Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Greg K" data-source="post: 6182031" data-attributes="member: 5038">Core rules I agree. Once you get to *optional* rules. No.  People have different ideas of what D&D is.  Some people want traditional fantasy. Some want Star Wars Cantina. Some want complete way out gonzo.  Some people focus on dungeoncrawls and hack and slash others on sandbox.  Some want traditonal D&D "vancian" spellcasting others want spontaneous casting or spell points. It has been this way since the beginning. You had Gary and, for 3e, Sean K Reynolds saying that there is no place for a detailed critical hit location system, yet Dave Arneson, one of the original creators, did have such as system and published it in Blackmoor.With so many divergent ways to play, the designers gave us a toolkit (how good is up for debate) with options not meant to work together or not appropriate for every person's campaign. Some players and DMs (to play on your earlier post) forget about the term *optional* or just don't want take the responsibility and then complain rather than tailor things. Yet, the DM's Guide tells DMs they will have to adjust things to their own tables, because the designers don't know each individual table, their playstyle (e.g. are they powergamers that minmax?, do they build organically?), what supplements they use, the party make up, etc.Sorry that you don't want to take responsibility for the game at your table. You would not be a DM that I would want to play with (nothing personal. I take responsibility for the game that I run and expect other DMs to do the same. That goes beyond adventure creation (which for me is based upon my players characters rather than Dungeon of the week) and  includes both deciding what options are appropriate for  the style and power level I  want to run and vetting characters to be appropriate). I would rather have to put up with the stink test which is often subjective. Personally, I despised the majority of WOTC supplemental 3e player material and alternative mechanics- often for aesthetic reasons and some for mechanical balance. Most of the WOTC player material and variants that I use come from the DMG and UA and outside of them, I ban pretty much everything else WOTC player based and alternate mechanics in favor of third party offerings.  Yet, a lot of people like the WOTC stuff and don't have issues, because it fits their style while others encounter issues.However, the stink test allows them to produce material for a variety of campaign power and style preferences and people to choose and customize to their preferences.  In my opinion, that makes DMs taking responsibility ability for choosing what they want for their games is worth it rather than designing simply for what you think is good or balanced or what I think is good or balanced and forcing us into a certain style of D&D.</blockquote>

Verification