Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 8136995" data-attributes="member: 82106">But this is THE WHOLE WAY classic D&D has worked, since Gygax day 1, see? This is not some small "people thing", this is THE ENTIRE STRUCTURE OF HOW D&D (except 4e, sort of) HAS BEEN DESIGNED. It is INTENDED to work this way. Its not some minor nit that gets addressed at the table. Sure, highly conscientious and skilled DMs and players can negotiate past this, but why isn't it just better to design a game from the ground up so it isn't going to happen? There are VERY few players in RPGs where they aren't interested in addressing at least some stuff that THEY care about. In a DW game, I'd have just set myself on an agenda of building that freehold at the edge of Greenvale. Once I built a stronghold, it would have required AT LEAST the imposition of a doom (with all attendant need for PC failures in adventures and prior signs and signals) in order for it to become at risk! Nor were the participants in this game inexperienced or anything like that. D&D simply doesn't help you here, and even sometimes actively thwarts such attempts. I posit that, people's resistance to change aside, something like DW's approach is just objectively much more likely to produce good results. I think this comes back to [USER=6696971]@Manbearcat[/USER]'s assertion of not having ever heard the "complicated success is failure" meme before. It often feels like these memes just arise in response to any suggestion that there are ways to improve RPG play beyond 1977 levels of technique. It really feels like stubbornness a lot of the time.</blockquote>

Verification