilitate Gameplay A, I do not try to make System X do Gameplay A, nor do I rage about X's inability to do A. Instead, I find System Y, which was built to do A well. Much simpler and easier than gnashing my teeth. And I believe that folks' unwillingness to go outside of D&D to do things that D&D doesn't do is the chief issue, not the fact D&D (or edition X) can't do it in the first place.

You win the 'Completely Missed the Point' Award for this thread.

You may play D&D this way. Since Zaran is talking about my game, it should be pretty obvious that I dont. If you have nothing to add because you dont play the game that way, please dont add anything.

 

[Imaro]

Verisimilitude isn't enhanced by having every version of something cost the same thing everywhere. At the very least I expect a price range that depends on quality, and then I'll have to adjust it for the particular circumstances. Which means if I'm interested in keeping track of things I have to write them down anyway. And if I don't and one of the players calls me on it, I make up an explanation on the spot. As far as I'm concerned, improvisation is an important GM skill.

Where did I claim everything costing the same contributes to versimilitude? It's used as a baseline and reference so that I'm not just pulling numbers from my imagination when something is asked for... prices can fluctuate based on many factors but, IMO, the amount they fluctuate by and the reason is what sustains versimilitude in this area, having a baseline helps me more easily improv this. It would break my versimilitude if my character enters a shop one day and mules cost 3 gp's and after adventuring for a couple of days, he returns to find them now costing 20gp (especially if the DM has no reason and really did just pull the numbers out of thin air and had forgotten since last game). Now as a DM if I have a base cost for these things I will only ad-hoc the price a little above or a little under which can reasonably be accepted by most players without breaking their vermisilitude...even if there isn't a reason that mules went up by a coin or two except the shopkeeper wants to make a little extra.

I mean I guess as an argument I could claim that having wildly different prices for the same thing every time it's bought or asked about doesn't contribute to versimilitude either... and it would be assuming there is only one way to use your imagination for creating prices out of thin air which in the far end of the spectrum as the one you made above.

 

[Mark]

Some how this turned into an edition war.

With your help, I can point out how.

No, 4e doesn't do more than combat well.

This is a single statement about a rule set that does not invoke an edition war.

But saying that is assuming that prior editions did it much better. No. 3e (. . .)

This is the follow up that forces discussion toward an edition war.

 

[Rechan]

Oh joy. Here comes the badwrongfun brigade.

Because I don't enjoy it it must be badwrongfun, right.

I was going to quote you and reply to various parts of your posts... but you know what? I don't care.

D&D is more than capable of supporting my ideal method of play, and is more than capable of supporting yours, at well, at the same time.

I never said otherwise. I specified what I like in my games.

Just because I am stunned people care about something that is completely beyond my interests does not mean that I am saying it's bad. it just surprises me that it matters. The same way that I'm confused with the hours and hours spent painting minis folks spend gobs of money on. It's not a judgment call, just a loss for "getting' the attraction.

But calling my preferred style "pixelbitching,"

I'm going to assume you don't know what it means because you're taking issue with it.

Pixel Bitching is a word that refers to the habit of early computer adventure games where you have to click a very specific area to get the game to advance.

This is very similar to the Gygaxian style where the party either must figure out what the DM has thought in order to "beat" the situation. In this example a trap, where the players MUST describe the process they go through to detect the trap without getting caught in it. If they don't discover the explicit parameters of what the DM has written down, they don't find the trap. If the trap is on the ceiling, and the PCs JUST say they probe the floor/air below the trap, well they don't find it. So equipment is paramount, because you need to be able to pull the right tool out of your pack to do the CSI: Dungeon. That is pixelbitching.

Trying to outsmart the DM's deviousness is clearly exciting for you. It's not for me. But considering the sheer amount of people who like Gygaxian style, it'd be stupid of me to write that off as "badwrongfun".

You're just trolling.

I think you're just overracting.There is no jugmentalism in anything I'm saying. Don't be so defensive. If I was trolling I'd just insult Gygax, make insinuations about the personality charactersitics of simulationists, and insult 3e.

Or, don't respond because you don't care and you think I'm trolling.