NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="TheCrazyMuffinMan" data-source="post: 3699000" data-attributes="member: 53470">I see a philosophical lean not unlike D&D alignments here:First, we have Tactics vs. Immersion (Priorities)Then, we have Form vs. Content (Methods)Those on the side of Tactics would want to kick ass and chew bubblegum.Those on the side of Immersion would rather immerse themselves in the world, [edit 8/14, 2:49]or alternatively[/edit] live through their character.Those on the side of Form would approach things from the perspective of the medium, rather than the message. Anyone familiar with Marshall McLuhan knows what I'm talking about.Those on the side of Content would approach things from the perspective of gaming content, and put formal issues on the backburner unless the situation specifically called for them.The purest form of Tactics/Form mentality will likely lean towards Munchkin, WoW and the like, due to preconceived notions of the types of game. They will probably focus on levels, xp, and the like exclusively when playing D&D, and they will likely run characters not QUITE like Pun-Pun, but definitely in the same spirit of optimization. Those really interested in pushing the rules of the game to the very limit, in an attempt to come as close to "winning" as one can, ideally as soon as possible, would be Tactics/Form.The purest form of Immersion/Form mentality will likely lean towards Vampire the Masquerade and other obvious immersive games, and freely invoke Rem's Law whenever tactical issues are prioritized. They would think very little of the mechanics and much more of their character. They don't let the dice get "in the way of" interacting with the D&D world. Ryan Dancey seems to be channeling this alignment in the OP, albeit more realistically then my purist hypothetical version of the I/F mindset.The purest form of Tactics/Content mentality will lean towards freeform games and classless ones like Shadowrun, and they would be fond of the mechanical aspects of any game, regardless of medium, and it would likely approach D&D as a specific challenge to building a really good character, and work with the system in order to create a character as good as possible for a certain situation (be it diplomatic, combative, stealth, or anything of the sort.) They would want to aid the party by fulfilling their character's archetype to the best of their ability. Ryan Stoughton's E6, which is all about mechanical balance within an existing ruleset, while maintaining the big picture, has shades of T/C.The purest form of Immersion/Content mentality will likely lean towards many CRPGs, or d20 variants based on existing popular fiction, and they will prioritize their character and their setting, but they won't constrain themselves in either. Many of these would probably want to introduce a crossover character (like a Keyblade Knight) into D&D, and see how a crossover character's mentality would fit in the context of the campaign. ICDungeonmasters could easily lean towards outside inspiration for their segments. The Lunar fan who wants to introduce a Dragonmaster PrC is an example of Immersion/Content mentality.As you can imagine, one can be neutral toward either, or both. I would be considered either Tactics/Content or Neutral/Content, depending on whether I'm playing or mastering. As a player, I am TC nearly all the way. As a DM and a designer, I swing both ways with regards to priorities (T/I). Overall, I would be NC because I can easily go one way or the other if required.</blockquote>

Verification