Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Thasmodious" data-source="post: 4684705" data-attributes="member: 63272">They are both crap.  GDS was a theory pushed by people who were, to the person, hardcore simulationists arguing that simulation was the one correct way to play.  GNS was a theory that redefined gamism and simulationism as bad and narrativism as the One True Game.Both need to be taken out in someone's back yard, put down, and buried.As for 3e and simulationism, its "nods" were the chief source of the problems of 3e, they brought more inconsistency to the game and made the game world less coherent, not more.  Things from the needlessly over structured grapple rules to the disarm/trip/sunder "options" to the failure of craft/profession to stand in for freedom of character to polymorph and its abuses...  as they developed more subsystems to deal with more situations, the system just developed more holes and less internal consistency.  The class system is another example.  It didn't have real freedom, only a huge list of multiple choice answers that had to keep expanding both to provide new content and to cover new ideas/player interests.  I understand that if you think "simulationism" is important and that you wish to play D&D because of its status, popularity, support, player base, etc., then 4e is problematic for you and that you are left with 3e.  It's also important to note that it was 3e that went in this direction from older editions and that 4e is much more in line with those editions than 3e is.  Placing the game world back firmly in the hands of the DM is the primary reason.</blockquote>

Verification