Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ariosto" data-source="post: 5263677" data-attributes="member: 80487">Therefore, we've got to have a written rule for every damned thing.&quot;Oh, no!&quot; Hussar is certain to protest. &quot;I mean only for the things that I am inclined to argue over!&quot;See, this deal of &quot;if you can make a good case for it being something a sailor would do&quot; is -- in general principle -- pretty standard stuff. The big difference in old D&amp;D is that usually we're not so concerned with &quot;making a case&quot; in the first place. We mainly just assume that adventurers can do stuff.This premise of yours that so much more must be called into question and subject to dice-rolls is a fundamental disjunction, and much of your ax-grinding seems to be in service of that basic assumption.What it comes down to, really, is where the game is.The old D&amp;D game by design is not about a whole lot of things. If someone really wants a game about knitting, then D&amp;D would not leap to my mind! However, if the employment of mighty warriors and wizards in production of sweaters and mittens somehow did become important in a given campaign, then I am sure that rules concerning that would be added.In a more usual campaign, it's unlikely that anyone is chomping at the bit to prevent your character from knitting. Characters do all sorts of things as &quot;color&quot; that are not of any strategic importance. Rolling dice just to confirm that, yes, 9 is greater than 5 is just not where some people see the interest. There are particular things interestingly treated that way, but it is not the constant preoccupation of players.The greatest interest, and what tends to occupy the bulk of time, is in investigation and decision-making. Combat takes up the bulk of dice-rolling, and the reasons it takes up much should not be totally foreign to those it pleases to have it take up more.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ariosto, post: 5263677, member: 80487"] Therefore, we've got to have a written rule for every damned thing. "Oh, no!" Hussar is certain to protest. "I mean only for the things that [I]I[/I] am inclined to argue over!" See, this deal of "if you can make a good case for it being something a sailor would do" is -- in general principle -- pretty standard stuff. The big difference in old D&D is that usually we're not so concerned with "making a case" in the first place. We mainly just assume that adventurers can do stuff. This premise of yours that so much more must be called into question and subject to dice-rolls is a fundamental disjunction, and much of your ax-grinding seems to be in service of that basic assumption. What it comes down to, really, is where the game is. The old D&D game by design is not about a whole lot of things. If someone really wants a game about knitting, then D&D would not leap to my mind! However, if the employment of mighty warriors and wizards in production of sweaters and mittens somehow did become important in a given campaign, then I am sure that rules concerning that would be added. In a more usual campaign, it's unlikely that anyone is chomping at the bit to [I]prevent[/I] your character from knitting. Characters do all sorts of things as "color" that are not of any strategic importance. Rolling dice just to confirm that, yes, 9 is greater than 5 is just not where some people see the interest. There are particular things interestingly treated that way, but it is not the constant preoccupation of players. The greatest interest, and what tends to occupy the bulk of time, is in investigation and decision-making. Combat takes up the bulk of dice-rolling, and the reasons it takes up much should not be totally foreign to those it pleases to have it take up more. [/QUOTE]

Verification