Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Joke Material Components
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6143701" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>I quite like Gygax's DMG, too. But when it comes to spell descriptions I prefer the approach of B/X or original D&D - the descriptions are terse and to the point (quite a bit like 4e, actually!). The really long descriptions in the AD&D PHB, replicated in 2nd ed AD&D and 3E, which also include the material components, are what I'm suggesting are someone else's play <em>output</em> repackaged as play <em>input</em>.</p><p></p><p>The limiting case of this outlook is that the whole scenario and all of play is prepackaged, all PCs are already built, etc.</p><p></p><p>Conversely, part of the point of play - for many people, at least - is that you create the story of your PC, both backstory and in play. Working out his/her idiom of casting is plausibly a part of that: one player has read A Wizard of Earthsea and casts spells through a staff; another has read LotR and calls upon the powers of Valinor; another has seen the cover of (the original) Unearthed Arcana and has a wizard carrying pouches and pockets of wacky components.</p><p></p><p>I don't see that the game needs to prescribe these things.</p><p></p><p>Well, by equal turns I could say that there are 13 year olds out there waiting to learn how a rationing of player resources on a metagame basis can produce a great RPG experience. But D&Dnext isn't going to give them that. Is the goal of the edition to present one particular taste for those who want that? Or to present a generic and unifying "D&D experience"? I had assumed the latter.</p><p></p><p>You're not persuading me more by talking about my preferred playstyle in a condescending way. You like joke D&D - fine. I don't. It doesn't mean I've got some problem with my sense of humour. I'm guessing that even in your game the somatic component for fireball is not a wizard chucking a brown-eye at his/her opponents - but I'm sure there'd be some 8 year olds out there who would find that hilarious!</p><p></p><p>I personally prefer to avoid it. People who want it will introduce it without the rulebooks hinting at it. (And including wacky monsters like Rust Monsters or Beholders is an easier way to give a nod to goofiness, because ignoring silly monsters - for any given group's value of "silly" - is a much more straightforward part of D&D practice.)</p><p></p><p>I think this is an issue too, but a different one (as you noted, it goes beyond joke components to all components). For me, I see this as being about the veneer of "simulation" that is part of the D&Dnext sensibility (healer's kits, with their improbably cheap and efficacious unguents and bandages, are another example). I find this stuff implausible and immersion-breaking, but for others it seems to be very important.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 6143701, member: 42582"] I quite like Gygax's DMG, too. But when it comes to spell descriptions I prefer the approach of B/X or original D&D - the descriptions are terse and to the point (quite a bit like 4e, actually!). The really long descriptions in the AD&D PHB, replicated in 2nd ed AD&D and 3E, which also include the material components, are what I'm suggesting are someone else's play [I]output[/I] repackaged as play [I]input[/I]. The limiting case of this outlook is that the whole scenario and all of play is prepackaged, all PCs are already built, etc. Conversely, part of the point of play - for many people, at least - is that you create the story of your PC, both backstory and in play. Working out his/her idiom of casting is plausibly a part of that: one player has read A Wizard of Earthsea and casts spells through a staff; another has read LotR and calls upon the powers of Valinor; another has seen the cover of (the original) Unearthed Arcana and has a wizard carrying pouches and pockets of wacky components. I don't see that the game needs to prescribe these things. Well, by equal turns I could say that there are 13 year olds out there waiting to learn how a rationing of player resources on a metagame basis can produce a great RPG experience. But D&Dnext isn't going to give them that. Is the goal of the edition to present one particular taste for those who want that? Or to present a generic and unifying "D&D experience"? I had assumed the latter. You're not persuading me more by talking about my preferred playstyle in a condescending way. You like joke D&D - fine. I don't. It doesn't mean I've got some problem with my sense of humour. I'm guessing that even in your game the somatic component for fireball is not a wizard chucking a brown-eye at his/her opponents - but I'm sure there'd be some 8 year olds out there who would find that hilarious! I personally prefer to avoid it. People who want it will introduce it without the rulebooks hinting at it. (And including wacky monsters like Rust Monsters or Beholders is an easier way to give a nod to goofiness, because ignoring silly monsters - for any given group's value of "silly" - is a much more straightforward part of D&D practice.) I think this is an issue too, but a different one (as you noted, it goes beyond joke components to all components). For me, I see this as being about the veneer of "simulation" that is part of the D&Dnext sensibility (healer's kits, with their improbably cheap and efficacious unguents and bandages, are another example). I find this stuff implausible and immersion-breaking, but for others it seems to be very important. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Joke Material Components
Top