Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Scott Christian" data-source="post: 8759701" data-attributes="member: 6901101">Can I offer a different perspective?Your entire argument comes from the framework that this is a game with one person. Like they are able to turn the sliders on/off as if in a single player video game. But this is a group game. So what rolls out can bleed into other people's games. Here are a few examples:<ul>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">ASI being removed, so two players at the table want to use it as their build style. This influences the other players' decisions while they build their characters. And even if they don't like, there is a psychological cog wheel on the table that doesn't allow them to forget it.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">One player in the group really likes 4e. The DM hates it. The others don't care. Who wins? (And you could say that the 4e person could go elsewhere, but have some sympathy. These are his/her friends. They want to play together.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">One player is an optimizer to the maximizer's limit. By fifth level their damage now triples the other PCs. Some players don't care. One really does. It bothers this player, and even though they like to play their character with a theme, which often forces them to not optimize, they feel the need to.</li>
</ul>The reason people debate changes, editions, playstyles, etc. is because there is a very good chance those things will bleed into their game, whether they want them to or not. So once someone insists on playing a lizardman that is lawful good, then that sets the precedence for others to do something equally absurd (in this case, absurd for this table).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Scott Christian, post: 8759701, member: 6901101"] Can I offer a different perspective? Your entire argument comes from the framework that this is a game with one person. Like they are able to turn the sliders on/off as if in a single player video game. But this is a group game. So what rolls out can bleed into other people's games. Here are a few examples: [LIST] [*]ASI being removed, so two players at the table want to use it as their build style. This influences the other players' decisions while they build their characters. And even if they don't like, there is a psychological cog wheel on the table that doesn't allow them to forget it. [*]One player in the group really likes 4e. The DM hates it. The others don't care. Who wins? (And you could say that the 4e person could go elsewhere, but have some sympathy. These are his/her friends. They [I]want[/I] to play together. [*]One player is an optimizer to the maximizer's limit. By fifth level their damage now triples the other PCs. Some players don't care. One really does. It bothers this player, and even though they like to play their character with a theme, which often forces them to not optimize, they feel the need to. [/LIST] The reason people debate changes, editions, playstyles, etc. is because there is a very good chance those things will bleed into their game, whether they want them to or not. So once someone insists on playing a lizardman that is lawful good, then that sets the precedence for others to do something equally absurd (in this case, absurd for this table). [/QUOTE]

Verification