Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Psion" data-source="post: 2682305" data-attributes="member: 172"><img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/devious.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":]" title="Devious    :]" data-shortname=":]" /> Speaking anecdotally here, but I don't. I find that my normal players DON'T twink the rules and I DON'T have to babysit them. In fact, I'd say my players are quite a bit LESS rulesy than me.OTOH, I think that to find players who are rolled up in the rules as an end not a means are represented here as well, if you go to the right forum. <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    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />You say it does this, but I am not seeing that it does. I've had no problem doing as I've professed: using the rules as a means to facilitate my game.I'm not sure what you are saying here is the right or wrong mode of play. The in game construct is built to approximate those archetypes; those classes were merely assigned alignments that the designer considered to be appropriate to those concepts. If anything, I don't see these conventions enforcing strategic play, because they force you, when playing these character types, to take your character's behavior into account. If you divorce the abilities from the alignment, THEN you are free to metagame the situation and use your class abilities strategically as you please.The record has a scratch in it, because we just skipped a track... <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> Is this thread about comparing your design decisions with D&D's or about whether the current edition is more a strategic game and less a roleplaying game? (Again, not linked conditions.) Because from where I am standing, the D&D experience system has always been about killing things and taking their stuff. In fact, the 3e experience system is, if anything, LESS about killing things:1) The default system does not require that you kill the threat, just meet the goal associated with the threat. Please read the minotaur example in the DMG. (Edit: this is the same section Jim referred you to. Great minds... <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> )2) That is only the default system. In the DMG they break it down for you and say that the real goal of the experience system is to create a certain progression rate, and give you the targeted rates without going through the CR chart, and provide alternate means of providing xp.Some will, of course, hasten to point out that #2 is not the default. Which I will hasten to point out is beside the point. It's a chicken-egg sort of thing. Lots of D&D games aren't about monster bashing because the XP system makes them kill monsters. Rather, the default system is written the way it is because the default playstyle of D&D features monster bashing.But, you see, because of #2, it does not force you into this playstyle. You are free to do something else if this is what your campaign is not about.</blockquote>

Verification