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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 4107171" data-attributes="member: 4937">I'm not sure I said that there was anything wrong with playing an immoral character.  I'm just equally unsure that exploration is really what is going on.  I approve of exploration.  It fits my high simulationist schtick.  What I disapprove of is playing a character immorally and not exploring that, or really playing the game and not exploring the mental space of the game at all.I'm inclined to think that if people aim at a target like, "I want to be a hero.", that they ought to learn something about what it means - including the risk of ugly deaths, crippling, and various other things.  No, the rules primarily support fighting.  What you do with those rules may or may not be fighting evil, and heavily relies on you having some sort of conception of what evil is and how you might go about fighting it.Granted.  But ever since 4e came out the boards have been swarmed by people who offer variations on, "I'm so glad that the risk of defeat has been mitigated or removed in 4e.  I've always wanted to be the sexy shoeless god of war, and now I can be."Interestingly, it tends to become the topic, because questions like, "Is long-term injury fun?", quickly become proxy arguments for advancing claims like, "The game is more fun if I as a player always get my way."  That is to say, there is a faction that believes that its really all about player empowerment, and that is what makes an RPG fun, and that anyone that thinks otherwise is somewhat sinisterly trying to ruin thier fun.I tried to stay on topic.  However before I even got involved, the topic had become, "We shouldn't discuss this because D&D is not a game were thier should be long term injury."  And its just got worse from there.  I was complaining about topic drift long before you where.</blockquote>

Verification