Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Balesir" data-source="post: 5733139" data-attributes="member: 27160">Of course it can be fun, and of course there is a place for such play in the &quot;broad church&quot; of &quot;roleplaying gaming&quot;.&nbsp; Playing in a world rather than a ruleset is a style of play I really enjoy from time to time.But I would question whether such play is &quot;playing D&amp;D&quot;.&nbsp; You are not using the rules of D&amp;D - you are using a selection of other rules that you are inventing on the spot to suit the world situation you are imagining.&nbsp; There is certainly nothing wrong with this, but I don't consider it to be the same thing as &quot;playing D&amp;D&quot;, which is done using the rules of D&amp;D.&nbsp; I do, on the other hand, considr it to be &quot;roleplaying gaming&quot;.I realise some people think of &quot;playing D&amp;D&quot; and &quot;playing a roleplaying game&quot; as synonymous - I can tolerate that view, but since it removes a large chunk of what &quot;playing D&amp;D&quot; means (without replacing it with a useful alternative) I much prefer to keep to my own definitions.On top of this, I think that having a complete set of rules in any RPG is preferable to having only a partial set.&nbsp; Having a set that explicitly calls out player abilities in some sort of semi-related sub-game would count, but would not fit well with the ethos of D&amp;D as I view it.More clearly stated, perhaps, I am happy with a game like Hârn, where the world is deeply developed and described, having rules that amount to &quot;use game world logic to resolve in-game actions&quot;, but for more world-generic and challenge-focussed systems such as D&amp;D I want the rules to be game rules, not vague injunctions to make stuff up as seems appropriate.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Balesir, post: 5733139, member: 27160"] Of course it can be fun, and of course there is a place for such play in the "broad church" of "roleplaying gaming". Playing in a world rather than a ruleset is a style of play I really enjoy from time to time. But I would question whether such play is "playing D&D". You are not using the rules of D&D - you are using a selection of other rules that you are inventing on the spot to suit the world situation you are imagining. There is certainly nothing wrong with this, but I don't consider it to be the same thing as "playing D&D", which is done using the rules of D&D. I [B][I]do[/I][/B], on the other hand, considr it to be "roleplaying gaming". I realise some people think of "playing D&D" and "playing a roleplaying game" as synonymous - I can tolerate that view, but since it removes a large chunk of what "playing D&D" means (without replacing it with a useful alternative) I much prefer to keep to my own definitions. On top of this, I think that having a complete set of rules in any RPG is preferable to having only a partial set. Having a set that explicitly calls out player abilities in some sort of semi-related sub-game would count, but would not fit well with the ethos of D&D as I view it. More clearly stated, perhaps, I am happy with a game like Hârn, where the world is deeply developed and described, having rules that amount to "use game world logic to resolve in-game actions", but for more world-generic and challenge-focussed systems such as D&D I want the rules to be game rules, not vague injunctions to make stuff up as seems appropriate. [/QUOTE]

Verification