D&D General D&D tries to be a little of everything, and that's its secret strength (and weakness)

[DEFCON 1]

the other guy did it so it's ok defense. weak sauce dude.

Absolutely! If they're not going to feel guilty, I will not either.

 

[Shardstone]

Technically you can play chess in a D&D game, doesn't mean it's the best option. There are some people on this forum do nothing but complain about the game and how it's badly designed. I think many of them would be better off playing a different game.

If you have to have more than a page or so of house rules to make the game what you want or if all you do is complain about how you don't like how the game works I think you would be better off with other games.

Again, you are inserting things into my argument that I didn't put there myself. I'm not talking about chess in D&D, I'm talking about adding other genre-based mechanics to D&D, be they hard or soft. I haven't said anything about people complaining on this forum and I don't care about that either. I have no idea why people want to keep quoting me and talking about complainers, when I've said many times that I'm here to talk about the ins and outs of game design as well as different practices for games at the table.

Furthermore, you are projecting your ideas about house rules onto my argument. Esper Genesis is a lot more than just a page of house rules and it's a very successful 3rd party 5E-based game. Legends of Rokugan is an amazing 5E-hack based on L5R with a lot more than a page of house rules.

Lastly, it's incredibly insulting to just assume what I'm creating is bad design by default. You are essentially taking my argument and reframing it in an absolutely absurd way to make it sound silly. Yes, the points you're making are valid, had they been in response to what I was actually saying. But your responses assume that I'm someone who is just here to complain, that all my designs are bad, and that I need to keep any changes to the game under one page.

If you're going to respond to me, please respond to me, not this legion of complainers you think you're responding to.

 

[nevin]

Absolutely! If they're not going to feel guilty, I will not either.

and apparantly if they aren't going to be polite you are going down into the mud with them. nice deflection...

 

[eyeheartawk]

I find that when people provide their own examples of my arguments, they usually choose the stupidest sounding example and try to fit my argument into it, when that's not what I'm arguing at all.

Yeah, I didn't make that up.

 

[Oofta]

Again, you are inserting things into my argument that I didn't put there myself. I'm not talking about chess in D&D, I'm talking about adding other genre-based mechanics to D&D, be they hard or soft. I haven't said anything about people complaining on this forum and I don't care about that either. I have no idea why people want to keep quoting me and talking about complainers, when I've said many times that I'm here to talk about the ins and outs of game design as well as different practices for games at the table.

Furthermore, you are projecting your ideas about house rules onto my argument. Esper Genesis is a lot more than just a page of house rules and it's a very successful 3rd party 5E-based game. Legends of Rokugan is an amazing 5E-hack based on L5R with a lot more than a page of house rules.

Lastly, it's incredibly insulting to just assume what I'm creating is bad design by default. You are essentially taking my argument and reframing it in an absolutely absurd way to make it sound silly. Yes, the points you're making are valid, had they been in response to what I was actually saying. But your responses assume that I'm someone who is just here to complain, that all my designs are bad, and that I need to keep any changes to the game under one page.

If you're going to respond to me, please respond to me, not this legion of complainers you think you're responding to.

I agree that D&D is flexible. The chess comment was an exaggeration to prove a point - the game can only be stretched so far. I have no idea what you're creating. If you want to rewrite the game, more power to you. A lot of people are unwilling or unable to do that.

You stated that telling people they should play a different game is always a bad thing. If I misread that, I apologize but I don't know how to else to read "I don't accept the assertion that people would be better off playing another game."

 

[Shardstone]

Yeah, I didn't make that up.

I'm not that person, and I'm not arguing for what that person is doing, but instead for my own points.

 

[Shardstone]

I agree that D&D is flexible. The chess comment was an exaggeration to prove a point - the game can only be stretched so far. I have no idea what you're creating. If you want to rewrite the game, more power to you. A lot of people are unwilling or unable to do that.

You stated that telling people they should play a different game is always a bad thing. If I misread that, I apologize but I don't know how to else to read "I don't accept the assertion that people would be better off playing another game."

You're right that I need to replace assertion with dogma, so that way I make it clear that sometimes people will enjoy playing another game instead (I've found games like Mythic Bastionland which fulfilled my dark fantasy knight game desires, for example).

 

[billd91]

and apparantly if they aren't going to be polite you are going down into the mud with them. nice deflection...

It's called Golden Rule enforcement. Sometimes you gotta put people in the shoes they're foisting on someone else to see how they like it.

 

[eyeheartawk]

I'm not that person, and I'm not arguing for what that person is doing, but instead for my own points.

I'm just saying I didn't make up the example as a strawman as you claimed.

I'm far too lazy for that.

 

[nevin]

It's called Golden Rule enforcement. Sometimes you gotta put people in the shoes they're foisting on someone else to see how they like it.

no being an naughty word is a choice that can be justified anyway you like it but it's still just being an naughty word. Better people try to be polite even when the jerks don't. or you can be just like the jerks and jump in the mud with them. You can make mistakes but you can't be both a better person and a jerk . It's a binary choice.