Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ulorian - Agent of Chaos" data-source="post: 1853051" data-attributes="member: 16668">They are? How are illustrations in computer games different from illustrations in D&amp;D and other FRPGs? And how do the illustrations in D&amp;D appeal to computer gamers in particular?It is common on these and similar boards to use 'computer gamers' as an invective, similarly to how&nbsp; 'munchkin', 'roll player', etc. are used. So when I see the term 'computer gamer' slipped into a sentence with no other context, in a thread about how 3E has no roleplaying appeal, and given how many criticize those who enjoy 3E as slack-jawed buffoons with no attention span, I drew a reasonable conclusion.Having said that, I wrote the original post when I was in a pretty cranky mood, so apologies to woodelf for the harshness.As am I.See, now that's just rude. And passive-aggressive <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Edit:Okay, my last two posts were 'thread-crapping', as the kids say, so here's something on topic. I agree that the rules in 3E are better than they were in previous editions in part because they are presented 'flavour-free', making them easier to understand. I also agree that the flavour text in previous editions did help fire the imagination. I wonder if we would get the best of both worlds if chapter introductions and in-chapter examples in the PHB and DMG were as exciting flavourwise as previous editions while the actual rules text was presented as it is now.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ulorian - Agent of Chaos, post: 1853051, member: 16668"] They are? How are illustrations in computer games different from illustrations in D&D and other FRPGs? And how do the illustrations in D&D appeal to computer gamers in particular? It is common on these and similar boards to use 'computer gamers' as an invective, similarly to how 'munchkin', 'roll player', etc. are used. So when I see the term 'computer gamer' slipped into a sentence with no other context, in a thread about how 3E has no roleplaying appeal, and given how many criticize those who enjoy 3E as slack-jawed buffoons with no attention span, I drew a reasonable conclusion. Having said that, I wrote the original post when I was in a pretty cranky mood, so apologies to woodelf for the harshness. As am I. See, now that's just rude. And passive-aggressive ;) Edit: Okay, my last two posts were 'thread-crapping', as the kids say, so here's something on topic. I agree that the rules in 3E are better than they were in previous editions in part because they are presented 'flavour-free', making them easier to understand. I also agree that the flavour text in previous editions did help fire the imagination. I wonder if we would get the best of both worlds if chapter introductions and in-chapter examples in the PHB and DMG were as exciting flavourwise as previous editions while the actual rules text was presented as it is now. [/QUOTE]

Verification