Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 4507650" data-attributes="member: 22779">I disagree.&nbsp; Basic D&amp;D had next to no rules for creating a believable setting.&nbsp; It was solely focused on the dungeon.&nbsp; Expert expanded things out into wilderness adventuring, but that was about it.&nbsp; &quot;Believable setting&quot; is entirely the job of the DM.&nbsp; No amount of mechanics can help you there.&nbsp; 3e most certainly did not make a believable setting, unless believable means you can never lose a limb, economies are entirely bizarre, and a host of other oddities that everyone sweeps under the carpet.Yet, I've played in perfectly &quot;believable&quot; 3e campaigns.&nbsp; Why?&nbsp; Because, like a good magician, the DM's I had were able to draw my attention away from the stuff I shouldn't be looking at and focus on the stuff I should.&nbsp; And that's always been the primary goal of DMing.&nbsp; To keep the players engaged enough that they don't start poking holes in the tissue thin veneer of believability that exists in D&amp;D.Heck, look at elves.&nbsp; (Note, I hate elves as a PC race, and this is why)&nbsp; Unless elves are massively developmentally challenged, the rules for elves makes no sense.&nbsp; An PC elf, starting out at level 1 is over 100 years old.&nbsp; Yet, other than a few racial benefits, he is IDENTICAL to that 1st level 15 year old human.&nbsp; Completely the same.&nbsp; Unless this elf is massively retarded, he should be light years ahead of the human by this point.This is &quot;believable&quot;?&nbsp; Not to me it's not.&nbsp; Yet, I turn a blind eye to it and get on with the game, because, well, it's D&amp;D and D&amp;D has elves.&nbsp; I don't play them, but, I can live with it.Looking back through this thread KM, you're basically saying that because 3e did &quot;mundane fantasy&quot; for 2 levels, that's support.&nbsp; I'm saying that the sweet spot in D&amp;D started at 3rd for a reason.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 4507650, member: 22779"] I disagree. Basic D&D had next to no rules for creating a believable setting. It was solely focused on the dungeon. Expert expanded things out into wilderness adventuring, but that was about it. "Believable setting" is entirely the job of the DM. No amount of mechanics can help you there. 3e most certainly did not make a believable setting, unless believable means you can never lose a limb, economies are entirely bizarre, and a host of other oddities that everyone sweeps under the carpet. Yet, I've played in perfectly "believable" 3e campaigns. Why? Because, like a good magician, the DM's I had were able to draw my attention away from the stuff I shouldn't be looking at and focus on the stuff I should. And that's always been the primary goal of DMing. To keep the players engaged enough that they don't start poking holes in the tissue thin veneer of believability that exists in D&D. Heck, look at elves. (Note, I hate elves as a PC race, and this is why) Unless elves are massively developmentally challenged, the rules for elves makes no sense. An PC elf, starting out at level 1 is over 100 years old. Yet, other than a few racial benefits, he is IDENTICAL to that 1st level 15 year old human. Completely the same. Unless this elf is massively retarded, he should be light years ahead of the human by this point. This is "believable"? Not to me it's not. Yet, I turn a blind eye to it and get on with the game, because, well, it's D&D and D&D has elves. I don't play them, but, I can live with it. Looking back through this thread KM, you're basically saying that because 3e did "mundane fantasy" for 2 levels, that's support. I'm saying that the sweet spot in D&D started at 3rd for a reason. [/QUOTE]

Verification