Lidgar
Gongfarmer
Merric describes some aspects of D&D that I can identify with - at least in terms of mechanics. From an emotional, non-mechanics view, D&D is many other things - but foremost for me it is telling a story, and the rules help tell the story. Many other game systems try to do this, and some do it quite well - but the best systems/versions have rules that do not get in the way of this fundamental purpose. Rather, they enhance it.
How can the rules do this most effectively? Well, in my opinion, they obviously need to flexible, and allow limitless flexibility. Hence the prime difference between D&D and a computer game. In D&D, I want my PC to feel like he can do anything within the fantastical limits of an RPG. As a DM, I want my players to get into their characters - that they have personality, individual drives, passion, and are fun to play.
D&D to me is not (necessarily) about optimizing ad nauseam. It involves tactics at times, but that is but a piece of the whole. It is about NPC's that (as a DM) you thought were simply straw men but actually become important story elements due to the actions of PCs. It is about spontaneity.
I am not sure what 4e is. I do not have the books, and have not played it yet. My group is sticking with 3.5 for now, but we may try it out. As a DM, my only, somewhat strange issue I see with it is minions. I understand why they did it - makes for great cinema - but something in me just cringes at the thought these poor buggers never have a chance. I can't count how many time a "minion" in a previous edition became an important story element because they were wounded and then surrendered, charmed, or through some lucky roles ended up being a more long term nemesis. While I suppose this is still possible under 4e, it seems these opportunities have become greatly limited - encounters feel more set in terms of outcomes. The PCs are expected to quickly dispatch the minions only to get to the real fight with major NPC's. That just feels a bit shallow to me. But again, i have not played it, so maybe this is not the case at all...
How can the rules do this most effectively? Well, in my opinion, they obviously need to flexible, and allow limitless flexibility. Hence the prime difference between D&D and a computer game. In D&D, I want my PC to feel like he can do anything within the fantastical limits of an RPG. As a DM, I want my players to get into their characters - that they have personality, individual drives, passion, and are fun to play.
D&D to me is not (necessarily) about optimizing ad nauseam. It involves tactics at times, but that is but a piece of the whole. It is about NPC's that (as a DM) you thought were simply straw men but actually become important story elements due to the actions of PCs. It is about spontaneity.
I am not sure what 4e is. I do not have the books, and have not played it yet. My group is sticking with 3.5 for now, but we may try it out. As a DM, my only, somewhat strange issue I see with it is minions. I understand why they did it - makes for great cinema - but something in me just cringes at the thought these poor buggers never have a chance. I can't count how many time a "minion" in a previous edition became an important story element because they were wounded and then surrendered, charmed, or through some lucky roles ended up being a more long term nemesis. While I suppose this is still possible under 4e, it seems these opportunities have become greatly limited - encounters feel more set in terms of outcomes. The PCs are expected to quickly dispatch the minions only to get to the real fight with major NPC's. That just feels a bit shallow to me. But again, i have not played it, so maybe this is not the case at all...