NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dannyalcatraz" data-source="post: 5459026" data-attributes="member: 19675">No.  But when people are trying to find common ground, certain definitions may not be as useful as others.  As I've pointed out in various IP Piracy threads, "theft" has many definitions, and "copyright infringement" meets several...and no version of theft is all inclusive.But here's the thing: no definition of theft overlaps a crime that is not theft.All I'm trying to get you to do is to work towards a definition of D&D that doesn't draw in games that clearly are not.  And when you have tried opening your definitions to "themes" and "feel" and capture games like Pathfinder, you have done so in a fashion that is overinclusive and thus, not helpful.No, and stop trying to infer when nothing is implied.It's simply a statement that the speaker finds that particular interpretation as somehow lacking.  The speaker may indeed find a wide variety of performances as completely valid, just not his.  At some point, you may find someone cast as JB who gives you the same feeling- say, Billie Piper.  Are you then inflexible when you say "Billie Piper isn't James Bond to me," even after she does 6 movies?  No.  clearly, you just don't care for her in the role.To take the example back to it's roots, those who express "4Ed is not D&D to me" are simply stating that they find 4Ed lacks a certain D&D-ness, not that they are inflexible or denying certain realities.How many games have been published under the D&D brand?  And when I find ONE that doesn't do it for me, I'm inflexible?  Please.</blockquote>

Verification