Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="GVDammerung" data-source="post: 2858778" data-attributes="member: 33060">They are more than mere &quot;ideas.&quot;&nbsp; They, and similar story elements, motivate much of the enjoyment of the game.&nbsp; When githyanki hates githzerai and githzerai hates githyanki and both hate mindflayers, who hate them back, it is the D&amp;D follow on to elves disliking dwarves, dwarves disliking elves and both hating orcs, who hate then back.&nbsp; I doubt anyone can reasonably say that fantasy is not richer for the latter and I posit D&amp;D is richer for both.Its not just the RAW.&nbsp; D&amp;D has its own mythology.&nbsp; This is perhaps easiest to see in monster entries that give more than just stats (we could add PrC descriptions in 3.5 certainly).&nbsp; If it was just the RAW, monsters would need little more than stats.&nbsp; They have more and all those little bits of extraneous information in the descriptions, along with more fullsome discussions of similar &quot;fluff&quot; elsewhere create a D&amp;D mythology that adds greatly to the appeal of the game.&nbsp; That Grazzt, Orcus and Demogorgon are not drinking buddies is important and matters to many players, who would be nonplussed at the least if suddenly those three were revealed as drinking buddies.&nbsp; By the same token, when these three are described as powerful but then revealed to have stats that do not comport with these descriptions, there is some understandable and well taken consternation, particularly when no in game explanation is offered, only a RAW explaination. Uder, you sell the game short.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="GVDammerung, post: 2858778, member: 33060"] They are more than mere "ideas." They, and similar story elements, motivate much of the enjoyment of the game. When githyanki hates githzerai and githzerai hates githyanki and both hate mindflayers, who hate them back, it is the D&D follow on to elves disliking dwarves, dwarves disliking elves and both hating orcs, who hate then back. I doubt anyone can reasonably say that fantasy is not richer for the latter and I posit D&D is richer for both. Its not just the RAW. D&D has its own mythology. This is perhaps easiest to see in monster entries that give more than just stats (we could add PrC descriptions in 3.5 certainly). If it was just the RAW, monsters would need little more than stats. They have more and all those little bits of extraneous information in the descriptions, along with more fullsome discussions of similar "fluff" elsewhere create a D&D mythology that adds greatly to the appeal of the game. That Grazzt, Orcus and Demogorgon are not drinking buddies is important and matters to many players, who would be nonplussed at the least if suddenly those three were revealed as drinking buddies. By the same token, when these three are described as powerful but then revealed to have stats that do not comport with these descriptions, there is some understandable and well taken consternation, particularly when no in game explanation is offered, only a RAW explaination. Uder, you sell the game short. [/QUOTE]

Verification