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: 8143149" data-attributes="member: 82106">Let me illustrate a fairly straightforward example:There is a principle embodied in 'classic' D&D (OD&D, BASIC et al, 1e AD&D, even 2e mostly) which is NEVER articulated, but which is fundamental to making the model work. That principle is "Players must understand the risk they are taking with their PCs." This principle is implicitly embodied in the structure of the game. Dungeons ALWAYS have 'levels', which are clearly distinct and which present tiered levels of danger (and reward). The wilderness is a clearly designated 'other place' where the risks are more varied (but even here mountains and swamps are no-go areas for lower levels, usually). This is a STRONG convention too! The DM can, SPARINGLY apply the dirty trick of elevators, ramps, etc. which suddenly force the PCs into a riskier mode of play. This trick should not be used too much, and only to raise the stakes a bit (IE a ramp down one level). Even then dwarves can detect this, and anyone with a ball bearing could also do so (in the traditions of classic D&D where player skill is supreme, another foundational principle).This example shows how principles are both not specifically embodied as rules (they may be explicit however, as in DW) and yet DO form a structural part of the game. The above principle must exist for a classic D&D game, because it is a game of skill, and balancing risk to reward is part of that skill set. Arbitrary danger levels would simply be a meat grinder filled with pointless death. You could run a game like that, but it would mostly be filled with some form of helpless PCs.</blockquote>

Verification