Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Snarf Zagyg" data-source="post: 8423750" data-attributes="member: 7023840">Yep. I admit to using the term "rules" loosely. But generally, I think that "rules" here means "written mechanics for action resolution (and subsystems)." Heuristics and norms can function as informal rules, and that's not what I was thinking of.I think that the 3e / PF "mindset" is definitely the target- but I would posit that the original appeal to history and name would go back to the Arnesonian/Gygax divide. It's a mindset; when applied to D&D, it would be someone looking at the past, and one person would say, "The issue was that OD&D went to worse rules with AD&D." Another person would say, "The issue was OD&D added unnecessary rules."More particularly and in a modern sense, you can look at the cunning action example. A proponent of the 5e system of play would see that cunning action applies in a way similar to a "keyword" and would seek to use it whenever the ability allows, despite the fiction.A person who is interested in the design might believe that the issue is that the rule doesn't accurately model the fiction, and the rule should be improved (designed to match the fiction better).An FKR devotee would believe that the issue is that there is a rule at all, and that the player would be better off not having to be beholden to the character sheet.I don't think any of these are correct or incorrect, but they are different outlooks. Agree. Is that controversial? I know that there is a decent contingent of people that like "structured" combat and "unstructured" role-play. Agree. Partly agree. I think that there is a strong resistance with a lot of people to "dice rolling exercises" but that many of them also like being able to use dice to overcome challenges. So, not sure on this? Agree, to the extent we are discussing most forms of D&D. D&D is generally predicated on the GM pacing the fiction, and ensuring the content is satisfactory. On this, I'm not sure. My own observation is that there tends to be a divide in approach between the "3e" player, the "1/2e player," and the "OD&D" It's a generalization that isn't always applicable, but (for example) the 3e player tends to be more focused on social skills as part of the game, the 1/2e player is more focused on the strict divide between crunchy combat and free role-play, and the OD&D player is more concerned with is amplification. The "4e" player, on the other hand, tends to be more open to skill challenges and or fiction-first. <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=";)" />IMO, YMMV.</blockquote>

Verification