Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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
*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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
I don't actually get the opposition for the warlord... or rather the opposition to the concept.
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="Bawylie" data-source="post: 6756005" data-attributes="member: 6776133"><p>Fireballs were never square. Their area of effect included all the squares the "ball" could reach/enter. </p><p></p><p>As for simulationism, that's just a rationale for your preferences. You're more than happy to make allowances for a HUGE amount of nonsensical game elements (dragon flight, human beings with as much or more HP than Giants, etc). But when it comes to an aoe that effects a square configuration on a grid, suddenly that's a bridge too far. Or, god help us, non-magical HP recovery on class B instead of class A, "simulationism" is the battle cry. </p><p></p><p>But the entire concept, as you seem to realize, is bankrupt. You've pointed out its not all white and not all black, but some mixture suited to taste. And THAT is correct. It's a matter of taste. And there is no logic, or game-theory-principle, behind taste. Even among self-described "simulationists" there's no agreed-on ratio of cinematic :: realistic. </p><p></p><p>"I'm a simulationist, therefore I don't wan a Warlord in my game, or square fireballs, but HP is meat, even when small-sized fighters have more than huge Giants. Simulationism!" It's frankly absurd. </p><p></p><p>We all feel the need to defend our tastes when someone else disagrees. You see this all the time in sports fandom - team rivalries, etc. But the truth is, what you like doesn't need a logical or rational defense - and no logical defense will ever be sufficient to convince anyone that your tastes are justified. Essentially, you cannot "logic" someone out of a belief or desire that they didn't "logic" into. </p><p></p><p>I'll wrap this up. You're not -NOT- a bad person for playing how you like. Have at! Corollary - nobody else is ridiculous for not playing as "simulationists" (to say nothing of the innumerable contradictions inherent in simulationism). Warlords are not beyond the pale simply because they rub you the wrong way. Your game isn't beyond the pale even if it rubs Me the wrong way. It's all good.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Bawylie, post: 6756005, member: 6776133"] Fireballs were never square. Their area of effect included all the squares the "ball" could reach/enter. As for simulationism, that's just a rationale for your preferences. You're more than happy to make allowances for a HUGE amount of nonsensical game elements (dragon flight, human beings with as much or more HP than Giants, etc). But when it comes to an aoe that effects a square configuration on a grid, suddenly that's a bridge too far. Or, god help us, non-magical HP recovery on class B instead of class A, "simulationism" is the battle cry. But the entire concept, as you seem to realize, is bankrupt. You've pointed out its not all white and not all black, but some mixture suited to taste. And THAT is correct. It's a matter of taste. And there is no logic, or game-theory-principle, behind taste. Even among self-described "simulationists" there's no agreed-on ratio of cinematic :: realistic. "I'm a simulationist, therefore I don't wan a Warlord in my game, or square fireballs, but HP is meat, even when small-sized fighters have more than huge Giants. Simulationism!" It's frankly absurd. We all feel the need to defend our tastes when someone else disagrees. You see this all the time in sports fandom - team rivalries, etc. But the truth is, what you like doesn't need a logical or rational defense - and no logical defense will ever be sufficient to convince anyone that your tastes are justified. Essentially, you cannot "logic" someone out of a belief or desire that they didn't "logic" into. I'll wrap this up. You're not -NOT- a bad person for playing how you like. Have at! Corollary - nobody else is ridiculous for not playing as "simulationists" (to say nothing of the innumerable contradictions inherent in simulationism). Warlords are not beyond the pale simply because they rub you the wrong way. Your game isn't beyond the pale even if it rubs Me the wrong way. It's all good. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
I don't actually get the opposition for the warlord... or rather the opposition to the concept.
Top