Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
People are Squishy (Abstract combat).
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Argyle King" data-source="post: 6067380" data-attributes="member: 58416"><p>Further thoughts:</p><p></p><p>Everything I mentioned in my last post are things I can to -some extent- ignore as long as I feel that I am still able to play what I want to play and be able to have the type of experience that I want to have. The amount of fun I'm having increases my ability to ignore parts of a game I might find undesirable. To that end, I'm thankful to have friends who are pretty good GMs.</p><p></p><p>The problem is when -on top of what I mentioned in my last post- I find that I have a difficult time telling the stories I want to tell and/or engaging in the fantasy I want to indulge myself with. As I've grown older alongside D&D, I've found that (in my opinion) I have less ability to entertain some types of fantasy which are dear to me. Books, movies, video games; ones which were influences on me because I loved them fit very poorly into D&D. Looking back on it, they perhaps never really did fit well, but I feel as though they fit even more poorly now than they did before, and I'm not so sure that trend will not continue when I look at the future of the game. </p><p></p><p>For other people, the complete opposite is true. The game of today marries excellently to the influences they grew up with, and the influences they still have today. I think that is fantastic for them. I will never begrudge someone for having fun. Games are meant to be fun. What's fun for me might not be fun for somebody else. I understand and accept that. Still, it's strange to me that the most popular (or at least most financially successful) rpg has such a wide gulf between what I want, and what some other people want. I'd be willing to make sacrifices toward a middle ground; I do that all the time even among the circle of friends I most commonly game with. </p><p></p><p>I too often feel D&D is too heavily set on a course which is drifting more and more away from my desires; even in spite of currently having a claimed goal of reaching a middle ground. Truth be told, I'm perfectly fine with that. I have other games which I've come to know and love, and I've also gotten to a place where I can enjoy D&D (mostly because those other games satiate the desires I have which D&D cannot fulfill.) That being said; in a time when the game is moving forward, and amongst a conversation about the game, I feel it worth mentioning that I do not believe the company behind D&D understands why I like what I like or why I don't like what I don't like. I have no qualms about playing the game, but -if the intent is to get me to buy it; spend money on it- more effort needs to be made to understand those things. Realistically, I don't expect a large company to care about one person.</p><p></p><p>In the context of this thread, what I'm trying to get at is I can ignore things which bother me in one area of a game if a different area of a game is fun enough for me to do so. Currently, I find that I have to work hard to ignore how the mechanical parts of the game work. On the other side of the coin, I also find that I have a lot of difficulty engaging in the fantasy I want to engage in because it's a poor fit for the game. That's a double whammy. What I find ironic about it all is that the current fluff behind the game is some of my favorite; unfortunately, I find that D&D currently doesn't seem to tell its own story very well either. The relationship between the two parts of the game (fluff and crunch) don't (in my opinion) compliment each other well, and I see that being a trend which will continue in the future. </p><p></p><p>It will still sell; I have no doubts at all about that. Whether or not I'll be one of the people buying it remains to be seen. Stances currently being what they are, chances aren't looking so good. So, for now, I'm just a guy on Enworld trying to express why I like the things I do. Realism doesn't need to be lame. It doesn't need to be a binary thing either. There often seems to be an argument that I'm asking for some manner of perfect physics engine when I say that I want more realism in my fantasy. That's not what I want at all; I'd just prefer more of a nod toward plausibility than what I feel the game currently gives. I'd like to feel that the game is at least close enough in its vision to mine that I don't need to keep in mind a whole second set of reality when I engage the game world. Even if sacrifices are made and I'm compromising my vision, I'd at least like the lines to be blurred enough that I don't really notice the things that I notice now... or at least notice them less.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Argyle King, post: 6067380, member: 58416"] Further thoughts: Everything I mentioned in my last post are things I can to -some extent- ignore as long as I feel that I am still able to play what I want to play and be able to have the type of experience that I want to have. The amount of fun I'm having increases my ability to ignore parts of a game I might find undesirable. To that end, I'm thankful to have friends who are pretty good GMs. The problem is when -on top of what I mentioned in my last post- I find that I have a difficult time telling the stories I want to tell and/or engaging in the fantasy I want to indulge myself with. As I've grown older alongside D&D, I've found that (in my opinion) I have less ability to entertain some types of fantasy which are dear to me. Books, movies, video games; ones which were influences on me because I loved them fit very poorly into D&D. Looking back on it, they perhaps never really did fit well, but I feel as though they fit even more poorly now than they did before, and I'm not so sure that trend will not continue when I look at the future of the game. For other people, the complete opposite is true. The game of today marries excellently to the influences they grew up with, and the influences they still have today. I think that is fantastic for them. I will never begrudge someone for having fun. Games are meant to be fun. What's fun for me might not be fun for somebody else. I understand and accept that. Still, it's strange to me that the most popular (or at least most financially successful) rpg has such a wide gulf between what I want, and what some other people want. I'd be willing to make sacrifices toward a middle ground; I do that all the time even among the circle of friends I most commonly game with. I too often feel D&D is too heavily set on a course which is drifting more and more away from my desires; even in spite of currently having a claimed goal of reaching a middle ground. Truth be told, I'm perfectly fine with that. I have other games which I've come to know and love, and I've also gotten to a place where I can enjoy D&D (mostly because those other games satiate the desires I have which D&D cannot fulfill.) That being said; in a time when the game is moving forward, and amongst a conversation about the game, I feel it worth mentioning that I do not believe the company behind D&D understands why I like what I like or why I don't like what I don't like. I have no qualms about playing the game, but -if the intent is to get me to buy it; spend money on it- more effort needs to be made to understand those things. Realistically, I don't expect a large company to care about one person. In the context of this thread, what I'm trying to get at is I can ignore things which bother me in one area of a game if a different area of a game is fun enough for me to do so. Currently, I find that I have to work hard to ignore how the mechanical parts of the game work. On the other side of the coin, I also find that I have a lot of difficulty engaging in the fantasy I want to engage in because it's a poor fit for the game. That's a double whammy. What I find ironic about it all is that the current fluff behind the game is some of my favorite; unfortunately, I find that D&D currently doesn't seem to tell its own story very well either. The relationship between the two parts of the game (fluff and crunch) don't (in my opinion) compliment each other well, and I see that being a trend which will continue in the future. It will still sell; I have no doubts at all about that. Whether or not I'll be one of the people buying it remains to be seen. Stances currently being what they are, chances aren't looking so good. So, for now, I'm just a guy on Enworld trying to express why I like the things I do. Realism doesn't need to be lame. It doesn't need to be a binary thing either. There often seems to be an argument that I'm asking for some manner of perfect physics engine when I say that I want more realism in my fantasy. That's not what I want at all; I'd just prefer more of a nod toward plausibility than what I feel the game currently gives. I'd like to feel that the game is at least close enough in its vision to mine that I don't need to keep in mind a whole second set of reality when I engage the game world. Even if sacrifices are made and I'm compromising my vision, I'd at least like the lines to be blurred enough that I don't really notice the things that I notice now... or at least notice them less. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
People are Squishy (Abstract combat).
Top