Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="jgbrowning" data-source="post: 2928280" data-attributes="member: 5724">I was resonding to this quote of yours  I think you made a leap from "no longer recognizible" to "indistinguishable." I was never arguing that which is indistinguishable from D&D isn't D&D. I was saying that if something was once distinguishable as D&D, but no longer is, that something is no longer D&D and if one persists in calling it D&D I will say, "You're playing it wrong, then."If one says, "I intend to play something indistinguable from D&D" and then they proceed to play Poker, I'd say they were playing D&D wrong. Just like if someone said, "I intend to play D&D" and then they play Vampire. I'd say they were playing D&D wrong. To me, D&D is a particular rules-set for role-playing. It is a rules-set designed for customibility at individual tables, but customized rules are not defacto D&D due to the unpredictable effects of rules change. The only specific set of rules that is 100% D&D are those which have been labled as such by the owners of the trademark."Degree of difference" is subjective because one has to decide which rules are more important than other rules, yes, as well as how much change can a rules sustain before it itself should be considered important enough to morph the game. However, one can indicate differences and such indications are the only way to determine how different from the RAW the current game is.There is no other method of telling the difference between two games unless one actually compares those difference. How important each difference is until something is considered something else is always subjective based upon individual opinions.An analogy: You have two Monopoly games. You rule-by-rule change one game and leave the other rules-set alone. At what point does your game cease to be alike the original enough so that perhaps we should think of a different name beside "Monopoly?" I don't know when, (mostly just because there is no set rule-change parameters forcing you to consistantly change rule, thus increasing my inability to predetermine the effect of rules changes) but I know that at some point, I'll start saying, "That's not Monopoly. That's something else."Roll, 2d5 for movement, ok that's close enough to be Monopoly, I'll let is slide. Roll 1d1: nope, not Monopoly. Or at least "Monopoly being played wrong."And Dammit, Umbran, don't use phrases like (naively defined above). Think of a better way of saying what you mean that isn't calling me names. Saying something is "pretty useless" may inadvertantly be a personal attack, but saying it's "naively" pretty useless is more-than-likely designed to be. Especially since you're a moderator and must get sick of this same quasi-defensible defacto-name-calling crap all the time. I'm talking with you, not against you: I'm not trying to tear down you or your reasoning, I'm trying to show you mine. We have differring opinions maybe? I'm not so sure, but either way don't be snarky, it pisses me off and reinforces the decision that posting is becoming more and more useless.joe b.</blockquote>

Verification