The current conversation about dragons should cause us to look back to the history of both D&D and ENWorld. Dragons being too weak has been a complaint for decades in both. In fact, it lead to one of the earliest ENWorld memes: B. A. D. D. Bothered About Disposable Dragons.
D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.
- Thread starter Reynard
- Start date
Micah Sweet
Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
Lingbows are harder to use than crossbows, which were more popular outside of England.
Micah Sweet
Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
Significantly more so, in my case.
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
I know. England, though, was VERY effective with their longbowmen.
We have halflings, but I've never seen a Ling. Now I see that they have their own bows and everything!
Tactics is the big one. A dragon attacking a town would not walk over to a group of armed commoners and attack them on the ground. They would strafe targets with their breath weapon and spells. Plus the old "drop heavy rocks on them"
Check out Vermithrax Pejorative attacking a city in Dragonslayer or Smaug attacking in the Hobbit. Or the Kraken from Clash of the Titans.
And once you get past the 5E super weak dragon......D&D 2E and 3X had not only powerful dragons, but tons of dragon content. Back when a dragon could be a great wyrm 20th level sorcerer with unique magic.
Faolyn
(she/her)
And you can keep doing that.
Their recon shows 50 pirates on the ship but when they get there to attack there's 100 carousing on the deck? Those other pirates were on shore leave and now they're back.
Their recon shows 50 pirates on the ship but when they get there to attack there's 100 carousing on the deck? Those other pirates were sea elves or members of another aquatic species and were off swimming.
Their recon shows 50 pirates on the ship but when they get there to attack there's a skeleton watch of 2 on deck and all else is quiet? They're on shore leave.
Their recon shows 50 pirates on the ship but when they get there to attack there's a skeleton watch of 2 on deck and all else is quiet? Uh-oh, most of them died from a fast-acting zombie plague and are being kept below decks so they don't eat who's left alive.
Their recon shows 50 pirates on the ship but when they get there to attack there's a skeleton watch of 2 on deck and all else is quiet. They're all in hiding, because they saw you scout them.
Unless the PCs have left someone watching the entire time (which is a possibility, of course), they won't actually know why there's suddenly more or fewer pirates. And unless they are unwilling to accept that things go on when they're not watching, you probably don't need that overt a causal chain. Heck, they can probably make one up themselves. Players are good at that. At least mine are.
Faolyn
(she/her)
No, they're not. Because--as has been pointed out to you--lower-level characters (like NPC commoners) still wouldn't be able to hit the ogres in the first place. The higher-level PCs would be hitting them anyway, even if they had full hit points.
Faolyn
(she/her)
So? This fits in with what I said. You don't have time to play it? Same here! I own scores of games I don't have time to play, but you don't see me talking about spending hundreds of posts talking about Kids On Bikes or In Nomine or Star Trek Adventures or Dragonbane. I'd love to play them, no time or the wrong playgroup. You don't want to play a game? Also same here! There's also tons of games I'm simply not interested in playing, because I'm not fond of the genre or system or the available PC options, but again, I'm not spending hundreds of posts talking about Cyberpunk Red or Lancer or Call of Cthulhu or Vampire: the Whatevering.
There's a big difference between what you've been doing and simply not being interested in playing certain games. What you've been doing is trying to poke holes in game mechanics in an attempt to prove that they're bad or illogical or incapable of being done in your edition of choice or things like that, and then hiding behind excuses of "just let me play my way!"
Micah Sweet
Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
Can you provide the names of some of those minion rule-bearing Sim games? That sounds interesting to me, both because I'd like to know what games have that combination and also what games you consider to be Sim.Are you trying to make me guilty by association? Is this really the argument you are trying to make in any good faith? Hopefully not because that seems like you are trying to make the argument more personal than it needs to be.
The explanation is likely simpler than believing that minion mechanics must be Narrativist. The commonality may simply be not valuing or being so dogmatic about the sort of Simulationism that gets bothered by 4e minion mechanics.
I say "the sort of Simulationism that gets bothered" because there are a number of Sim games (even "Process Sim" ones) out that there with rules for minions and mooks.
Are you some sort of Simulationist Purity Tester? If you don't see that as Sim, then that's fine. Call it Emulationism. But that's still doesn't make something "Narrativist."
And this reads to me that you are trying to equivocate here with "narrative" and "Narrativism" in a way that stretches the meaning of both. Respectfully, please cut it out. Trying to turn everything your dislike into "Narrativism," including Emulationism and/or High-Concept Simulationism is NOT helpful in the slightest.
I don't think that the issue is with any "common use definitions" especially after so many years of being in such discussions about GNS, Ron Edwards, and these terms. Sorry, but that argument doesn't pass a basic sniff test.
So if you are going to spend your time ranting and raving against Narrativism, GNS, and Ron Edwards, then wouldn't it be wise to do your due diligence and actually know what these terms and ideas mean that you profess to hate so much any chance you can get even when it's not pertinent?
That said, I don't prefer the term "Narrativist" either. I think that the original term "Dramatism" would have been better, but as I understand it, that term had its own carry-over baggage from the previous GDS theory. I don't know the reasons why Edwards chose the term that he did. I don't care for it personally, but it is what it is. But I do try to use the term correctly in any case. I tend to think of "Narrativism" as being about play being centered around players making dramatic choices for their characters in ways that meaningfully engage with the theme and premise of play.
As a result, I don't think that Narrativism has strong opinions about "minions." Minions don’t force meaningful choices about values, relationships, or character dilemmas. They don't really test the values of player characters. In contrast, there are a fair number of Simulationist games out there that have rules for enemy minions and mooks. However, I acknowledge that such Sim games may be "Not True Simulationist Scotsmen" to you.
Micah Sweet
Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
I'd still like the GM to be able to make an in-fiction causal claim though, and preferably one that doesn't read like it was invented from whole cloth because the GM decided at the last minute to double the number of enemies they had already decided were there.
