D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

[Hussar]

The issue is that you are really, really redefining the word and you have never once linked to a source that contradicts the dictionary definition.

I don't need to because at no point am I contradicting the dictionary definition. FFS, look it up.

 

[Hussar]

Knave 2ed is a fantastic purchase. I love games with relatively little starting character building and the bulk of progression is diegetic.

Ooooh, I've never seen that one before. That's NEAT. I like. Heading off to spend money now. SIgh.

 

[FrogReaver]

maybe yall should stop rageposting about the scary and nasty Other Ideas that have polluted your Pure Gygaxian Industry. this thread is full of people actively trying to Deny the validity of non-heavily-prepped-"sim" play. Active hostility to the idea that such play could even have merit. And then you're all like "ohhh but hearing new ideas is offensive to my sensibilities and sooooo upsetting". I know the average user of this forum is a cishet white man in his 50s, but the amount of people who act like they're 7 years old seems to dispute that.

For the 777,777th time, there is nothing wrong with playing other ways. Everyone here has repeatedly said that.

 

[Faolyn]

So anyone that says "I played it, I didn't like it" can just be dismissed by "You played it wrong"? Because that's the answer to everything. I've read up on and watched a couple hours of streams, had numerous discussions around narrative games. I've never had the opportunity to play DW, but I can still form an opinion that it's not for me. All we ever get is "If you really understood it you'd like it as much as I do". It's BS.

We all have preferences, things we like and don't like. Why can't people just accept that?

When those people are actively not following the rules, yes, they can be dismissed.

 

[Hussar]

Have you considered collaborating with the player who wants to try playing a tiefling to make the mechanical and fictional core? They're obviously interested, or they wouldn't have asked it in the first place.

Never minding, just imagine how much depth a setting would have after ten or fifteen years of play with five or six different people collaborating on creation. We're talking a MASSIVE setting with so much depth an detail. And, even better, every single player is actually directly involved in every single aspect. No more six page treatises on elven tea ceremonies that no one cares about and never see play.

 

[TwoSix]

Ooooh, I've never seen that one before. That's NEAT. I like. Heading off to spend money now. SIgh.

Production values on the boxed set are really high. Comes with 5 copies of the core rules booklet for players.

 

[Hussar]

Now, as much as I've sung the praises of collaborative setting building, I do see the real downside here.

I have a player whose primary engagement in RPG's is discovering the setting. He adores peeling back the setting and learning as he goes. He doesn't want to know all about the setting at the outset. So, my approach to sandboxing very, very much doesn't work for him. He hated it. The idea that the person running the game turns to the player when the player asks a question and says, "I dunno, what do you think?" is just very unfun for him.

So, it very much isn't for everybody. I totally get that.

 

[Hussar]

Heh. Perusing Knave 2e and reading through it. Very cool. This one line just totally stuck out with me considering this thread:

Treat the game world as if it was real and work to turn every aspect of it to your advantage. When simulating a living world, no detail is simply "flavor"

I wonder where I heard that before... oh right... that's exactly what I've been saying all the way along. LOL.

 

[AlViking]

I don't need to because at no point am I contradicting the dictionary definition. FFS, look it up.

From the dictionary- Diegetic: existing or occurring within the world of a narrative rather than as something external to that world.

They don't say anything about knowing how. But keep beating that drum.

 

[Maxperson]

This is so frustrating in this thread. I say this three times and I'm told I'm 100% wrong every time. You say it once and everyone agrees. :hrm:

I do not agree with that, though. So not everyone.