Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="MJS" data-source="post: 6152247" data-attributes="member: 6747144">Hello Good Peopleit was suggested to me, in the Narrative Option thread, to start another for the questioning of the premise - so here we are. I had chimed in, with a few others, that I truly do not see the problem at all. &nbsp; My background: Mentzer Red Box kid who quickly moved on to the venerable 1E. It was in 1E where my friends and I made the most system changes. My buddy and I rewrote the UA Barbarian to something we preferred, I wrote tournaments, played a ton of RIFTS, 2E. My 3x mechanic knowledge is mostly from Bioware PC titles, as the old group went off and had families and whatnot. I've played some PF also and find it very familiar in a good way - all the colorful character options I'd simply allowed in 1E are fully flowered in modern systems, and I love that.&nbsp; &nbsp; Ok, that out of the way - I am first off a bit disturbed by the language itself - &quot;narrative control/options&quot;. IMO nobody, not even DM, has narrative control of a D&amp;D game, and indeed that is, to me, a defining characteristic. The players play, the DM referees and plays with them, but NO ONE is driving the bus. That's the magic. &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; I keep hearing that fighters, poor fighters, have nothing to do. We've been hearing that, of course, for decades, and to me it seems that the fighter class &quot;cause&quot; is the rallying cry of munchkinism, of video gamey mechanics that make no sense in RPGing. To me, you have to describe your actions. MMORPG mechanics circumvent all of that. Is truly an endless cycle - the player wants more narrative options, which is not attainable through mechanics. &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; For instance, in the other thread it is suggested to have an &quot;its not there&quot; card, so non spellcasters can make things go poof, for some reason. Nothing personal, but I think that might be the worst idea ever. &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; If spellcasters are totally dominating the game, as a DM, I will... Hurt them...in a good way of course. If theyre scribing reams of scrolls is problematic, make it harder. Make them only scribable on a full moon, or something. But even so, I simply do not equate a characters ability to interact with the gameworld with spells or skills. &nbsp; &nbsp; I cant even tell you how many times a fighter altered the game with something they did or said. My feeling is that the fighter class may be the most challenging in the game to play *interestingly*, but a lack of player ability is not a good reason to pile on mechanical options. There is no end to it, and the &quot;its not there&quot; card idea is the crystallization of all that. Its almost anti-imagination. What say you?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="MJS, post: 6152247, member: 6747144"] Hello Good People it was suggested to me, in the Narrative Option thread, to start another for the questioning of the premise - so here we are. I had chimed in, with a few others, that I truly do not see the problem at all. My background: Mentzer Red Box kid who quickly moved on to the venerable 1E. It was in 1E where my friends and I made the most system changes. My buddy and I rewrote the UA Barbarian to something we preferred, I wrote tournaments, played a ton of RIFTS, 2E. My 3x mechanic knowledge is mostly from Bioware PC titles, as the old group went off and had families and whatnot. I've played some PF also and find it very familiar in a good way - all the colorful character options I'd simply allowed in 1E are fully flowered in modern systems, and I love that. Ok, that out of the way - I am first off a bit disturbed by the language itself - "narrative control/options". IMO nobody, not even DM, has narrative control of a D&D game, and indeed that is, to me, a defining characteristic. The players play, the DM referees and plays with them, but NO ONE is driving the bus. That's the magic. I keep hearing that fighters, poor fighters, have nothing to do. We've been hearing that, of course, for decades, and to me it seems that the fighter class "cause" is the rallying cry of munchkinism, of video gamey mechanics that make no sense in RPGing. To me, you have to describe your actions. MMORPG mechanics circumvent all of that. Is truly an endless cycle - the player wants more narrative options, which is not attainable through mechanics. For instance, in the other thread it is suggested to have an "its not there" card, so non spellcasters can make things go poof, for some reason. Nothing personal, but I think that might be the worst idea ever. If spellcasters are totally dominating the game, as a DM, I will... Hurt them...in a good way of course. If theyre scribing reams of scrolls is problematic, make it harder. Make them only scribable on a full moon, or something. But even so, I simply do not equate a characters ability to interact with the gameworld with spells or skills. I cant even tell you how many times a fighter altered the game with something they did or said. My feeling is that the fighter class may be the most challenging in the game to play *interestingly*, but a lack of player ability is not a good reason to pile on mechanical options. There is no end to it, and the "its not there" card idea is the crystallization of all that. Its almost anti-imagination. What say you? [/QUOTE]

Verification