Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 6301119" data-attributes="member: 87792">Heh.&nbsp; In 4e the DM has no less power than in A/oD&amp;D.&nbsp; But what people see is that the non-caster players have more because the abilities are more clearly defined.&nbsp; (D&amp;D casters have always had clearly defined abilities).Yup, and my pleasure <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Fair enough.&nbsp; I was simplifying quite a bit (there's a jump in 4e at 11 and 21 as well).Heh.&nbsp; In my experience you play a very different style of game from me but normally talk sense about it.The thing a lot of people don't get about the Forge&nbsp; is that it's fundamentally got very little to do with D&amp;D.&nbsp; It comes&nbsp; out of the 90s and White Wolf promising things like &quot;A game of personal&nbsp; horror&quot; - and then delivering an experience that was fundamentally not&nbsp; terribly different from e.g. 2E D&amp;D or even GURPS unless you used a&nbsp; lot of GM force to make it so.&nbsp; And a lot of the founders of The Forge&nbsp; (Edwards included) spent a lot of time not getting the game they were&nbsp; promised, and then trying to work out what had gone wrong.And I don't think it's overthinking to a near absurd degree if it's lead to the number of good games that it has <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />I've a degree in mathematics.&nbsp; You're claiming I don't have experience with actual game theory.&nbsp; Riiiight.Then in your own words, what do you mean by playing a role?You can say&nbsp; there's no such thing as pawn stance.&nbsp; I've played games of D&amp;D in&nbsp; it (generally when the DM was terrible and there wasn't much point&nbsp; emotionally engaging).&nbsp; One single counter-example shows claims of&nbsp; non-existence to be false.And &quot;always narratives&quot; is because our&nbsp; monkey brains interpret events as a story even if there is no causal&nbsp; link between them.&nbsp; In any RPG there is generally a causal link between&nbsp; events even if you're using a Wand of&nbsp; I-Wonder-why-someone-invented-this.But it is very obvious that whatever&nbsp; you understand about the version of D&amp;D you play you are making&nbsp; counter-factual assertion after counter-factual assertion about games&nbsp; that don't fit your favoured version of D&amp;D.&nbsp; You can accuse&nbsp; pemerton of not thinking outside the box, but you have no idea as to&nbsp; where the box is.As for why 1980s D&amp;D was so wildly popular,&nbsp; times have changed - and we no longer have Patricia Pulling and BADD&nbsp; giving free publicity to D&amp;D.&nbsp; A lot of the appeal of&nbsp; D&amp;D is fairly thoroughly covered by World of Warcraft and related&nbsp; games.&nbsp; Not all of it but a lot.&nbsp; Especially of the sort of D&amp;D that&nbsp; runs using a referee rather than a GM.&nbsp; If the GM is not there making&nbsp; decisions, but measuring on the map and moving the pieces as directed&nbsp; while not interfering with actual players playing computers are about 1000 times as good at this as any human ever can be.&nbsp; Here you appear to not know the history of D&amp;D back to&nbsp; Braunstein.&nbsp; Dave Arneson invented D&amp;D after a game where he took&nbsp; the predetermined options and binned them; his role was intended to be&nbsp; the Students' Revolutionary Leader in a banana republic, but outside the&nbsp; game he had a fake CIA badge printed, and convinced everyone he was a&nbsp; CIA plant.&nbsp; The appeal of D&amp;D isn't that it's a boardgame or&nbsp; computer game with predefined rules.&nbsp; As I mentioned computers and e.g.&nbsp; World of Warcraft or EVE Online do that better.&nbsp; It's in taking the&nbsp; rules as a starting point and being able to break out of your&nbsp; predetermined options the way that lead Arneson to invent D&amp;D.There have been boardgames with predefined rules as far back as you can go.&nbsp; The appeal of D&amp;D is that it's not one of those.&nbsp; Its something where you do not&nbsp; have to pick from the list of predefined options but can instead do&nbsp; your own thing.&nbsp; And because you have a living breathing human being as&nbsp; GM they are able to adapt to whatever you are trying to do rather than&nbsp; simply saying that you are trying something not on the predetermined&nbsp; list.&nbsp; And in D&amp;D you have never had to stick to the&nbsp; predefined list.&nbsp; Mike Mornard played a Balrog in both Arneson's&nbsp; original campaign and Gygax's.&nbsp; I'm not aware you'll find that as an&nbsp; option in any book prior to Savage Species.&nbsp; For that matter Brown Box&nbsp; D&amp;D has very few rules.The appeal of D&amp;D has always been&nbsp; &quot;We made up some <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> we thought would be fun&quot; - and doing an end run&nbsp; round the rules because you have a DM who is more than a simple&nbsp; referee.&nbsp; It's that, not following the rules, that distinguished D&amp;D&nbsp; from every other game on the market in the 1970s.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Neonchameleon, post: 6301119, member: 87792"] Heh. In 4e the DM has no [I]less[/I] power than in A/oD&D. But what people see is that the non-caster players have [I]more[/I] because the abilities are more clearly defined. (D&D casters have always had clearly defined abilities). Yup, and my pleasure :) Fair enough. I was simplifying quite a bit (there's a jump in 4e at 11 and 21 as well). Heh. In my experience you play a very different style of game from me but normally talk sense about it. The thing a lot of people don't get about the Forge is that it's fundamentally got very little to do with D&D. It comes out of the 90s and White Wolf promising things like "A game of personal horror" - and then delivering an experience that was fundamentally not terribly different from e.g. 2E D&D or even GURPS unless you used a lot of GM force to make it so. And a lot of the founders of The Forge (Edwards included) spent a lot of time not getting the game they were promised, and then trying to work out what had gone wrong. And I don't think it's overthinking to a near absurd degree if it's lead to the number of good games that it has :) I've a degree in mathematics. You're claiming I don't have experience with actual game theory. Riiiight. Then in your own words, what do you mean by playing a role? You can say there's no such thing as pawn stance. I've played games of D&D in it (generally when the DM was terrible and there wasn't much point emotionally engaging). One single counter-example shows claims of non-existence to be false. And "always narratives" is because our monkey brains interpret events as a story even if there is no causal link between them. In any RPG there is generally a causal link between events even if you're using a Wand of I-Wonder-why-someone-invented-this. But it is very obvious that [I]whatever[/I] you understand about the version of D&D you play you are making counter-factual assertion after counter-factual assertion about games that don't fit your favoured version of D&D. You can accuse pemerton of not thinking outside the box, but you have no idea as to where the box is. As for why 1980s D&D was so wildly popular, times have changed - and we no longer have Patricia Pulling and BADD giving free publicity to D&D. A [I]lot[/I] of the appeal of D&D is fairly thoroughly covered by World of Warcraft and related games. Not all of it but a lot. Especially of the sort of D&D that runs using a referee rather than a GM. If the GM is not there making decisions, but measuring on the map and moving the pieces as directed while not interfering with actual players playing [I]computers are about 1000 times as good at this as any human ever can be.[/I] Here you appear to not know the history of D&D back to Braunstein. Dave Arneson invented D&D after a game where he took the predetermined options and binned them; his role was intended to be the Students' Revolutionary Leader in a banana republic, but outside the game he had a fake CIA badge printed, and convinced everyone he was a CIA plant. The appeal of D&D isn't that it's a boardgame or computer game with predefined rules. As I mentioned computers and e.g. World of Warcraft or EVE Online do that better. It's in taking the rules as a starting point and being able to break out of your predetermined options the way that lead Arneson to invent D&D. There have been boardgames with predefined rules as far back as you can go. The appeal of D&D is that it's [I]not[/I] one of those. Its something where you [I]do not[/I] have to pick from the list of predefined options but can instead do your own thing. And because you have a living breathing human being as GM they are able to adapt to whatever you are trying to do rather than simply saying that you are trying something not on the predetermined list. And in D&D you have [I]never[/I] had to stick to the predefined list. Mike Mornard played a Balrog in both Arneson's original campaign and Gygax's. I'm not aware you'll find that as an option in any book prior to Savage Species. For that matter Brown Box D&D has very few rules. The appeal of D&D has always been "We made up some :):):):) we thought would be fun" - and doing an end run round the rules because you have a DM who is more than a simple referee. It's that, not following the rules, that distinguished D&D from every other game on the market in the 1970s. [/QUOTE]

Verification