Search results

Because people don't know about the awesomeness of that game!

Huh? Not from where I'm standing... I talk to people about D&D sometimes. I just don't go on and on and on about it when they're not interested. You know... socialization, basic empathy? Well, I use those when I interact with people. So I might totally mention a role playing game or some stuff...

To those who can't keep up with PbP games, you definitely are not alone. This is a usual problem with PbP. There are two related problems with PbP: the pacing, and the overall flow of time in the game. Since it takes a lot more time to go around the table in a PbP game, with a few hours delays...

Edited. Move on.

Oh my God. I can't believe this. It's like I'm speaking French or something. Fine. Believe what you want. :confused:

All I'm doing is explaining how people might use SoD, think they do not suck, and enjoy their use in play. I'm answering specifically to the notion that "SoD are bad design, BADWRONGFUN, period." Well, NO. They aren't. It depends how they are used. Whether the DM knows what he is doing or not...

It would depend on the situation. In the corridors example for instance, if I was in a situation where one straight path with the potential for an SoD trap would lead me to a fleeing BBEG, with two other paths leading me around the dungeon with much less of a chance to catch up with him, I might...

I think there is a place for all sorts of processes at a game table. I also think that player expectations vary greatly. In other words, it's okay if someone enjoys SSSoD and wants things like tactical maneuvering with terrain and stuff being all meaningful part of the game's system. Believing...

Nope. We're back to the argument that each and every rule in a game is meaningless without a given context, that what truly matters is what the rules mean when they are used at an actual game table, and how, rather than consider numbers in a theoretical vacuum. Nope. My examples are not edition...

For me the example is not appropriate, because the sum of the activities played out and the tension experienced by the players as they play a role playing game is not contained within the rules. It's what's going on around them. See my example with the corridors before. My point was to show...

I have to agree. *nod*

I don't think anybody's doomed to play role-playing games just one way, with no chance to ever grasp how someone else might run a different game using different assumptions. I'm sure there are people out there who are running, say, both First Edition AD&D, and 4th edition D&D, and adapt their...

What you do not seem to be getting is that many people who like save-or-die do not look at the game rule on its own, but consider the circumstances where it is used, and how it is used, in the game world, as part and parcel of the SoD process. In other words, the rules are not the game, the...

Because you like monks? Because you have a character concept that fits a monk best? Because you want to play a different character from what you've played before? Etc etc etc etc. The game is not the rules. The rules are not the game.

WotC has always had an abysmal record for digital offerings. D&D e-tools, anyone? What really surprises me is that anyone is surprised about these failings, honestly.

Two approaches come to mind: I. Holmes/AD&D Path. I'd run a few games using First Edition AD&D. Assuming the person is interested to run the game, I would then give him or her Holmes D&D. From there, the person running the game could either upgrade to the full AD&D game, or use Meepo's...

They don't. Because the game is not the rules, and the rules are not the game. This is the major shift that happened, this notion now that the game is just the sum of its rules, and the rules encompass the whole gammut of game play. This is a weird, nonsensical idea for anyone playing First...

Yeah, I got to join the chorus. It wouldn't affect me at this point. I'd just keep on running OD&D and AD&D.

WEG Star Wars d6 for the win. It's honestly the best, most fun version of the game for me.

Original Dungeons & Dragons, 1974. Arguably, without that small RPG's success, we would not have any of these big 5,000 pages RPGs to play with. And yes, I do think this is a very relevant example, mostly because it is a game that is still incredibly fun to play, extremely light on the page...