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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dave Turner" data-source="post: 2378028" data-attributes="member: 12329">I can appreciate what you're saying.  I know that comments like mine are used to fuel anti-D&D arguments.  But the thread seems to be about what changes to the game would be most powerful and I'm suggesting that a frank embrace of the game's strengths in physical confict would be powerful.  To tie into Mearls' Core Story idea, it would help strengthen the game by addressing the elephant in the room: D&D is not equipped to model situations in which social action is the primary approach to conflict resolution.  What are the rules of the game most concerned with?  They are concerned with adjudicating physical action, whether it's combat or physical infiltration or athletic activity (Climbing, Jumping, Tumbling, etc.).   There are rules for social action, but they are threadbare, vague, and simple.  The DM is not given any help in crafting or, more importantly, referreeing social action.  The DM is given plenty of help in crafting and referreeing physical action.  This suggests to me that the game is about kiling things or overcoming them with physical action.  It would be disingenuous to suggest that the vast majority of opponents aren't killed.  Magical items are needed to create competent characters that can defeat the opponents they are supposed to kill.  DMs are told that the players should find this stuff in the lairs of the oppoents they kill.  There are some simple rules for player-crafted magic items, but the characters must still sell the loot they find in the pockets of their dead opponents to fund the creation of these items.  The game is about killing things and taking their stuff.This isn't to say that the game can't be used in other ways by some players.  But I think this is akin to using a tool in a manner that it wasn't originally intended for.  You might get along fine with the improvised tool, but it would be a mistake to suggest that the tool was originally designed for the improvised use.</blockquote>

Verification