Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mustrum_Ridcully" data-source="post: 3928821" data-attributes="member: 710">I hate to single this out, but, well, it's something I just don't like to read anymore and I think that is actively damaging the quality of a post for me, even if it is undeserved. Don't &quot;hide&quot; behind using a shorthand like &quot;video game&quot; (or &quot;anime&quot;), or something like that. Say what you think it's wrong, in as precise terms as possible to you. People use the term Video Game as a synonym for &quot;inferior&quot; or &quot;something else I don't like much as the thing I really want&quot;. It is in danger of becoming a new variant of Godwyn's Law. Saying &quot;I don't like it&quot; can't be discussed. It's subjective, it doesn't give anyone a way to react to it (aside maybe from undesirable personal attacks about lack of common sense, taste or mind). Using a &quot;pseudo-synonym&quot; like video game makes thinks even worse...Instead of saying &quot;Don't like it&quot; explain why you don't like it. Others now have a chance of at least understanding the point and learning why they should care and be able to explain why the feel the same or why the feel different. That said, return to your regularly scheduled thread.Because I think I agree with your point in way, but I think one thing is important: Neither rules nor fluff are ever really mandated, though there are degrees of &quot;nearly-mandation&quot;. If you want to use a rule system, you're usually best off using all its rules, because changes might have unforseen circumstances.If fluff really makes it into the rules and this fluff is used for &quot;balance reasons&quot;, it becomes a problem. &quot;Yes, you can become a Sword Ubermaster of Destruction, but keep in mind that people like him are hunted down by the Emerald Frost Wizards&quot;. That's bad &quot;fluff&quot;, because you're trying to balance a mechanic with a story aspect. That won't work, because maybe the DM doesn't want to feel forced sending a hunting team behind his PCs all the time.Naming a spell or a feat after a wizard or a wizardry tradition doesn't cause this kind of problem. Take away the name &quot;Dark Serpent Adept&quot; and rename it &quot;Scry&quot;, and you won't destroy your game. It's not as if you just decided &quot;No Power Attack and Metamagic feats in my 3.5 game!&quot; It's &quot;I call the Barbarian Class Berserker&quot;. I am not saying it's not work to change fluff written into the rules. But it doesn't have unforseen side effects. You built your homebrew without an &quot;Emerald Frost Academy&quot;, so you rename the feats and spells associated with it. You don't have Pelor in your campaign, but want to keep the Sun Domain? Write your own god with the domain!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mustrum_Ridcully, post: 3928821, member: 710"] I hate to single this out, but, well, it's something I just don't like to read anymore and I think that is actively damaging the quality of a post for me, even if it is undeserved. Don't "hide" behind using a shorthand like "video game" (or "anime"), or something like that. Say what you think it's wrong, in as precise terms as possible to you. People use the term [i]Video Game[/i] as a synonym for "inferior" or "something else I don't like much as the thing I really want". It is in danger of becoming a new variant of [i]Godwyn's Law[/i]. Saying "I don't like it" can't be discussed. It's subjective, it doesn't give anyone a way to react to it (aside maybe from undesirable personal attacks about lack of common sense, taste or mind). Using a "pseudo-synonym" like video game makes thinks even worse... Instead of saying "Don't like it" explain why you don't like it. Others now have a chance of at least understanding the point and learning why they should care and be able to explain why the feel the same or why the feel different. That said, return to your regularly scheduled thread. Because I think I agree with your point in way, but I think one thing is important: Neither rules nor fluff are ever really mandated, though there are degrees of "nearly-mandation". If you want to use a rule system, you're usually best off using all its rules, because changes might have unforseen circumstances. If fluff really makes it into the rules and this fluff is used for "balance reasons", it becomes a problem. "Yes, you can become a Sword Ubermaster of Destruction, but keep in mind that people like him are hunted down by the Emerald Frost Wizards". That's bad "fluff", because you're trying to balance a mechanic with a story aspect. That won't work, because maybe the DM doesn't want to feel forced sending a hunting team behind his PCs all the time. Naming a spell or a feat after a wizard or a wizardry tradition doesn't cause this kind of problem. Take away the name "Dark Serpent Adept" and rename it "Scry", and you won't destroy your game. It's not as if you just decided "No Power Attack and Metamagic feats in my 3.5 game!" It's "I call the Barbarian Class Berserker". I am not saying it's not work to change fluff written into the rules. But it doesn't have unforseen side effects. You built your homebrew without an "Emerald Frost Academy", so you rename the feats and spells associated with it. You don't have Pelor in your campaign, but want to keep the Sun Domain? Write your own god with the domain! [/QUOTE]

Verification