Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="toucanbuzz" data-source="post: 8592014" data-attributes="member: 19270">Here's my take from the video:Theme: style of play will vary so much by individual table that one immutable rule set will not suit every table. Online rule discussions may be fundamentally flawed because of this. A person is arguing from the stance of their style of play and unique game table setup, which may not translate well to another table.0 to 1 min intro D&amp;D co-designer Gary Gygax ideally felt (and wrote) each D&amp;D table should have its own &quot;house rules&quot; and that's how the game should be played. It'll be designed one way, but because each table varies, style of play will vary.1 to 5 mins&nbsp;Online arguments about &quot;how to play D&amp;D (correctly)&quot; likely boil down to simply your table makeup and not the game design itself. Having 4 players or 6 dramatically changes perception of encounter design, combat length, and how groups run combats. Immutable rules are great for online video games that can be &quot;won.&quot; That idea doesn't translate well to D&amp;D. &quot;One size fits all&quot; can't work for D&amp;D because designers don't know your table makeup, what type of games you like to play, etc.Many tables have wildly different reactions to the same exact rules (e.g. this class is overpowered or weak-sauce). Doesn't mean the rules are flawed in any way. Style of play is the variant.6.30+ minsCall for players to understand where other tables are coming from before saying &quot;that's wrong&quot; or &quot;that's not how to play D&amp;D.&quot; Brainstorm of a universal way to communicate to others (e.g. a signature line tag) what kind of game our table likes (e.g. more social). Understanding preferred style of play is paramount to trying to change core game design. (Didn't, but could have cycled back to the beginning. That was the genius of Gygax, to understand back in the 1970s that style of play would vary so much that one immutable rule set wouldn't suit every table).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="toucanbuzz, post: 8592014, member: 19270"] Here's my take from the video: [B]Theme: [/B]style of play will vary so much by individual table that one immutable rule set will not suit every table. Online rule discussions may be fundamentally flawed because of this. A person is arguing from the stance of their style of play and unique game table setup, which may not translate well to another table. [B]0 to 1 min intro [/B] D&D co-designer Gary Gygax ideally felt (and wrote) each D&D table should have its own "house rules" and that's how the game should be played. It'll be designed one way, but because each table varies, style of play will vary. [B]1 to 5 mins[/B] Online arguments about "how to play D&D (correctly)" likely boil down to simply your table makeup and not the game design itself. Having 4 players or 6 dramatically changes perception of encounter design, combat length, and how groups run combats. Immutable rules are great for online video games that can be "won." That idea doesn't translate well to D&D. "One size fits all" can't work for D&D because designers don't know your table makeup, what type of games you like to play, etc. Many tables have wildly different reactions to the same exact rules (e.g. this class is overpowered or weak-sauce). Doesn't mean the rules are flawed in any way. Style of play is the variant. [B]6.30+ mins[/B] Call for players to understand where other tables are coming from before saying "that's wrong" or "that's not how to play D&D." Brainstorm of a universal way to communicate to others (e.g. a signature line tag) what kind of game our table likes (e.g. more social). Understanding preferred style of play is paramount to trying to change core game design. (Didn't, but could have cycled back to the beginning. That was the genius of Gygax, to understand back in the 1970s that style of play would vary so much that one immutable rule set wouldn't suit every table). [/QUOTE]

Verification