Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
"Railroading" is just a pejorative term for...
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="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 5424809" data-attributes="member: 18280"><p>You mean apart from "Since I'm being told that older editions contained all sorts of rules for tactical play, let's see an example."? If you were not arguing that 1e didn't have rules for tactical play, I wonder why you are questioning what you are told.</p><p></p><p>The extremely strong implication of questioning every statement that tactical options exist in 1e is that you do not believe that they do. When you continue despite being given evidence to the contrary, the extremely strong implication is that you believe that the opinion (that there are no or few tactical options in 1e) is correct regardless of the evidence that it is not.</p><p></p><p>EDIT: And, of course, Jacob Marley has pointed out the exact quote. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin :D" data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Not only does it have a demonstrable mechanical impact in 1e, it has a demonstrative mechanical impact in every edition. It probably has a demonstrative mechanical impact in every rpg.</p><p></p><p>Consider: Even when all opponents are exactly the same, it often makes sense for PCs to concentrate fire on one or two targets, rather than choose targets at random. That way, they have a greater potential to reduce the amount of damage they receive. In 1e, in fact, there are several creatures who offer an advantage when one targets specific body parts. This might be the eye stalks of a beholder, or avoiding the better AC of a lion's mane.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>No one is jumping up and down.</p><p></p><p>But The Shaman is right when he says that 1e offers tactical options, and he is right when he says that how you played it around your tables is not how the game was written. That you failed to avail yourselves of the rules does not reflect upon the rules themselves.</p><p></p><p>In a number of threads, I have noted that your posting has been much more even-handed of late. I have been happy to have opportunity to XP you for it, and I have been happy to point it out in at least one thread.</p><p></p><p>I am the pot calling the kettle black, I am sure, but I'd just like to give you the opportunity to come back from the Dark Side on this topic. Tactical options exist in 1e. That is an objective fact. If you didn't use them, that will surely colour your experience of 1e, much like not using skill challenges will change what 4e feels like. </p><p></p><p>But your experience is not an artifact of the rules; it is an artifact of a failure to use the rules available.</p><p></p><p></p><p>RC</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Raven Crowking, post: 5424809, member: 18280"] You mean apart from "Since I'm being told that older editions contained all sorts of rules for tactical play, let's see an example."? If you were not arguing that 1e didn't have rules for tactical play, I wonder why you are questioning what you are told. The extremely strong implication of questioning every statement that tactical options exist in 1e is that you do not believe that they do. When you continue despite being given evidence to the contrary, the extremely strong implication is that you believe that the opinion (that there are no or few tactical options in 1e) is correct regardless of the evidence that it is not. EDIT: And, of course, Jacob Marley has pointed out the exact quote. :D Not only does it have a demonstrable mechanical impact in 1e, it has a demonstrative mechanical impact in every edition. It probably has a demonstrative mechanical impact in every rpg. Consider: Even when all opponents are exactly the same, it often makes sense for PCs to concentrate fire on one or two targets, rather than choose targets at random. That way, they have a greater potential to reduce the amount of damage they receive. In 1e, in fact, there are several creatures who offer an advantage when one targets specific body parts. This might be the eye stalks of a beholder, or avoiding the better AC of a lion's mane. No one is jumping up and down. But The Shaman is right when he says that 1e offers tactical options, and he is right when he says that how you played it around your tables is not how the game was written. That you failed to avail yourselves of the rules does not reflect upon the rules themselves. In a number of threads, I have noted that your posting has been much more even-handed of late. I have been happy to have opportunity to XP you for it, and I have been happy to point it out in at least one thread. I am the pot calling the kettle black, I am sure, but I'd just like to give you the opportunity to come back from the Dark Side on this topic. Tactical options exist in 1e. That is an objective fact. If you didn't use them, that will surely colour your experience of 1e, much like not using skill challenges will change what 4e feels like. But your experience is not an artifact of the rules; it is an artifact of a failure to use the rules available. RC [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
"Railroading" is just a pejorative term for...
Top