Iron Heroes threaten my GM style of low magic items...

[LostSoul]

Just because a group is not following your ideas of how a D&D game should be run does not make it wrong or violate the rules. In fact, many of the discussions around here are because of problems with following all of the aspects of RAW. D&D/d20 can work in practically every genre of role playing

Two things here.

I think D&D can work in any genre. I don't think it can work for every player, because some people will come to the table with different creative agendas (the whole GNS thing). If I want to play a narrativist or sim game, D&D doesn't facilitate that kind of role play.

Which leads into the idea of "how a D&D game should be run". D&D is best when you approach it with the intent of running a game the way it was designed to be played - that is, gamist. There are other game systems out there that better facilitate other types of play. Which isn't to say it should be run one way or another, but it you play against type it'll be more difficult to get the game play you want.

One of the big things about D&D is that it rewards "killing monsters and taking their stuff". You kill monsters, take their stuff, and then you get better at killing monsters and taking theri stuff. You can award XP for totally different reasons - good use of the immursion stance, playing a character true to the setting, exploring premise (ie. theme, ethical and moral issues important to the player as opposed to the PC) - but you don't get better at those things. You get better at killing things and taking their stuff. So D&D has a natural pull towards that kind of play.


My own personal journey here...

When I returned to D&D in the tail end of 2e, it was because I wanted to revist all the strange monsters and kill them, and get all the interesting magical loot. That was fun for a while, but I'm not sure if it's what I really want out of role-playing. I was one of those guys who said, "Let's tell a story." But I had no idea how to do it. I just couldn't figure out how to create The Story without railroading. There's lots of tricks, techniques, and methods I used to try and reach this, but it didn't always work. And I felt "gray", empty.

Then I read the section about premise. Eureka - that's what I've been looking for. It all makes sense now.

I think.

 

[Bastoche]

What on Earth is a "rules forum" argument that isn't a rules argument, particularly when it's not in a "rules forum"? No seriously, what is it?

Read Hussar's posts just above yours. It relates to what Zelgar said. In answer to him, I'm not saying that one should not ask for insight about gaming problems on any forum. I'm just saying that most of the time, the important information is not included. Not always is it buried in it and never is it addressed by the one who answers.

Like someone said in this thread (I think it was Voadam) some people sometimes play with widely different character levels in the party. It imply that they don't play a purely gamist game. Else, the gamists player the "weaker" characters might feel cheated.

All topics about "Should encounter XYZ played the alpha-beta-omega way worth 100% XP" is purely a gamists question. They usually are asking if the challenge was challenging enough to grant XP.

Sometimes, though, GM talk about that "troublesome" player who "munchikin/powergame" and always find the "perfect" combo to ruin his plot/encounters. Such a GM is not a gamists. Or at least not a pure one.

Then, like Hussar pointed out, everyone and the next one answer to the problem with a solution that relates only to their own personnal gaming preference. I know I did this too. It's innefficient and might be frustrating for both the inquirer and it's fellow players.

Let's take the original post in this thread as an example. You can diagnos a few things.

1) the DM is used to use quite a bit of "force" on the player since he talks about "iron heroes" threatning the way he DM (i.o.w. control) the game. Second, there's no mention of the arguments used by the players. However, many speculated that said players might feel cheated by not having powerful enough characters. We do not know what classes they are, etc. The way the post is made doesn't seem like an inquiry. It's more as if the guy wanted support and/or arguments to "straighten" his players out.

2) there's absolutly no questions in the post. There's no point in making such a post IMO.

3) From my point of view, mission-based XP = railroading. But that's just me.

The post was so useful that we slipped this way out of topic Nothing really insightful was posted besides a serie of "I would do this". So my counsel is rather: "Ask yourself and your fellow players what everybody expects from the game". That's what leads to fun. If 30% of the "group" problems that were posted after I typed all these posts in this thread turned from "I go a trouble with a player/my DM" to "What common ground could be found between a player who expect A from the game when I expect B?" I would feel like I accomplished something. Some As and Bs are so incompatible that the answer (that we read often on this boards. too much IMO) would rightfully be "You can't. Find another group/drop the player".