Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Jack Daniel" data-source="post: 5633520" data-attributes="member: 694">I'm interested in posters' knee-jerk reaction to this question, the gut-instinct response, hence the fact that the poll asks for a simple &quot;yes&quot; or &quot;no.&quot;I've been prompted to ask this question by an odd happenstance.&nbsp; You see, I was browsing through my local library yesterday, and I stumbled across a copy of &quot;Dungeon Mastering for Dummies&quot; (the only D&amp;D book on the shelves), written by Bill Slavicsek and published during the &quot;v3.5&quot; era.&nbsp; Curious, I picked up this book and started leafing through it, having never before read any of the &quot;D&amp;D for dummies&quot; books.&nbsp; I wondered what kind of advice this book might give budding DMs.&nbsp; A lot of it was re-hashed from the 3rd edition DMGs.&nbsp; A lot more was pretty sound advice.&nbsp; But then, at one point, Bill came out and said, &quot;D&amp;D is a game about combat.&quot;This disturbed me instantly.&nbsp; Mainly because it contrasted with everything I remember Zeb writing in the 2e DMG, where the text came right out and said things like, &quot;D&amp;D is not a combat game&quot; and &quot;more than just hack &amp; slash.&quot;&nbsp; So for me, when I see a question like &quot;Is D&amp;D a game about combat?&quot;, my gut reaction is a weird, atavistic sort of &quot;NO IT'S NOT!&quot; that comes barreling out of my brain like that space-slug coming out of the asteroid in Empire.It's the same reaction I have whenever I see someone say, &quot;You shouldn't use the phrase 'roll-playing.'&nbsp; That's judgmental and derogatory, like calling someone a munchkin or a min/maxer.&quot;&nbsp; But I can't help it: it's a major aspect of my &quot;upbringing&quot; into D&amp;D, an irremovable portion of my &quot;gamer constitution.&quot;&nbsp; I was brought into the game when roll-playing was bad, min-maxing was bad, rules-lawyering was bad, the Monty Haul campaign was bad, the killer DM was bad, etc., etc.&nbsp; Objectively bad: these were game-killers.&nbsp; They made things less fun for everybody.The mantra I remember, back in my day (when we had to climb uphill both ways in the snow just to roll some d20s, don't you know), was &quot;good role-playing.&quot;&nbsp; This is a phrase sprinkled liberally throughout the 2nd edition books in particular.&nbsp; Preachy?&nbsp; You bet.&nbsp; Bad for the game?&nbsp; Not necessarily.&nbsp; As near as I can tell, &quot;good role-playing&quot; according to the 2e definition meant &quot;resisting the temptation to play the numbers,&quot; e.g. forsaking min/maxing, monty-hauling, munchkining, etc. in favor of a more immersive experience.&nbsp; It didn't always turn out that way, of course, but at least the admonition was there in the books.&nbsp; The notion was current in gamer culture in the late 80s and throughout the 90s.And that's changed.&nbsp; I don't think that we see exhortations in favor of &quot;good role-playing&quot; in rulebooks anymore.&nbsp; And I think that gaming has suffered for it.&nbsp; Certainly, in my locality, it's exceedingly difficult to find any player who would rather play a character than a character-sheet.&nbsp; Can it be that attitudes have changed so much in the span of a mere decade?&nbsp; I hope not.*grumble grodnardy grumble*</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Jack Daniel, post: 5633520, member: 694"] I'm interested in posters' knee-jerk reaction to this question, the gut-instinct response, hence the fact that the poll asks for a simple "yes" or "no." I've been prompted to ask this question by an odd happenstance. You see, I was browsing through my local library yesterday, and I stumbled across a copy of "Dungeon Mastering for Dummies" (the only D&D book on the shelves), written by Bill Slavicsek and published during the "v3.5" era. Curious, I picked up this book and started leafing through it, having never before read any of the "D&D for dummies" books. I wondered what kind of advice this book might give budding DMs. A lot of it was re-hashed from the 3rd edition DMGs. A lot more was pretty sound advice. But then, at one point, Bill came out and said, "D&D is a game about combat." This disturbed me instantly. Mainly because it contrasted with everything I remember Zeb writing in the 2e DMG, where the text came right out and said things like, "D&D is not a combat game" and "more than just hack & slash." So for me, when I see a question like "Is D&D a game about combat?", my gut reaction is a weird, atavistic sort of [b]"NO IT'S NOT!"[/b] that comes barreling out of my brain like that space-slug coming out of the asteroid in [i]Empire.[/i] It's the same reaction I have whenever I see someone say, "You shouldn't use the phrase 'roll-playing.' That's judgmental and derogatory, like calling someone a munchkin or a min/maxer." But I can't help it: it's a major aspect of my "upbringing" into D&D, an irremovable portion of my "gamer constitution." I was brought into the game when roll-playing was bad, min-maxing was bad, rules-lawyering was bad, the Monty Haul campaign was bad, the killer DM was bad, etc., etc. Objectively bad: these were game-killers. They made things less fun for everybody. The mantra I remember, back in my day (when we had to climb uphill both ways in the snow just to roll some d20s, don't you know), was "good role-playing." This is a phrase sprinkled liberally throughout the 2nd edition books in particular. Preachy? You bet. Bad for the game? Not necessarily. As near as I can tell, "good role-playing" according to the 2e definition meant "resisting the temptation to play the numbers," e.g. forsaking min/maxing, monty-hauling, munchkining, etc. in favor of a more immersive experience. It didn't always turn out that way, of course, but at least the admonition was there in the books. The notion was current in gamer culture in the late 80s and throughout the 90s. And that's changed. I don't think that we see exhortations in favor of "good role-playing" in rulebooks anymore. And I think that gaming has suffered for it. Certainly, in my locality, it's exceedingly difficult to find any player who would rather play a character than a character-sheet. Can it be that attitudes have changed so much in the span of a mere decade? I hope not. *grumble grodnardy grumble* [/QUOTE]

Verification