Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ilbranteloth" data-source="post: 7168231" data-attributes="member: 6778044">So you choose to perceive that people play games without referees because they have something against referees. I don't see the connection at all. People don't play Monopoly or Life because there isn't a referee. They play them because they like the games. And the games just don't happen to have referees. You know what games more people play than any of these? Sports. Most of which have referees. They don't play them because they love referees any more than people play Monopoly because it doesn't. It's flawed logic. To me, that's fundamentally obvious.So we'll have to agree to disagree.In my perception it's not ignoring D&D history because it's based not only on the design of the game, but also the writings of the very people that designed it. I was wrong when I said you're not playing D&D, and much of that post. My point was intended to be that the hobby encompasses a lot of playstyles and games evolve from other games, and that your adventure sounds pretty amazing. Not my cup of tea to play all the time, but pretty amazing. I got way off my point, and that's my bad. I apologize. Based on what you had been describing in some of your other posts, it sounds very much like a video game to me. I'm not saying you try to "twist" it into one, nor do I view that as a negative thing. Just like I don't think that Dungeon World molding a play style of OD&D into a Story Now game is a bad thing. It was intended to be a compliment of how you've been able to take the base of D&D and turn it into something new and different that most of us can't do. If you take offense, that's not my intent. My post clearly didn't portray that.I used the term board game as a description of your style of playing, because that's the term you used. I didn't know it was used as a derogatory term in the past, and don't know if you took offense. Since I wrote the post you're quoting, Tony recapped his understanding of what your play style is, and it's very different from what I understood.At the time you were describing your game as one that you "liked to play like a board game" and that you didn't want the DM to make decisions during the course of the game, that they were all decided before the game. That sounds very much like board game and video game design to me. No offense is meant by that. My point was never to stifle, trivialize, or belittle you or your play style. I can see that I missed that big time in this post. I haven't said once that you needed to do something differently, or that you were wrong in how you play the game. My objections are entirely about statements like the one that started this post: "More people play games without referees, therefore people hate referees." I also object to the term "DM taint." That term in particular really bothers me. I've acknowledged multiple times that I don't think my play style is a majority in any sense, and that the most common approach is most likely that of the casual gamer, that picks up an AP and plays it with the core rules, and a DM that assumes many roles. I don't think that approach is close to yours or mine, we're both outliers in a very broad hobby (from my perception). I'll work to do better.</blockquote>

Verification