Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Elphilm" data-source="post: 3906249" data-attributes="member: 55130">Although I agree with the main idea of your post, I don't think that D&amp;D has been moving away from being a mishmash of ripoffs only recently.The D&amp;D magic system, for instance, hasn't resembled Dying Earth magic in a long time (if it ever did). For example, Vance's magic is extremely limited per day; a master magician might be able to memorize about six spells in total. This is a far cry from the dozens and dozens of spells D&amp;D wizards fit into their heads every day. You could refute this by saying that the amount of combat in a typical D&amp;D session necessitates the huge number of spells, but it is nevertheless a major step away from the flavor and careful resource management of Dying Earth magicians. Furthermore, Vancian magic is more unreliable than D&amp;D magic, especially if one tries to cast a spell that is too strong for the magician's skill level, and D&amp;D has never modeled this in any way. D&amp;D magic has always been inspired by Dying Earth rather than directly cribbed from the books. A more faithful (and interesting!) conversion can be found, curiously enough, in the Dying Earth RPG.I also think that D&amp;D's alignments took a major step away from Moorcock's (and Poul Anderson's) writings when 1E expanded the alignment field from three to nine. Moreover, Moorcock's alignments are allegiances rather than the descriptors of a person's psychology that the D&amp;D alignments have become. I really don't see how the infamous D&amp;D alignment debates have anything to do with Moorcock's writings. D&amp;D's problem has always been that it tries to fit together the amoral concepts of order and chaos and the moral judgements of good and evil. Nowhere in Moorcock do you find such a pairing.Nevertheless, like I said, I mostly agree with your post. I have few problems with Feywild and Dragonborn and whatnot, and I think I understand what the 4E design team is aiming for with the new flavor. That being said, I will doubtlessly homebrew some of that flavor out simply because I like the merry hodge-podge style of D&amp;D the most. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f60e.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":cool:" title="Cool&nbsp; &nbsp; :cool:"&nbsp; data-smilie="6"data-shortname=":cool:" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Elphilm, post: 3906249, member: 55130"] Although I agree with the main idea of your post, I don't think that D&D has been moving away from being a mishmash of ripoffs only recently. The D&D magic system, for instance, hasn't resembled Dying Earth magic in a long time (if it ever did). For example, Vance's magic is extremely limited per day; a master magician might be able to memorize about six spells in total. This is a far cry from the dozens and dozens of spells D&D wizards fit into their heads every day. You could refute this by saying that the amount of combat in a typical D&D session necessitates the huge number of spells, but it is nevertheless a major step away from the flavor and careful resource management of Dying Earth magicians. Furthermore, Vancian magic is more unreliable than D&D magic, especially if one tries to cast a spell that is too strong for the magician's skill level, and D&D has never modeled this in any way. D&D magic has always been inspired by Dying Earth rather than directly cribbed from the books. A more faithful (and interesting!) conversion can be found, curiously enough, in the Dying Earth RPG. I also think that D&D's alignments took a major step away from Moorcock's (and Poul Anderson's) writings when 1E expanded the alignment field from three to nine. Moreover, Moorcock's alignments are [i]allegiances[/i] rather than the descriptors of a person's psychology that the D&D alignments have become. I really don't see how the infamous D&D alignment debates have anything to do with Moorcock's writings. D&D's problem has always been that it tries to fit together the amoral concepts of order and chaos and the moral judgements of good and evil. Nowhere in Moorcock do you find such a pairing. Nevertheless, like I said, I mostly agree with your post. I have few problems with Feywild and Dragonborn and whatnot, and I think I understand what the 4E design team is aiming for with the new flavor. That being said, I will doubtlessly homebrew some of that flavor out simply because I like the merry hodge-podge style of D&D the most. :cool: [/QUOTE]

Verification