Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Sacrosanct" data-source="post: 6767423" data-attributes="member: 15700">Yeah, they are.Firstly, I didn't say just to role play everything.&nbsp; This also comes awfully close to a &quot;no true Scotsman&quot;.&nbsp; I said that we don't let ourselves be slaves to a rule or min/maxing to prevent us from roleplaying the theme we want to play.&nbsp; Those comments were in response to the quotes above, where it was said that people are being punished by the mechanics or being pushed into playing something they don't want to play. (e.g. someone wanting to play an intelligent fighter, but being &quot;pushed' into using INT as a dump stat because it's mechanically inferior to another stat).Again, I never said it was a failure of roleplaying.&nbsp; I said that roleplaying the type of character you want shouldn't be driven by metagaming mechanics unless that's your goal.&nbsp; Because the reality is that this game is about pretend.&nbsp; Play the type of character you want.&nbsp; To head off a potential argument I've seen before, that doesn't mean that your character has to be ineffective mechanically.&nbsp; Not the best build =/= ineffective.&nbsp; But if you chose to build your character based on metagaming modifiers values in direct conflict of what you wanted to play, then yes, you very much are sacrificing role playing for roll playing.&nbsp; It's sort of the very definition of that.From the very first day of D&amp;D, the rules were there just to give you structure for your pretend sessions of fantasy heroism.&nbsp; Your imagination was always the first priority.&nbsp; In that context, the rules aren't forcing or coercing anyone into anything.&nbsp; Heck, even in the 1e DMG it's explicitly called out that anyone &quot;using the books (rules) as a defense&quot; to a DM ruling should be expelled from the campaign.&nbsp; That's how strongly the foundation of the game was built to use rules only as guidelines.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Sacrosanct, post: 6767423, member: 15700"] Yeah, they are. Firstly, I didn't say just to role play everything. This also comes awfully close to a "no true Scotsman". I said that we don't let ourselves be slaves to a rule or min/maxing to prevent us from roleplaying the theme we want to play. Those comments were in response to the quotes above, where it was said that people are being punished by the mechanics or being pushed into playing something they don't want to play. (e.g. someone wanting to play an intelligent fighter, but being "pushed' into using INT as a dump stat because it's mechanically inferior to another stat). Again, I never said it was a failure of roleplaying. I said that roleplaying the type of character you want shouldn't be driven by metagaming mechanics unless that's your goal. Because the reality is that this game is about pretend. Play the type of character you want. To head off a potential argument I've seen before, that doesn't mean that your character has to be ineffective mechanically. Not the best build =/= ineffective. But if you chose to build your character based on metagaming modifiers values [i]in direct conflict[/i] of what you wanted to play, then yes, you very much are sacrificing role playing for roll playing. It's sort of the very definition of that. From the very first day of D&D, the rules were there just to give you structure for your pretend sessions of fantasy heroism. Your imagination was always the first priority. In that context, the rules aren't forcing or coercing anyone into anything. Heck, even in the 1e DMG it's explicitly called out that anyone "using the books (rules) as a defense" to a DM ruling should be expelled from the campaign. [i]That's[/i] how strongly the foundation of the game was built to use rules only as guidelines. [/QUOTE]

Verification