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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 8998161" data-attributes="member: 6790260">I'm saying you can put DW rules to work (is "operationalize" really needed?) in all the ways D&D rules can be, unless the work you wish to do is widely held to be bad. I don't mean style stuff. I mean (as I said before) "rocks fall, everyone dies." Running the game in bad faith.Would that not mean truly no one can ever talk about gaming? Because no one can ever know if their D&D is anyone else's D&D, so any useful talk is impossible. Would seem to be a self-defeating claim if so, since it is, of its nature, talking about D&D.So, again: Does this mean we cannot ever talk about D&D, at all, in any way, at any time? Because the fact this forum is here seems to disprove that claim. Instead, we would have to go with something far weaker, like, "D&D is a bundle of things, and not everyone agrees on everything that is in it, but a majority agrees on most things in it, and for some specific things, nearly everyone agrees."E.g., D&D is a cooperative game. Sure, you can run it for solo play, but we agree the rules were meant for groups. D&D is a roleplaying game. The DM controls the opposition, and needs to use some kind of "fairness" or the like. The DM has a lot of power, which means they have a burden to use it wisely, or else upset the group.I could probably go on. It's not like the D&D bundle is some utterly ineffable mystery never to be understood by Mankind.Dungeon World does get specific with its Principles (and Agendas, which are at a higher level still than Principles; Agendas are why you play at all, Principles are how you play, and Moves are the tools you use to do that.) When you tell people these Agendas, Principles, and Moves, and say "no, Dungeon World does not have a Rule Zero, you are supposed to follow the rules," they almost immediately react very badly. Often with bold assertions about how such a restrictive approach can't possibly produce good play because no system can be complete etc. etc. etc. Yet when you actually walk people through the process of applying the Agendas, following the Principles, and making Moves, it almost always ends with them saying, "That sounds just like D&D," in whatever phrase makes sense.Hence why it seems like such a nontroversy. Getting one's feathers ruffled over the abstract sound of something, when actually using it is not only unobjectionable, but so familiar it leads to confused questions about how it differs at all.</blockquote>

Verification