Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 330347" data-attributes="member: 177">Well, thanks for doing so anyway.&nbsp; Who brought it up wasn't the issue.&nbsp; Having people claim &quot;the book says &lt;X&gt;&quot; without anyone saying where was the issue.&nbsp; *shrug*.&nbsp; I know that the DMG doesn't include as many options as you'd like.&nbsp; However, you seem to be attributing more arrogance and malice to the text that is present.&nbsp; There's no &quot;or else&quot;.&nbsp; There's no statement that &quot;we speak the One True Way&quot;.&nbsp; Additionally, I think you are taking it as advice on how to design worlds when it isn't intended as such.&nbsp; Note that the passage you quote is in the &quot;Running the Game&quot; section, not the &quot;Campaign&quot; or &quot;World Building&quot; section.&nbsp; If they wanted to say that you really couldn't muck with what they wrote, they could have made it painfully clear in those sections.&nbsp; The fact that they didn't suggests that they didn't intend to do so.The very existance of Rule 0 as the most quotable game guideline stands pretty strongly against your belief that they are trying to tell you not to mess with things.&nbsp; Let's remember that the DMG needs to have a lengthy section about using the rules as written.&nbsp; Before you can start talking about how to change the rules, you must understand how the original ones are designed to work, and how to be a good DM.&nbsp; The existance of a section that says, &quot;this is how we intend these rules to be used&quot; isn't a sign of arrogance.&nbsp; It's a sign that the authors realize that many of the readers aren't experienced DMs, and that the rules are complex and subtle, and DMing isn't easy, and that their advice and clarifications as to intent might be useful.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Umbran, post: 330347, member: 177"] Well, thanks for doing so anyway. Who brought it up wasn't the issue. Having people claim "the book says <X>" without [i]anyone[/i] saying where was the issue. *shrug*. I know that the DMG doesn't include as many options as you'd like. However, you seem to be attributing more arrogance and malice to the text that is present. There's no "or else". There's no statement that "we speak the One True Way". Additionally, I think you are taking it as advice on how to design worlds when it isn't intended as such. Note that the passage you quote is in the "Running the Game" section, not the "Campaign" or "World Building" section. If they wanted to say that you really couldn't muck with what they wrote, they could have made it painfully clear in those sections. The fact that they didn't suggests that they didn't intend to do so. The very existance of Rule 0 as the most quotable game guideline stands pretty strongly against your belief that they are trying to tell you not to mess with things. Let's remember that the DMG [i]needs[/i] to have a lengthy section about using the rules as written. Before you can start talking about how to change the rules, you must understand how the original ones are designed to work, and how to be a good DM. The existance of a section that says, "this is how we intend these rules to be used" isn't a sign of arrogance. It's a sign that the authors realize that many of the readers aren't experienced DMs, and that the rules are complex and subtle, and DMing isn't easy, and that their advice and clarifications as to intent might be useful. [/QUOTE]

Verification