Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Scurvy_Platypus" data-source="post: 5551756" data-attributes="member: 43283">I can see that. *shrug* It's not something that matters overly much to me, so I won't bother pursuing it.No, we're not talking about that. Water Bob said he didn't like the Tumble skill in a "tolkien-esque universe". I took and take exception to the notion that D&D is a "tolkien-esque universe", despite elements of tolkien being incorporated. There's just as many influences from other writings.And really? You're going to turn around and claim D&D is a "tolkien-esque universe" and cite something like "51% to control a company" as justification for it?"Tumble" is what's being discussed; it's a skill that's a part of the ruleset of D&D/d20 which has been around since 2000. That means D&D as it exists/existed then, not 30 years ago when it was barely more than a wargame.No thank you. As I've said before, I'm actually aware of D&D's history. I don't need to be convinced that tolkien was an element tossed into the melting pot. I also don't accept the contention that LotR was the _primary_ influence, so reading arguments about that being the case isn't actually going to do any good; it's not something debatable to me and therefore I don't have a mind to be changed. I've got an opinion which has served me well for decades and hasn't been in need of revision in this particular case.In order for me to accept that something is a "tolkien-esque universe", it means I have to actually accept that tolkien could/would have written it. I don't see tolkien creating the sort of setting/mythology that we were given with 3.0 D&D.I've got no idea what you're referring to when you say "main core fantasy settings". I'm not talking about fantasy rpgs, I'm talking explicitly about D&D as a game. If you want to claim that Forgotten Realms is a "tolkien-esque" setting... well, I'm sure there's plenty of people willing to fight you on that; I won't bother going there.Ravenloft and Spelljammer are _part_ of the "mythos" of D&D and have shaped and influenced the development of the game, as well as the "implied setting" of D&D. If you can't see any relevance to that and the question as to whether or not 3.0/3.5 D&D is "tolkien-esque" then I don't see how we can have a conversation; you're coming at things from a perspective I just don't get.Again, I'm not arguing about whether Tolkien was an influence; he was, so what? That has little bearing on whether D&D in the 3.0 rules is a "tolkien-esque universe".Second, you completely missed the point I was making about complaining about the modern game relying on origins as somehow justifying a misstatement.Again, I'll use superhero comicbooks to try and explain...Superhero comics are an outgrowth of pulp stories. Superman literally used to jump... "able to leap tall buildings in a single bound". Batman was "the greatest detective".Now, you can't look at an issue of modern superhero comics and say "I don't agree with Cyclops being able to shoot lasers from his eyes. It just doesn't work for me in a Lester Dent-esque universe".To me, that's about the equivalent kind of statement. D&D is and has been about _far_ more than the initial bits of Tolkien inspiration that were tossed in.Now, if you want to only focus on the Tolkien-esque elements of D&D? More power to you, it's your game; knock yourself out. But _don't_ claim that your personal preference is somehow an objective statement of fact regarding the nature of the game. Bits from Tolkien? Sure. Might as well have been written by Tolkien? No. And no, "51%" is A) Not enough to justify calling D&D "tolkien-esque" and B) I disagree with the asseration that Tolkien is that much a core of D&D; I honestly don't think it was back 30 years ago and I certainly don't see it in 3.0, which is the ruleset in question.*shrug*I think some people go far out of their way to claim that D&D is Tolkien. D&D is a lot of other stuff mixed in, including Lovecraft, Leiber, Vance, and Howard. It's also an extremely strong part of historical fantasy patched together willy-nilly; I don't see people referring to D&D as a "historical" game though.D&D's whole magic thing is based off Jack Vance and people frequently refer to the style of spell-casting used in D&D as "Vancian". It's a pretty core element of the rules, it's a pretty core element of D&D as an identity, but I don't see Water Bob complaining about how Tumble works in the Vance-esque universe.At the end of the day, it's really simple from my perspective: I don't see myself budging here... D&D is not "tolkien-esque". Water Bob's objections to the Tumble skill have nothing to do with D&D's implied setting and rules and everything to do with his own personal preferences for what he likes in a game.</blockquote>

Verification