Search results

I dunno. I think I spent a whole thread arguing I could get exactly what I wanted out of the D&D rules as is, just by not viewing them as all-encompassing representation of the sum totality of all possible events in the game world. It was on ENWorld. I think the thread was called "Game rules...

Some of us don't equate "heroic fantasy" with "superheroes with swords."

That'd be a fun character concept, now that I think about it. Playing a mighty warrior, slayer of beasts, hunter of dragons...who happens to be deathly afraid of horses. "But why, Torkol, destroyer of men, savior of the Elves, eater of hearts, are you afraid of that pony?" "Horses killed mah...

I ask. An excellent summary of the issue.

Oh, for the love of god. We've been over this a thousand times already in this thread. I am tired of repeating myself, but one more time: I am of the school of thought that the rules are for a specific purpose and for a specific time. An off-screen, NPC knight is not what the rules are for. The...

Well, after they pass all the initiation tests and the ritual scarification, plus the apprenticeship period, they tend to adapt well. Of course that's because of the cult indoctrination techniques. I find those very helpful!

Celebrim is arguing that consistent DM fiats on stuff not covered in the rules, but still come up often enough, develops a body of precedence and established guidelines that eventually evolve into a new rule to cover the situation. This is the exact opposite of my experience, in which over time...

My example stands even if that's the case. Even if my preferred game had one, my players would never demand I use it. I guess we're all just a lot more relaxed about this stuff. They don't see fiat as being some slap in their face, and if they think it's a poor decision on my part, they'll say...

You know, the weather. Knights falling down and breaking their necks. Weather or not a tough justice system can cut out a captive wizard's tongue. Stuff like that. I think in this example it's better handled by the player deciding whether or not they want to do a pregnancy storyline with their...

Oh, I didn't realize you were talking about that. Yes, if the GM is consistent about his portrayal of the game world (like seasons being regular in the same place, I guess) then it does create a kind of stability. Oh, definitely. I thought you were talking about something else, for some...

Some of it is covered by the rules, some of it is controlled by the GM.

We noticed! Do game worlds have physics at all? (Also keeping it brief)

This makes no sense. The dragon is much more likely to kill you than a random accident. People ride horses all the damn time in fantasy settings! Sigh. Nothing anyone is saying is sinking in, is it? You continue to define your terms the way you want and expect us to abide by them. Neither am...

A slippery slope argument isn't fallacious if you can demonstrate a direct inevitability between one step and the next- it's not fallacious to say that if I fall off a building, I'll keep falling. In this case, I deny that there is inevitability. I have been doing what you described in your...

What? I was just being irreverent, because being Somber and Serious in examples is boring. Besides, in actual play there are a whole host of issues beyond my theoretical gaming preferences- as much as I love a good story, I love to kill things and take their stuff as well. I have varied tastes...

Celebrim- You should try playing on a flat surface, like a table or a floor. That greased ramp, glazed downgrade or rain-soaked hill or whatever kind of slick slant you're playing on is clearly not helping your game. Besides, it's a lot easier if the dice have some rigid surface to land on. I...

No. That is by no means inevitable. As a player, I expect the exact opposite- that things will only conform to the rules interacting with me. This is what I want. I don't want to play in a "D&D Rules are Laws of Physics" universe. That would be an incredibly dumb world of completely ridiculous...

That, at least, is clear. I would maintain that 1st, 2nd and 3rd edition D&D, as well as most RPGs, are firmly in the "A" camp as well. GURPS is a good example of an attempt to satisfy a "B" type paradigm.

But you still get that. With your car analogy, the rules are for driving and repairing and customizing the car- but the DM decides on the highway, rest stops, motels and drive through fast food joints. But...a DM's filter is why you have the DM in the first place? To have the ability for the...

Nah, if the PC's want to pump one for information, then he automatically becomes important to the plot, yes?