Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="RFisher" data-source="post: 3412271" data-attributes="member: 3608">Celebrim, I like your distinction between &quot;game space&quot; &amp; &quot;imaginary space&quot;.Yeah. But, there's a difference between e.g. &quot;there are no rules for making arrows so we assume characters can't make arrows&quot; v. &quot;there are rules for rangers tracking so we assume no other characters can track.&quot; It's a lot harder for me to criticize a game for leaving out a topic completely than for touching on a topic in one context &amp; completely ignoring it in others. At least give me an &quot;Oh, by the way, it's left up to the DM to handle another characters trying to track&quot; at the end of the description of the ranger ability.Of course, even when the games did explicitly explain such things, I don't think they always sunk in to my thick skull. (^_^)I don't think any written game, however, can fully capture the designers' intent. Even when 3e came out, there were a number of things (though I can no longer remember specifics) in which I missed the designers' intention until clarified online or in Dragon. 3e may be &quot;better&quot; in this regard, but it isn't immune.Only if there's a disconnect between the DM &amp; the players on this. I've seen 1e groups get wiped out because they assumed the DM will never throw anything at them they can't handle. I've seen the same in 3e groups. Among some groups in either edition, having encounters out of your league &amp; knowing when (&amp; how) to flee is an important &amp; expected part of the game.Yes, every edition of D&amp;D has had a steeper progression than most other RPGs. So, it is unsurprising that every edition has had some amount of scaling the challenges to the players.On these issues, I don't think the edition's influence/fit on gameplay style is that different.The difference really come with the increase of oppossed resolution. In previous editions, resolution of many things depended primarily on the character or the monster/challenge. e.g. The difficulty of picking a lock depended primarily on the thief's level &amp; only occasionally had a modifier for the lock itself. A saving throw v. a spell primarily depended on the HD/class+level of the target with only occasional modifiers for the level of the caster.In fact, in some ways, C&amp;C carries this even farther than 3e!Now, either style is fine. You may prefer one or the other. Either game can handle either style. The cD&amp;D DM can add a pick locks modifier to every lock, &amp; the 3e DM can not vary lock DCs very much. But the games do naturally tend to diverge on this point of style.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="RFisher, post: 3412271, member: 3608"] Celebrim, I like your distinction between "game space" & "imaginary space". Yeah. But, there's a difference between e.g. "there are no rules for making arrows so we assume characters can't make arrows" v. "there are rules for rangers tracking so we assume no other characters can track." It's a lot harder for me to criticize a game for leaving out a topic completely than for touching on a topic in one context & completely ignoring it in others. At least give me an "Oh, by the way, it's left up to the DM to handle another characters trying to track" at the end of the description of the ranger ability. Of course, even when the games [i]did[/i] explicitly explain such things, I don't think they always sunk in to my thick skull. (^_^) I don't think any written game, however, can fully capture the designers' intent. Even when 3e came out, there were a number of things (though I can no longer remember specifics) in which I missed the designers' intention until clarified online or in [i]Dragon[/i]. 3e may be "better" in this regard, but it isn't immune. Only if there's a disconnect between the DM & the players on this. I've seen 1e groups get wiped out because they assumed the DM will never throw anything at them they can't handle. I've seen the same in 3e groups. Among some groups in either edition, having encounters out of your league & knowing when (& how) to flee is an important & expected part of the game. Yes, every edition of D&D has had a steeper progression than most other RPGs. So, it is unsurprising that every edition has had some amount of scaling the challenges to the players. On these issues, I don't think the edition's influence/fit on gameplay style is that different. The difference really come with the increase of oppossed resolution. In previous editions, resolution of many things depended primarily on the character or the monster/challenge. e.g. The difficulty of picking a lock depended primarily on the thief's level & only occasionally had a modifier for the lock itself. A saving throw v. a spell primarily depended on the HD/class+level of the target with only occasional modifiers for the level of the caster. In fact, in some ways, C&C carries this even farther than 3e! Now, either style is fine. You may prefer one or the other. Either game can handle either style. The cD&D DM can add a pick locks modifier to every lock, & the 3e DM can not vary lock DCs very much. But the games do naturally tend to diverge on this point of style. [/QUOTE]

Verification