Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 3785782" data-attributes="member: 2011">I don't think Frank meant lethal as in &quot;a single attack roll can kill the PC&quot; like in Rolemaster.I think he meant lethal as &quot;a single combat can more easily result in the death of a PC&quot;.In 3.5, the former does not often occur (except save or die, or massive damage) and there are a lot of ways to avoid the latter. Even if one gets knocked unconscious in 3.5, typically one does not die.If the latter case occurred, I could see players negotiating instead of fighting. However, it is the 3E/3.5 XP system that encourages players to have their PCs fight, not the lethality or lack thereof of the combat system.An XP system that rewarded solving problems and accomplishing goals instead of killing opponents would at least help in this regard.Historically, that is a lot of what DND roleplaying is since the rules do not discuss it a lot. Character decisions out of combat (for the most part). These decisions include what is done as well as what is said. Character decisions in combat could in some cases be considered roleplaying, but those typically are more tactical decisions.If you check the 1E Forward, the word roleplaying is mentioned exactly once and there is one slight reference of playing the character on an entire page describing what DND is.DND is first and foremost a combat game with a lot of non-combat support rules and with roleplaying tacked on. Many people deny this, but more than half of the 3.5 PHB rules are combat rules (especially when you take into account combat spells and unrelated rules like movement or equipment that still reference combat) and there really are no significant RPing rules. If DND were truly a first and foremost roleplaying game, it would have roleplaying rules.Look at how many people here in this thread do not even want RPing suggestions added to the PHB.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="KarinsDad, post: 3785782, member: 2011"] I don't think Frank meant lethal as in "a single attack roll can kill the PC" like in Rolemaster. I think he meant lethal as "a single combat can more easily result in the death of a PC". In 3.5, the former does not often occur (except save or die, or massive damage) and there are a lot of ways to avoid the latter. Even if one gets knocked unconscious in 3.5, typically one does not die. If the latter case occurred, I could see players negotiating instead of fighting. However, it is the 3E/3.5 XP system that encourages players to have their PCs fight, not the lethality or lack thereof of the combat system. An XP system that rewarded solving problems and accomplishing goals instead of killing opponents would at least help in this regard. Historically, that is a lot of what DND roleplaying is since the rules do not discuss it a lot. Character decisions out of combat (for the most part). These decisions include what is done as well as what is said. Character decisions in combat could in some cases be considered roleplaying, but those typically are more tactical decisions. If you check the 1E Forward, the word roleplaying is mentioned exactly once and there is one slight reference of playing the character on an entire page describing what DND is. DND is first and foremost a combat game with a lot of non-combat support rules and with roleplaying tacked on. Many people deny this, but more than half of the 3.5 PHB rules are combat rules (especially when you take into account combat spells and unrelated rules like movement or equipment that still reference combat) and there really are no significant RPing rules. If DND were truly a first and foremost roleplaying game, it would have roleplaying rules. Look at how many people here in this thread do not even want RPing suggestions added to the PHB. [/QUOTE]

Verification