Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Desdichado" data-source="post: 3328867" data-attributes="member: 2205">TX, you could really benefit from learning to use the quote button...Logical fallacies are the most any of us can do in life?  What?!I was under the impression that you were talking about AD&D, not OD&D.  Yes, Arneson was instrumental in the concept of D&D and editions prior to AD&D, but you're going out on a limb that I don't think you want to go out on with that claim now.  Either you're talking specifically about AD&D or you're not.  If not, then I'll happily point out that 3e D&D is just as much based on OD&D as AD&D is.But you're not actually quoting any rules, you're just summarizing their effect.  You really haven't presented anything---convincing or otherwise---about their details.  And besides---what you have described isn't really much different than what every single RPG ever created uses, so to present a vague summary that describes almost every RPG ever printed and then claim that that's the core of the 1e "feel" is at least disingenious, if not outright nonsensical.Except that players all over the place DO read the DMG.  Besides, your description is no different than the way 2e or 3e or 3.5e is organized anyway.That is patently untrue.  If that's your preferred style, you can easily do that in d20 too.  I know.  I've done it.  The work still has to be done by the DM of course, but if the DM's doing the work, why does the player even care what the system is?  And the if the DM's doing the work, at a certain point, why does he care about all the details of the system--he can assign them on the fly and the players will be none the wiser.  Here's where we get to one of your other logical fallacies (and a new one!  yay!) too--1) that all groups played the way you do (we didn't, nor did anyone I know) and the new one, 2) that your rather unusual playstyle was actually the norm for 1e and therefore constitutes it's "feel."I've seen this very frequently from you--you make very extraordinary claims about what 1e and 1e alone can do, when in fact your claims are not all the remarkable, and practically any RPG system worth the paper it's printed on can do the exact same thing.  You're ascribing to 1e uniqueness that it doesn't actually have at all.  It does have uniqueness, yet bizarely, you're ignoring the uniqueness it does have to make these other rather extraordinary claims.The cynical side of me would say that's because the uniqueness 1e does have is actually a weakness to it, not a strength, so you're scrambling about trying to shore up reasons why you prefer it that don't actually make any sense to someone who's used 1e, 3e and various other systems frequently.  If 1e is what you prefer, just be happy preferring it.  Like the Apple Jacks commercials where the dad asks the kids why they like Apple Jacks when they don't even taste like apples, just say, "because we like it" and move on.  You don't need to go to these elaborate lengths to try to constantly "prove" to us that 1e is a great system.  Especially when your "proofs" actually prove nothing of the sort, and most of the arguments you're putting forth for 1e's strengths actually apply equally well to 3e anyway.</blockquote>

Verification