Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 6003414" data-attributes="member: 87792">Honestly, this sort of thinking bothers me far far more than even the people who talk about 'rolling toons'.&nbsp; And I really dislike calling characters toons - makes me want to declare duck season.&nbsp; (I dislike calling them toons in MMOs as well).&nbsp;It bothers me for two reasons; firstly a lack of desire to expand the hobby and secondly rejecting MMOs indicates to me a complete lack of respect of D&amp;D and its influence.&nbsp;The desire to expand the hobby is simple.&nbsp; There are what?&nbsp; A few hundred thousand D&amp;D players.&nbsp; World of Warcraft has literally millions of subscribers, all taking part in what is in some ways a third rate knock-off experience when compared to the one you get round the table.&nbsp; (In other ways it's better, but I digress).&nbsp; Probably half those players don't even know that D&amp;D is even in print - and 90% couldn't give a damn about D&amp;D terminology.&nbsp; But if we can even pick up one tenth of them we've vastly expanded the hobby and that will be good for it (especially as we'll have expanded it by the people who care about roleplaying and tabletop interaction).&nbsp;The second is the fundamental lack of respect for D&amp;D that rejecting MMOs shows.&nbsp;D&amp;D terminology is based on tactical wargames.&nbsp; Why is it based on tactical wargames?&nbsp; Because that's what smart nerds were playing when Gygax and Arneson came out with D&amp;D.&nbsp; It's now an extremely niche hoby as computers have eaten it alive.&nbsp; A cry to reject the language of MMOs is a cry to reject the players of MMOs and to keep D&amp;D in an inward looking niche.&nbsp;MMOs on the other hand owe their roots to D&amp;D.&nbsp; And a lot of the MMOisms that people are decrying are traceable directly back to D&amp;D.&nbsp; Tanks?&nbsp; Dragon in the 80s was using Tanks to illustrate negative AC.&nbsp;&nbsp; Tank/DPS/Healer trinity?&nbsp; Straight out of the brown box.&nbsp; With fighters tanking, wizards being mobile artillery, and clerics healing.&nbsp; (The thief showed up later).&nbsp; Tanking was the job of the fighter - keeping the bad guys off ths squishies.&nbsp; 2e of course had its families of classes.&nbsp; Fighters didn't need an aggro mechanic because they had a battle line and some nice solid stone walls in the dungeon.&nbsp; DPS?&nbsp; D&amp;D came out of tabletop wargaming.&nbsp; Weapon types did different damage to prevent people carrying iron spikes as those were the cheapest weapon.Almost all the objections to MMOs are traceable directly to things at the very core and origin of D&amp;D - and normally it's because the MMOs have stolen from D&amp;D.&nbsp; Anyone who wants to keep D&amp;D pure IMO needs to read Appendix N.&nbsp;&nbsp;Honestly the game sounds like a computer game to me - and not on the players' side.&nbsp; The part you've described is an arbitrary puzzle with an oh-so-convenient solution located in the next room.&nbsp; And you're putting special elements into the encounter quite intentionally - it's all sounding extremely artificial to me.&nbsp; And as if you are setting it up to be approached as a game.&nbsp; All the PCs are doing is approaching it as a slightly different one to the one you want.&nbsp; Combat is more interesting than a fetch quest or a &quot;click the random object&quot; quest.&nbsp; And the party doesn't even get the mental reward of having been creative, merely having solved the arbitrary puzzle you set them.&nbsp; A creative group given license to be creative will come up with solutions and ideas you never expected - and you don't get that from a series of well defined Sierra-style quests.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Neonchameleon, post: 6003414, member: 87792"] Honestly, this sort of thinking bothers me far [I]far[/I] more than even the people who talk about 'rolling toons'. And I really dislike calling characters toons - makes me want to declare duck season. (I dislike calling them toons in MMOs as well). It bothers me for two reasons; firstly a lack of desire to expand the hobby and secondly rejecting MMOs indicates to me a complete lack of respect of D&D and its influence. The desire to expand the hobby is simple. There are what? A few hundred thousand D&D players. World of Warcraft has literally [I]millions[/I] of subscribers, all taking part in what is in some ways a third rate knock-off experience when compared to the one you get round the table. (In other ways it's better, but I digress). Probably half those players don't even know that D&D is even in print - and 90% couldn't give a damn about D&D terminology. But if we can even pick up one tenth of them we've vastly expanded the hobby and that will be good for it (especially as we'll have expanded it by the people who care about roleplaying and tabletop interaction). The second is the fundamental lack of respect for D&D that rejecting MMOs shows. D&D terminology is based on [I]tactical wargames[/I]. Why is it based on tactical wargames? Because that's what smart nerds were playing when Gygax and Arneson came out with D&D. It's now an extremely niche hoby as computers have eaten it alive. A cry to reject the language of MMOs is a cry to reject the players of MMOs and to keep D&D in an inward looking niche. MMOs on the other hand owe their roots to [I]D&D[/I]. And a lot of the MMOisms that people are decrying are traceable directly back to D&D. Tanks? Dragon in the 80s was using Tanks to illustrate negative AC. Tank/DPS/Healer trinity? Straight out of the brown box. With fighters tanking, wizards being mobile artillery, and clerics healing. (The thief showed up later). Tanking was the job of the fighter - keeping the bad guys off ths squishies. 2e of course had its families of classes. Fighters didn't need an aggro mechanic because they had a battle line and some nice solid stone walls in the dungeon. DPS? D&D came out of [I]tabletop wargaming.[/I] Weapon types did different damage [I]to prevent people carrying iron spikes as those were the cheapest weapon.[/I] Almost all the objections to MMOs are traceable directly to things at the very core and origin of D&D - and normally it's because the MMOs have stolen from D&D. Anyone who wants to keep D&D pure IMO needs to read Appendix N. Honestly the game sounds like a computer game to me - and not on the players' side. The part you've described is an arbitrary puzzle with an oh-so-convenient solution located in the next room. And you're putting special elements into the encounter quite intentionally - it's all sounding [I]extremely[/I] artificial to me. And as if you are setting it up to be approached as a game. All the PCs are doing is approaching it as a slightly different one to the one you want. Combat is more interesting than a fetch quest or a "click the random object" quest. And the party doesn't even get the mental reward of having been creative, merely having solved the arbitrary puzzle you set them. A creative group given license to be creative will come up with solutions and ideas you never expected - and you don't get that from a series of well defined Sierra-style quests. [/QUOTE]

Verification