Interesting Ryan Dancey comment on "lite" RPGs

[Mythmere1]

There you go! You can now join the ranks of the Knights of Wrongfun and wield a +2 sword of superiority!

I think it's a prestige class, but it would be fun to figure out the feat chain...

 

[Psion]

Scadgrad, Akrasia, let the Knights of Wrongfun pontificate, and just ignore it.

He says, invoking a pejorative...

The more you try to respond, the more you fuel the people who are threatened by other rule systems. If you're going to argue, at least argue with Joshua Dyal or MoogleEmpMog or someone who prefers 3E without feeling threatened enough to sling insults.

As long as you are playing armchair psychologist, enlighten me: if arguing is about systems I "feel threatened by", why am I not feeling more threatened by a game like Exalted which has actually attracted players I know in meatspace, and engaging in the said supposed bashing you refer to?

 

[Psion]

My apologies for misunderstanding your original comment.

My tip of the hat to you for sticking with me while, it occurs to me, that in my frustration, my prior post might have come off a bit abbrasive.

 

[Remathilis]

I think that (IMHO) I'm not afraid of my DM, but I want something to use as a REFERENCE for my decision.

In D&D, a 10' pit is DC 10, barring invisible walls. Why? Its 5' per 5 DC. I know that the fall does 2d6 damage (10' deep). I know I can make 15 ref save if I do roll less. I can look at my jump check and decide IF I want to chance it, all without the DM telling me these things, which SPEEDS UP game for me. I can know all this from "Its a 10 wide, 10 deep pit".

In C&C* a 10' pit is TN 15 Str. Why? Thats what the DM says. How much damage will I take if I fail? DM decides that. (uh 2d6). Can I make it? Depends on if Str in prime and my level. If its not prime, I really can't do anything to help make me a better jumper other than level up.

As a player, I'd rather know WHAT I can do on a regular basis (jump 10' pits) and make descisions based on the excepted rules.

As a DM, I'd like a guide to know HOW to set this DC/TN and what the failure for missing is without making a random number up.

Does this make me a bad GM. Possibly. I'd rather save my ad-hoc rules for things like what happens when a PC tries to absorb an conduit to the Negative Energy Plane with a Staff of Power rather than coming up with every pits TN. Theres a Chart I can look at for that.

Of course, I like packaged campaign settings and modules too, allows me more time to play.

HUGE FOOTNOTE: I've never played C&C. There MIGHT be a rule for pit TNs and falling damage, but I do not know it. Therefore, the example is more important than the numbers: I'd rather had a set number known to all players and myself than to come up with something willy-nilly based on what I "feel" is right. (which might not feel right to my players).

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

Yeah, whatever.

Armchair pop psychology and sociology is pretty uninteresting IMO.

My own tastes in RPGs have nothing to do with "sticking it to the Man", and I dislike knee-jerk "rebellion" more generally.

I dislike knee-jerk (and, indeed, almost any) "rebellion" myself, so I can understand that.

I do note, however, that you left off the part of my post where I noted that your gaming preferences might not be due to any such thing.

And, for that matter, the part directly addressing your prior post.

Ah, well.

Now that I've qualified for Knight of Wrongfun, I'll just smack you with my +2 Sword of Superiority and call it a day.

 

[Mythmere1]

He says, invoking a pejorative...

Yes, I think people who bash on other systems deserve it - if I were bashing on D&D, you'd have a valid point.

As long as you are playing armchair psychologist, enlighten me: if arguing is about systems I "feel threatened by", why am I not feeling more threatened by a game like Exalted which has actually attracted players I know in meatspace, and engaging in the said supposed bashing you refer to?

I don't know. Are you bashing on C&C? The posts I saw from you were along the lines of "some people prefer rules-lite, some people don't, and there's not an objective answer," which is basically the same position I take. Out of the two games, I prefer C&C, but I can completely understand when people prefer 3e. It's just about whether people prefer GM adjudication or referencing a comprehensive rule-set. There are advantages to both sides. Also, I'm kind of an old-schooler, so there are aesthetic issues and things like that which just jibe better with C&C on a subjective level for me.

 

[Silverleaf]

But I digress. That's not to say that you like rules-lite, or dislike D&D, because of those aspects of your enculturation - or that Mearls was referring to you personally. Your "some" leaves room for his "chunk of gamers."

Some people who like 3e are rapists. Some people who like 3e are child molesters. Some people who like 3e are murderers. I'll stop now, but I think the point is fairly evident. If not, then I'll spell it out: judging an entire group by some unknown subset of that group is a really, really stupid idea.
In fact this kind of bogus association is exactly what sparked this humongous thread to begin with. In other words, some people don't know when to quit BS'ing...

 

[Remathilis]

I want a sword....

 

[Akrasia]

Not that Mike needs me to defend him but this one is out of line.

Why is it "out of line"? He's making a set of sweeping, patronizing generalizations about people who are attached to 'rules light' games.

He said there's "an element" of rebellion at work. In some cases, he's right.

The generalization is either meaningless (yes, I'm sure that *somewhere* there are people who are anti-3e, or whatever, because of some immature 'rebellious' motive), or it is insulting (if he is actually trying to put forward an empirically meaningful *explanation* for why people are attached to rules light systems).

Patronizing is labelling all gamers who like more complex rules as having, how did Ace put it, "less social maturity and dispute resolution skills" and not being able to "handle a more complex social contract." Given that, I think it's fair to say that the patronizing attitude has been flying both ways on this thread.

Well I am not going to speak on behalf of Ace (aside from noting that Mearls is now part of WotC, whereas Ace is, AFAIK, a private gamer expressing his view).

I will say that mature gamers can like either rules light or rules heavy games. However, I think mature and experienced gamers are more likely to be *able* to enjoy rules light games -- simply because it takes experience and trust to make such games work.

And I retract any derogatory comments about the folks at Troll Lord Games that don't have to do with them calling my preferred style of game "immature," "boring," "dull," or "in conflict with the basic idea of the game."

Ummm ... what? TLG has *never* expressed the views you are attributing to them. Don't confuse opinions expressed by some of their fans with the views of the company itself.

 

[Mythmere1]

I want a sword....

Not for your post. Too fair. You have to say that people who play C&C are playing the game wrong before you get the prestige class and the sword. Or pick any game, really. Rifts is a popular avenue to the Citadel of the Knights of Wrongfun. (That's how I got my wrongfun sword - Rifts. I couldn't help myself).