Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Do you think they will add more races to PHB2024 to make up for dropping other stuff?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 9129466" data-attributes="member: 7006"><p>I understand what your feeling is on the matter in this regard... but from my perspective what you are looking for is completely arbitrary.</p><p></p><p>Your feeling on what is verisimilitudinous is just that. A feeling. X feels like it's a part of the world, Y does not. But that is entirely based upon your imagination. How you <em>imagine</em> these things would be represented in this world, were there game rules to represent them.</p><p></p><p>But there's no hard or fast way for anyone to determine what is correct in these rules for your verisimilitude. It's all just your feelings, your imagination. So at what point is any random rule in the game not verisimilitudinous because it's not a good rule, or just because you aren't imagining it well enough?</p><p></p><p>I mean... isn't that what the issue is for all those players who say (for instance) that then NEED to have the Elf species give a +2 to DEX, rather than just give the player the choice of the +2 in anything? They can't imagine the Elf being dexterous enough <em>without</em> seeing that +2 to DEX is the Species write-up? To me, that's them just not imagining hard enough. That's their issue, not WotC's.</p><p></p><p>Now if (general) you don't <em>want</em> to have to imagine anything and want everything spelled out for you in-game... I understand that instinct. I don't agree with it-- and in fact I think it's more lazy in attitude than ANYTHING WotC has ever done that people claim are "lazy choices" in their rule design-- but that's fine, how you choose to play the game is how you play the game. But I personally do not see any reason for any of us to get in arms that WotC doesn't agree with us on how we play the game and makes choices that run counter to it. So I don't. Knowing full-well that WotC will make occasional rules choices that don't work for me, I just don't concern myself with them and play the game how I want with what I have. And that way, I never have to worry about the choices WotC makes and I'm a heck of a lot happier than it seems a lot of people here are.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="DEFCON 1, post: 9129466, member: 7006"] I understand what your feeling is on the matter in this regard... but from my perspective what you are looking for is completely arbitrary. Your feeling on what is verisimilitudinous is just that. A feeling. X feels like it's a part of the world, Y does not. But that is entirely based upon your imagination. How you [I]imagine[/I] these things would be represented in this world, were there game rules to represent them. But there's no hard or fast way for anyone to determine what is correct in these rules for your verisimilitude. It's all just your feelings, your imagination. So at what point is any random rule in the game not verisimilitudinous because it's not a good rule, or just because you aren't imagining it well enough? I mean... isn't that what the issue is for all those players who say (for instance) that then NEED to have the Elf species give a +2 to DEX, rather than just give the player the choice of the +2 in anything? They can't imagine the Elf being dexterous enough [I]without[/I] seeing that +2 to DEX is the Species write-up? To me, that's them just not imagining hard enough. That's their issue, not WotC's. Now if (general) you don't [I]want[/I] to have to imagine anything and want everything spelled out for you in-game... I understand that instinct. I don't agree with it-- and in fact I think it's more lazy in attitude than ANYTHING WotC has ever done that people claim are "lazy choices" in their rule design-- but that's fine, how you choose to play the game is how you play the game. But I personally do not see any reason for any of us to get in arms that WotC doesn't agree with us on how we play the game and makes choices that run counter to it. So I don't. Knowing full-well that WotC will make occasional rules choices that don't work for me, I just don't concern myself with them and play the game how I want with what I have. And that way, I never have to worry about the choices WotC makes and I'm a heck of a lot happier than it seems a lot of people here are. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Do you think they will add more races to PHB2024 to make up for dropping other stuff?
Top