Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Balesir" data-source="post: 5774405" data-attributes="member: 27160">Meh - it's a matter of taste, and different folks have different things they just can't stomach.&nbsp; There doesn't have to be any very logical or factual reason for the dislike - and indeed with added broadmindedness and persistent positive experimentation the dislike might go away - but who are any of us to demand that someone submit themselves to such a degree of work and discomfort just to overcome something that they can easily avoid?The only time I do get a tad peeved is when someone seems incapable or unwilling to either avoid or overcome some dislike and just keeps demanding that the world should be changed to suit their convenience.The DMG and the Monster Builder (original, offline version) do offer some clarification, in fact. It's not explicit on the statblock because, quite simply, it would be more a hindrance than a help during actual play.I think there is a &quot;plausibility link&quot; to the world, here, as well, actually.&nbsp; A level 27 solo Demon Lord who has a Fortitude defence significantly below the &quot;level standard&quot; is not likely to remain a Demon Lord for long. The &quot;Survival of the Fittest&quot; seems to me something that could be expected to apply amongst Demon Lords...The same applies to actual species in the game world. Is this &quot;adding flavour/colour after the fact&quot;? Yes, it is - but on the other hand it is a factor which (a) I would expect to affect any game world and (b) which, in my experience, it is extremely easy to miss when using a &quot;build the world then model it with systems&quot; approach.&nbsp; In general, I think that, if the systems work in a coherent way, the chances are very high that it will be easy to find descriptive, game-world reasons why things work that way. Building plausibility from the ground up, building systems that model game-world processes explicitly, on the other hand, tends very strongly to lead to macro-system inconsistencies. I find D&amp;D (all editions) to be full of these.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Balesir, post: 5774405, member: 27160"] Meh - it's a matter of taste, and different folks have different things they just can't stomach. There doesn't have to be any very logical or factual reason for the dislike - and indeed with added broadmindedness and persistent positive experimentation the dislike [I]might[/I] go away - but who are any of us to demand that someone submit themselves to such a degree of work and discomfort just to overcome something that they can easily avoid? The only time I do get a tad peeved is when someone seems incapable or unwilling to either avoid or overcome some dislike and just keeps demanding that the world should be changed to suit their convenience. The DMG and the Monster Builder (original, offline version) do offer some clarification, in fact. It's not explicit on the statblock because, quite simply, it would be more a hindrance than a help during actual play. I think there is a "plausibility link" to the world, here, as well, actually. A level 27 solo Demon Lord who has a Fortitude defence [B][I]significantly[/I][/B] below the "level standard" is not likely to remain a Demon Lord for long. The "Survival of the Fittest" seems to me something that could be expected to apply amongst Demon Lords... The same applies to actual species in the game world. Is this "adding flavour/colour after the fact"? Yes, it is - but on the other hand it is a factor which (a) I would expect to affect any game world and (b) which, in my experience, it is extremely easy to miss when using a "build the world then model it with systems" approach. In general, I think that, if the systems work in a coherent way, the chances are very high that it will be easy to find descriptive, game-world reasons why things work that way. Building plausibility from the ground up, building systems that model game-world processes explicitly, on the other hand, tends very strongly to lead to macro-system inconsistencies. I find D&D (all editions) to be full of these. [/QUOTE]

Verification