Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Desdichado" data-source="post: 8231001" data-attributes="member: 2205">This is an interesting question to me, because regardless of what your tastes and preferences are, I think it's fairly obvious to anyone who really looks at it for a moment, that D&amp;D does a poor job of emulating exactly the same source material that it says it's largely based on. Sometimes people say that D&amp;D is &quot;generic&quot; fantasy, but that's clearly not true; there are a lot of very unique implied setting assumptions built into the system. It's probably better to say that it's broad rather than generic, i.e., you can do a lot of different things with it. But you can't do everything, without making some pretty substantive hacks to the system to change those implicit setting assumptions. And classic sword &amp; sorcery of the type that filled up the old Appendix N is very poorly handled by D&amp;D.And as has been amply pointed out by now, Appendix N wasn't just a handwavey &quot;inspirational reading&quot; list; it was a list that Gygax prepared of very specific works that contributed in some way to the milieu of D&amp;D. Anyway, that doesn't offer much, so sorry. Carry on! I'll be watching this thread a bit.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Desdichado, post: 8231001, member: 2205"] This is an interesting question to me, because regardless of what your tastes and preferences are, I think it's fairly obvious to anyone who really looks at it for a moment, that D&D does a poor job of emulating exactly the same source material that it says it's largely based on. Sometimes people say that D&D is "generic" fantasy, but that's clearly not true; there are a lot of very unique implied setting assumptions built into the system. It's probably better to say that it's [I]broad [/I]rather than generic, i.e., you can do a lot of different things with it. But you can't do everything, without making some pretty substantive hacks to the system to change those implicit setting assumptions. And classic sword & sorcery of the type that filled up the old Appendix N is very poorly handled by D&D. And as has been amply pointed out by now, Appendix N wasn't just a handwavey "inspirational reading" list; it was a list that Gygax prepared of very specific works that contributed in some way to the milieu of D&D. Anyway, that doesn't offer much, so sorry. Carry on! I'll be watching this thread a bit. [/QUOTE]

Verification