Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Orius" data-source="post: 5400951" data-attributes="member: 8863">Honestly, though I think some of the seriousness exists for good reason. The whole element of whimsy seems to me to be something that's a bit harder to codify in the rules.&nbsp; Or at least when you're trying to keep the rules internally consistant.&nbsp; Sometimes it can be highly illogical, and there's always that group of players who just can't handle the illogic and go out of their way to nitpick it to death.&nbsp; Some players do prefer a more serious game, and the whimsical, strange, and funny stuff really sticks out to them, and not in a positive way.&nbsp; It also might be a measure of trying to keep things fair, though that can get into the whole &quot;balance&quot; argument that some long time players occasionally bring up.&nbsp; And you're right to some degree that sometimes WotC takes things a bit too seriously, but occasionally the whimsy ends up being quite geeky. That can be a huge barrier to new players and WotC has a vested interest in attracting new players.&nbsp; And when you get into strange and/or humorous stuff, that starts becoming more subjective.&nbsp; Not everone thinks the same thing is funny or amusing.&nbsp; Some find it rather irritating.&nbsp; For example, some people think it's the height of comedy to quote Monty Python at the table; I think it's an excuse to drop a Great Red Wyrm on the offending party, or just have rocks fall so everyone can die.&nbsp; I think that's kind of the point ByronD was trying to make.&nbsp; It's like games that throw in occasional sci-fi flavor along the vein of Expeditionto the Barrier Peaks.&nbsp; Some people love it, others loudly insist it has no place in D&amp;D whatsoever.&nbsp; So while I do miss some of the whimsy, I admit that it's harder to pull off and it's something that probably needs to take player composition into account.&nbsp; That gives WotC some good reason to tone it down a bit in official products.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Orius, post: 5400951, member: 8863"] Honestly, though I think some of the seriousness exists for good reason. The whole element of whimsy seems to me to be something that's a bit harder to codify in the rules. Or at least when you're trying to keep the rules internally consistant. Sometimes it can be highly illogical, and there's always that group of players who just can't handle the illogic and go out of their way to nitpick it to death. Some players do prefer a more serious game, and the whimsical, strange, and funny stuff really sticks out to them, and not in a positive way. It also might be a measure of trying to keep things fair, though that can get into the whole "balance" argument that some long time players occasionally bring up. And you're right to some degree that sometimes WotC takes things a bit too seriously, but occasionally the whimsy ends up being quite geeky. That can be a huge barrier to new players and WotC has a vested interest in attracting new players. And when you get into strange and/or humorous stuff, that starts becoming more subjective. Not everone thinks the same thing is funny or amusing. Some find it rather irritating. For example, some people think it's the height of comedy to quote Monty Python at the table; I think it's an excuse to drop a Great Red Wyrm on the offending party, or just have rocks fall so everyone can die. I think that's kind of the point ByronD was trying to make. It's like games that throw in occasional sci-fi flavor along the vein of [i]Expeditionto the Barrier Peaks[/i]. Some people love it, others loudly insist it has no place in D&D whatsoever. So while I do miss some of the whimsy, I admit that it's harder to pull off and it's something that probably needs to take player composition into account. That gives WotC some good reason to tone it down a bit in official products. [/QUOTE]

Verification