Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="jdrakeh" data-source="post: 4296246" data-attributes="member: 13892">And? This doesn't change the fact that D&amp;D has never had mechanical roots in literature as you claim. D&amp;D was, in fact, originally &quot;Rules for Fantastic Medieval Wargames Campaigns Playble with Paper and Pencil and Miniature Figures&quot;. It was certainly inspired by literature, though the original rules rarely (if ever) seek to mechanically simulate literature (past the dubious use of race names lifted directly from Tolkien's LotR, anyhow). Incidentally, wouldn't custom-creating monsters to suit the story, rather than using a cookie-cutter template be more faithful to the concept of literature emulation? Just a thought. Because this is exactly what the &quot;heinous&quot; advice in question suggests -- creating monsters custom-tailored to encounters. Or, as you suggest, making them matter in the context of story.[Edit: Spelling corrected.]</blockquote>

[QUOTE="jdrakeh, post: 4296246, member: 13892"] And? This doesn't change the fact that [I]D&D[/I] has never had mechanical roots in literature as you claim. D&D was, in fact, originally "Rules for Fantastic Medieval Wargames Campaigns Playble with Paper and Pencil and Miniature Figures". It was certainly [i]inspired[/i] by literature, though the original rules rarely (if ever) seek to mechanically [I]simulate[/I] literature (past the dubious use of race names lifted directly from Tolkien's LotR, anyhow). Incidentally, wouldn't custom-creating monsters to suit the story, rather than using a cookie-cutter template be [i]more[/i] faithful to the concept of literature emulation? Just a thought. Because this is exactly what the "heinous" advice in question suggests -- creating monsters custom-tailored to encounters. Or, as you suggest, making them matter in the context of story. [Edit: Spelling corrected.] [/QUOTE]

Verification