Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 5761909" data-attributes="member: 2067">Ah, they aren't driven by narrative, though, they are driven by the stats.Because the game is played with the stats. The stats are what overcome challenges. The stats are what provide conflict and excitement. The stats are the game experience. And, if the narrative doesn't affect the stats, the game leaves ONLY the stats, without context or meaning. Oh, it's easy to re-fluff, sure. But that's because those fluffy elements are essentially meaningless. They have no bearing on gameplay. Call a rabbit a smeerp if you want, but unless it is different, it's not interesting. Here, I'd agree with a a lot of folks who see that the DM needs to be more of a judge, and less of a CPU. This spell creates a ball of fire. Heres' the typical effects. Want something more? Go for it, using the DM advice that has trained you to be able to take a game element and run with it, with confidence. No ruleset or person can see every ramification, but to me, that's incredibly liberating. It gives you a lot of ways to work with what the game gives you. This spell creates a ball of fire. Does it burn down the forest? Does it explode the doors off the hinges? Does it alert the nearby hobgoblins? Sure, maybe! If the DM allows that to happen. The DM is encouraged to think creatively based on what exists in the game, rather than about how to excuse a purely mechanical effect.Improvised weapons existed in all e's, and I saw plenty of bare-fisted brawls or odd tools. It's not hard to do for me, since the rules support me if I want to do that, and allow me to futz if I don't like what they are. 3e's tightly integrated system makes futzing tougher, but it I didn't feel the need to futz as much. It also happened in 2e, whenever a party member "chucked a rock at it." I've never needed tightly bound resolution mechanics to do that, but I have used solid existing rules or improvising guidelines.I don't see descriptive rules elements as providing a script. I see them as providing PROPS. How you use them is up to you (and a judge is needed to make sure the uses are vaguely balanced and fair), but the game doesn't tell you what they're used for. It's fun like the old Whose Line game "Props" is fun:<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=fvwp&NR=1&v=yIyJkduMkC4" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oViGsUZM6-U</a>The idea isn't to use the props in one and only one way. The fun comes from thinking of different ways to use the equipment you have. Narrowly defined effects are good for one and only one thing (the effect they provide). Broadly defined tools are useful in MANY different ways.There's not just one thing Super Strength or Fireball can do. There's as many things they can do as your imagination can come up with (and your DM can allow. <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    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />).aside: Personally, I feel that because D&D adventures consist of four major activities (combat, exploration, interaction, and discovery), most effects only need to be described mechanically in those broad terms. That's actually a pretty small continuum of mechanical needs. Fireball burns monsters, clears flammables, and is pretty useless at the other two things. Given that framework, I can improvise quite well within it, giving a wizard who wants to use it to, say, impress thee locals, a chance to do it if I feel it's warranted.</blockquote>

Verification