The Elegance of d20 and D&D

Rel said:
I must agree. Librarius, speaking as a moderator, there is nothing strictly against the rules with your posts dripping with condescention. Speaking as a fellow poster, I find myself not wishing to bother reading your posts as I anticipate an encounter with same.

What lol, you are joking right, "dripping with condescention" well non was added,

Please feel free not reading my posts, that is fine as a poster,
but as a Mod, if you are go around allowing certain people to call others smarmy you are not doing your job,
 

log in or register to remove this ad

librarius_arcana said:
What lol, you are joking right, "dripping with condescention" well non was added,

Please feel free not reading my posts, that is fine as a poster,
but as a Mod, if you are go around allowing certain people to call others smarmy you are not doing your job,

Considering that each and every post you've made in this thread has contained some snippet that has implied your own superiority or the inferiority in experience or effort on the part of the person whom you're quoting, I felt it was descriptive. If you wish to be a valued member of this community, I suggest seeking a way to get your (potentially valid) points across in a manner that does not insult those to whom you are speaking.

And if you've got a problem with my moderation, feel free to e-mail me about it.
 

librarius_arcana said:
if you are go around allowing certain people to call others smarmy you are not doing your job,

Librarius Arcana, welcome to a three-day ban. During this time, please consider the wisdom of

a) being polite to people when you post
b) especially being polite to moderators. Rel was giving you some advice, you throw it back in his face. Not big and not clever.
 

librarius_arcana said:
...And as to fact, there will always be people like you who seem to need to argue the length of a pieice of string...
I've snipped out some of the vitriol to just reply to this. I think all I was trying to point out was that I would have liked some detail - in fact a single piece of detail would have been appreciated. :) The length of a piece of string? No. An initial and cursory unfurling of the twine? Yes. ;) Such is a polite way to converse upon the boards here as evidenced by other people on this thread who share your opinion but have articulated their reasons well.

I can understand that you believe what you believe very forcefully. But next time (in a few days) perhaps you could explain the whys as well as the whats. And chill too, Enworld's a pretty friendly place if you're a friendly person. :)

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise
 

Catsclaw227 - I'm not sure when the article will show up on the web site. Two of them are in the can, and I have two more concepted out. I think I'll do the elegance on first. Assuming that one of the articles shows up every other week, it'll about 4 or 5 weeks.

Mods - Thank you.
 

Turjan said:
With skill (or feats), I can principally understand a "variable cost" model. If you think of two skills that, by themselves, are only moderately useful but, taken together, give a big synergism boost, I can imagine a system where buying each of the skills alone is cheap, but buying the second one would cost considerably more. This would result in a very complicated table for skill costs, but the result would be "more balanced". Which is better? That depends on taste. Most popular games seem to target for some kind of middle ground.

As we move further into the computer age, I can see this becoming more & more viable. We are probably not that far away from a time when we can expect that "everyone" will have access to a computer for recreational purposes, or it being cheap enough to include a character generation electronic gadget with a RPG. In the first case, you could include a CD-ROM with the RPG.

All of that can be briefly covered in the game, but the electronic gizmo can do all the math out-of-sight. Rules light games will still have their advantages, but complex character generation methods will move closer to seeming to be "rules light."
 

Just to clarify my position here a bit. I am not saying that DnD is the model of elegance and all other games are poor comparisons.

Good grief, that's not true.

I was simply taking exception to some of the exampled ineligancies. For example the HD=CR=LA. There's simply no way to do it.

If HD was the yardstick, that would mean that all creatures of a given hit dice would have to be equivalent challenges to the party. This would mean that creatures of a given HD would have to all be the same. Within a given CR, you can have a high AC, low damage output creature and a low AC high damage creature. As a challenge to the party, they are roughly equivalent. But, the only way to do this is to fiddle with the hit dice.

If both creatures had the same hit dice, they would not be equivalent challenges. Never mind adding in things like DR, SR and other traits as well.

As was mentioned, elegant has to work. A rule which requires individual interpretation by the DM is not elegant. It's simple, that's true, but it's not elegant.

Simple =/= elegant. As Treebore said, elegant has to get the job done. In a situation where it is a complex issue, then the rule will need to be complex enough to resolve the issue.

For example, if I made a rule that all fighters hit 50% of the time, that would be extremely simple. Flip a coin and you can attack. No modifiers other than what your DM allows. That's simple. It's about as elegant as a pregnant water buffalo. There are just far too many unanswered questions. As a mechanic, it simply doesn't work. It could work if the DM was on the ball enough to make it work, but, that's the point.

You shouldn't have to make elegant rules work. If a rule is elegant, it should work all on its own.
 

mearls said:
Catsclaw227 - I'm not sure when the article will show up on the web site. Two of them are in the can, and I have two more concepted out. I think I'll do the elegance on first. Assuming that one of the articles shows up every other week, it'll about 4 or 5 weeks.

Thanks for the update. An article on elegance would be very interesting coming from an experienced designer like yourself.
 

Well, I think I'll add a piece of internet wisdom here....

edited for content. Try something more wise and less nasty next time - Plane Sailing
 
Last edited by a moderator:


Remove ads

Top