Discussing problems with D&D/d20 rules...

[tsadkiel]

Interesting moniker. I take it that you have read The Urth of the New Sun series by Gene Wolfe?

Nope. My username comes from Robertson Davies' What's Bred in the Bone, in which Zadkiel, the Angel of Biography, is a character in the framing story. The frame around the frame, now that I think about it.

It's tsadkiel rather than Zadkiel because there was already a zadkiel on yahoo when I got my e-mail address.

 

[Mobius]

If someone in your group tends to munchkin their PC when playing D&D, then maybe that's how they want to play. Forcing them to play a game that doesn't give those options to the player seems unfair and not very enjoyable, to me.

I love your choice of words!

"Force", "seems unfair", "not very enjoyable".

What about MY rights, or the rights of the other players at the table? Do they disappear as soon as the munchkin enters the room? We do not enjoy that style of play and under no circumstances should we be "forced" to endure a game we "don't enjoy", merely to placate the munchkin. That "seems unfair" - to us. If he likes that style, let him make his own campaign and collect his own group of munchkin friends to play with. We'll do our own thing, both groups will be happy, and we can meet together on a more neutral ground to discuss gaming as a whole. To each his own.

If he insists on staying, though, I am going to do what I can to make sure that his style of play affects the enjoyment of the rest of the group as little as possible. That is my right as GM, and if it means one person's rights get trampled in favour of the majority, the door is always open for him to go and do what he pleases.

So ... he does have freedom, just not freedom to wreck the enjoyment of the rest of the group. If he insists on that, he has the freedom say whatever he wants as he is getting shuffled out the door.

 

[Kaptain_Kantrip]

LOL. This schizoid thread is killing me: Harn or d20? Communism or capitalism? Roleplaying or powergaming?

I'll settle the issue for everyone here:

1. Harn
2. Capitalism
3. Roleplaying

 

[Mobius]

Sorry for hijacking the thread, KK. I just came to see how you were doing and got a bit carried away. You know that I am in way over my head when the Capitalism/Communism starts coming to a head.

I have resolved not to mention politics anymore, as I now know that they are verboten on the forums. Ooops, except for mentioning them above.

 

[Eosin the Red]

LOL. This just goes to show you that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. If you read the back posts on the Harnforum you would see a very vociferous debate over the merits of the new art, with the cover of Evael being the center piece. There was a vocal group that liked the new 'elf on steroids from a comic book' style art, and a bunch that considered that style selling out to the high-fantasy crew.

I will add - I did not say it was good only a vast improvement over those woodcut/stamps that looked like a 5 year old carved. I like some of the new D&D art but prefer some of the recent stuff like what has been in Polyhedron (the deathknights frex).

As to how far down the road you travel - every setting has some degree of sell out, if that is what you want to consider it. I don't play in FR but I also don't play in Harn both go to extremes. I buy both - but I don't think I will be picking up much more Harn at the current prices. Harn/Columbia cannot afford to loose many more customers.

PS - I play in 3 low magic (occurance) settings - Birthright, WoT, & my homebrew. Low magic does not have to mean low options, or low powered. Tone back the fantastic in the AMOUNT of magic, not in the POWER of magic. Harn d20 can work - especially if you use some of the WP/VP and the WoT rules (non-magical classes).

 

[Desdichado]

PS - I play in 3 low magic (occurance) settings - Birthright, WoT, & my homebrew. Low magic does not have to mean low options, or low powered. Tone back the fantastic in the AMOUNT of magic, not in the POWER of magic. Harn d20 can work - especially if you use some of the WP/VP and the WoT rules (non-magical classes).

Oddly enough, I do the opposite. The power of magic is low, but all kinds of fantastic "magical" stuff is all over the place. I still consider my game low magic, but high fantasy. That's why Harn doesn't appeal to me, the "realism" -- which really translates as a fetish to mimic middle-ages England to some extent -- isn't my thing. But low magic does.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

I love your choice of words!

"Force", "seems unfair", "not very enjoyable".

What about MY rights, or the rights of the other players at the table? Do they disappear as soon as the munchkin enters the room? We do not enjoy that style of play and under no circumstances should we be "forced" to endure a game we "don't enjoy", merely to placate the munchkin. That "seems unfair" - to us. If he likes that style, let him make his own campaign and collect his own group of munchkin friends to play with. We'll do our own thing, both groups will be happy, and we can meet together on a more neutral ground to discuss gaming as a whole. To each his own.

If he insists on staying, though, I am going to do what I can to make sure that his style of play affects the enjoyment of the rest of the group as little as possible. That is my right as GM, and if it means one person's rights get trampled in favour of the majority, the door is always open for him to go and do what he pleases.

So ... he does have freedom, just not freedom to wreck the enjoyment of the rest of the group. If he insists on that, he has the freedom say whatever he wants as he is getting shuffled out the door.

Ah, I see. When it comes to criticizing a game you don't like, generalizations are OK. But then, when someone criticizes the style of play you seem to advocate, then it becomes about one player. Good to know you aren't being consistent. For example:

The reason I think HarnMaster is relatively popular with the users of Harn, the setting, is that the goal for any true role-player is the system that lets the setting shine through. Good role-players could use literally any system to achieve nirvana with their game world, but when the system is tailored to the setting, reaching that synergy is perhaps a little easier for us merely mortal role-players.

Now, I think everyone reading the thread knows you are implying that d20/D&D isn't for "true role-player"s. That's a generalization.

The assumption in my statement being that true role-players, ahem... like role-playing. The rules can get in the way of that sometimes.

Again, this seems to be a strong implication being made.

If he likes that style, let him make his own campaign and collect his own group of munchkin friends to play with.

Now, I know you're playing off my words, so I can't say for sure that you're saying those who play D&D - which was what I was getting at by using the term "munchkin," since detractors of D&D love to use that term - are munchkins. So, I'll just ask - are D&D players, in your honest estimation, munchkins, and not "true role-player"s?

Also, the point is, you make broad generalizations about those who play less roleplay-intensive games - and come on, we know you mean D&D; let's not bandy words - but then when I make similar generalizations about those who play more roleplay-intensive games, it becomes about specific groups and players.

 

[Tiefling]

I do feel that D&D does not treat its adult players with respect by providing enough mature content (must not aliennate the kiddies and/or their parents, heavens no!), and that many (certainly not all) D&D players and writers are preoccupied with IMO "childish things" like battling hordes of red dragons (D&D movie, anyone?), levitating war ships or killer flumphs (well, you get the idea) in order to save the world every week.

Due to what I perceive as its preoccupation with childish "video game" concepts, D&D cares little for character development and everything about character power-ramping...

KK, this is where you become stupid. I share your tastes in realistic self-consistent settings and low-fantasy, but I never, ever, EVER make the STUPID mistake of believing that those who do not share my tastes are "childish", nor do I EVER say that systems that cater to those tastes "insult my intelligence." How dare you insult me and everyone else by suggesting that they are and yet still expecting us to treat you like a rational person?

 

[Breakdaddy]

I will never get the hours of my life spent reading this thread back. Doesnt harn have its own boards?? KK and co. might wanna go preach to the choir. No offense meant here, but my brain absolutely throbs after this immense constant rant for both sides (D20 and harn). In the end, this is a D20 board with tons of rabid D20 fans. I can live with that, can you harniacs??

 

[Mobius]

I will add - I did not say it was good only a vast improvement over those woodcut/stamps that looked like a 5 year old carved.

And that is why I was laughing out loud. I *like* those woodcuts. I study medieval art, illumination mostly, but woodcuts, too and I found that style to be a very good addition to the 'feel' of Harn. It isn't really authentic, seeing as woodcuts only started getting popular near the end of the medieval period, but it was a lot closer than the modern art trying to meld with a medieval style game. Somehow, that didn't quite seem right to me.

That is what I meant by aesthetics being a personal opinion.