Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 3001391" data-attributes="member: 22779">But, why should using the Unearthed Arcana be a sort of benchmark for being a DM?&nbsp; If I chose to use variant rules, that's fine.&nbsp; However, it should be equally acceptable to play a game entirely RAW as well.&nbsp; I would certainly not look down on any DM who did so.&nbsp; In all honesty, I loathe Unearthed Arcana.&nbsp; Mostly because I just don't enjoy tweaking.&nbsp; I want to play.&nbsp; I don't want to design a game.&nbsp; It does not interest me in the slightest.&nbsp; I got all that amateur game designer beaten out of me in 2e when piles of contradictory rules forced me to constantly rework the game in order to use any new material.To me, the best part of being a DM is the creativity of it.&nbsp; Being able to envision an entire world (or at least a part of it) and then expressing that vision to my players.&nbsp; Reinventing rules bores me to tears and I drop games that expect it as fast as I can.&nbsp; I don't want to have to think about the rules.&nbsp; I want rules that work the vast majority of the time.&nbsp; The corner cases I can deal with if they come up or just ignore them.&nbsp; Bag of kittens and great cleave?&nbsp; Meh, never had to worry about it and wouldn't let it bother me if a player ever tried it.&nbsp; Hulking Hurler or whatever?&nbsp; Meh, I trust my players more than enough to know that they won't do that to me.I adore the fact that I can now lean on the rules and know that they aren't going to bog my game down most of the time.&nbsp; To have to go back to the days when every new piece of material that comes out, be it from Dragon or in a book, needs to be thoroughly vetted and play tested would cause me to drop the game entirely.&nbsp; Is there broken stuff out there?&nbsp; Oh yeah, of course there is.&nbsp; However, the existence of specific examples of broken mechanics is not proof that the game is broken.I love playing with a game that works.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 3001391, member: 22779"] But, why should using the Unearthed Arcana be a sort of benchmark for being a DM? If I chose to use variant rules, that's fine. However, it should be equally acceptable to play a game entirely RAW as well. I would certainly not look down on any DM who did so. In all honesty, I loathe Unearthed Arcana. Mostly because I just don't enjoy tweaking. I want to play. I don't want to design a game. It does not interest me in the slightest. I got all that amateur game designer beaten out of me in 2e when piles of contradictory rules forced me to constantly rework the game in order to use any new material. To me, the best part of being a DM is the creativity of it. Being able to envision an entire world (or at least a part of it) and then expressing that vision to my players. Reinventing rules bores me to tears and I drop games that expect it as fast as I can. I don't want to have to think about the rules. I want rules that work the vast majority of the time. The corner cases I can deal with if they come up or just ignore them. Bag of kittens and great cleave? Meh, never had to worry about it and wouldn't let it bother me if a player ever tried it. Hulking Hurler or whatever? Meh, I trust my players more than enough to know that they won't do that to me. I adore the fact that I can now lean on the rules and know that they aren't going to bog my game down most of the time. To have to go back to the days when every new piece of material that comes out, be it from Dragon or in a book, needs to be thoroughly vetted and play tested would cause me to drop the game entirely. Is there broken stuff out there? Oh yeah, of course there is. However, the existence of specific examples of broken mechanics is not proof that the game is broken. I love playing with a game that works. [/QUOTE]

Verification