Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Desdichado" data-source="post: 2239431" data-attributes="member: 2205">Kamikaze Midget, I think there's some serious flaws in your argument.  First, your comparison to Chutes & Ladders is a complete non sequiter.  Going off the board is a complete non-option in that game, just as travelling sideways through the fourth dimension is in real life.  D&D, as Willowhaunt alluded, being an RPG is much more open.  By design, it's not merely a set of four or five options for every scenario; it's wide open and players can attempt to do anything they can think of in their capabilities.  Comparing rpgs and board games in this case doesn't say anything to me, because the point of both is different.  My complaint about what makes for good RPG design doesn't apply to board games.  Maybe that's all you're pointing out, but I already knew that, and I assumed that it was implicitly clear that I was talking about roleplaying games, not any game at all.  I'm not sure what you're trying to demonstrate with that whole string of reasoning.And I can accept that D&D was designed under some default assumptions of team-working dungeoncrawling.  However, you're taking my complaint that any (roleplaying) game that only works right in extremely limited conditions, exacerbating it to (IMO) absurd levels, and then saying that it's not a problem after all.  Then, in direct opposition to that position, you say that an RPG shouldn't be as linear and tightly controlled as a computer game.  I don't get what you're trying to say, as it seems you're making all my points for me and then somehow mysteriously coming to the exact opposite conclusion that seems natural to me.And then you say that PC vs PC (with or without an N in front of that) is outside the scope of the game, and if that's what I want, I should be playing something other than an RPG altogether!  This is in spite of the fact that the iconic villains of almost every module ever published are classed NPCs, as well as the villains of most of the game fiction.  Where you're getting the idea that the game isn't about PC class on PC class action is completely beyond me, as that's clearly always been an integral part of the game.And then later, you go on to say stuff that I at least understand, although I disagree strongly with it.  The idea that you must have a "balanced party" of the four iconic PC types is anathema to me.  To me, the whole point of the game is to give players a chance to play a role of their choosing.  I've never been in a group (other than one-shots with pregen characters) where all of the iconic character classes were represented, or in which one role wasn't over-represented.  You may think that it's perfectly fine for the game designers to essentially say, "sorry, man, you're not playing the game "right" so you're on your own," but to me, that is the very definition of bad game design.  So, we'll just have to disagree on that point.</blockquote>

Verification