Naked contradiction is fine, but you'd be a lot more convincing if you were willing to tackle any of the issues I'm bringing up. If I started bringing up the problems with a having narrow wheels on an all steel body car with a high center of gravity, and you just told me, "It always worked for me." you wouldn't really convince me you had a lot of experience with the car no how matter how you told me you still drove one weekly.
So I think this conversation may have got off to the wrong foot a little.
If you thought that my post was an insult to you, I apologize I didn't intend that.
My point was more addressing the assertion that running a game based on rulings somehow means you can't have an objective game. My assertion was that with practice and learning, it is indeed possible to run a game based on rulings that is 100% objective.
It is something that requires work and study and skill. This is a statement of fact and not a supposition of your own capabilities as a DM. In fact, it is something that I work on all the time and try to improve at. Personally, I feel the work I put in helps make me a better DM, so I find the endeavor worth it and satisfying. I love D&D and anything that helps me be better at it is something worth doing. I also run and play 5E... the same work helps me be better at that game as well.
To the actual post:
I'm really not sure of what I need to convince you. You said this, here:
When someone says "old school games play absolutely fine" it really makes me wonder if you played them. Like as soon as I read the 'scent' rule in 3.0e, I smelled the 1980's and the old pizza and the table arguments as we tried to get realism and the rules to mesh into something everyone at the table agreed to. And if that didn't happen for you, were you even there?
You are projecting your own experiences on me.
You are making the assertion that older versions of D&D are broken and old and busted and are to be abandoned for newer versions. I simply don't share the same viewpoint or experiences with the game. You go on to assert that if I don't have a similar outlook as you towards the game, then I'm lying and I have not actually played these games.
This is a ridiculous assertion.
I don't need to convince you or anyone. If you don't believe me, I don't care.
I don't need to tackle any of the issues you bring up. You already have a multitude of versions of D&D that serve you better. Enjoy playing those games.
Last edited: