NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FireLance" data-source="post: 5619092" data-attributes="member: 3424">I'll give you the former, but I believe the income from Monopoly is supposed to represent a salary or allowance of some kind. Perhaps changing the name of the square from "Go" to "Bank" or "ATM" might help remove the disassociation.No more "bizarre" than the idea that you should not use classes, spells or monsters if they do not fit in with your concept of your fantasy world. Some people don't like monks in a western medieval fantasy setting, so they don't use them. Some people don't like psionics, so they don't use them, either. I personally have encountered some spells that I consider to be nothing more than combo platters of disassociated effects, so I don't use those. I find some classic D&D monsters like the beholder to be rather silly, so I don't use them, either. But so what? Even if some people don't use these classes, spells and monsters, others do.The same goes for disassociated mechanics. I don't think disassociation is something that can be objectively proven. Some abilities might seem disassociated to one person, and not to another. As for "serving the purpose of the game" ... Frankly, for a game of fantasy and imagination like D&D, I'd say the purpose of the game is better served by pushing the boundaries of the possible (admittedly, to subjective degrees of success and acceptance) than by staying firmly within the boundaries of what we have always known.</blockquote>

Verification