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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mercurius" data-source="post: 5457507" data-attributes="member: 59082">I think part of the problem is that you keep trying to pin me down to a specific definition, which I don't have. If you stop doing that you might find that I'm not being "logically dishonest" but that I just take a different approach to thinking than you might want me to; I see thinking as more of an art, a kind of poetry even, than a science or set of laws and rules.And yes, I do believe that the essence, as well as the thematic elements, is more important than the form, the nuts and bolts, and least of all, the rules themselves. I think you could play a game that narrates exactly like D&D but only uses a d20 with no stats but a descriptive understanding of your character for completely DM-decided resolution. That could "feel like" D&D to me, and even be a form of "Ultralite D&D." Now it wouldn't feel the same as AD&D or any current edition, but it would still feel "D&Desque" enough to call it D&D.See, to me D&D is not a game that has either Vancian magic or powers, it is a game where you explore a fantasy world with certain now classic D&D-fantasy archetypes, like elf wizards, dwarf fighters, half-orc barbarians. There are terrible monsters, many of them unique to D&D, there are iconic treasures like the bag of holding and the vorpal sword; there are classic campaign and adventure types, like the dungeoncrawl, the trap-laden maze, the quest to the mountains for the ruined dwarven keep. It is all of these elements and many more, but no specific combination or single element is defining. This is why I think the disagreement around this issue at least partially comes from different types of people and where they put the weight of "what is D&D to them." If one puts the weight on mechanical elements then the issue of Vancian magic vs. powers may be more important. You seem to want to pin me down to a specific definition which, to me, would be artificial and pointless, like trying to stop the flow of a river and take a snapshot saying, "This is the river! This moment." To me that's a limited view, just as it is limited to say "But this snapshot is not the river." The whole flow and movement is the river. Thus any definition that I could possibly come up with would be more descriptive than definitive. </blockquote>

Verification