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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Not a Decepticon" data-source="post: 9772145" data-attributes="member: 7020527">I meant game in the same cathegory Risk is a game - a board game. While RPGs are games, cannot claim they are the same as Risk or Root or Ticket to Ride. A lot of friends I have who are board game geeks and refuse to touch na rpg. Trying to claim D&D is the same as Risk is ridiculous to me. These are different things to me that have completely different design principles. Hell, in the board game sphere itself there are many different categories and D&D does not fit into any of them entierly.That is also inaccurate, Raistlin's health is not there to reflect spell slots, it has a backstory and outside of novels, it comes from trying to reflect how in the original campaign his player tried to roleplay having 3 Constitution. You made up connectio nthat was never there. In fact, Raistlin has coughing fits and needs to rest even when he isn't casting spells or when he has not cast enough for character of his level (remember, Dragons of Despair is for character of minimum 4th level) to run out already.You try to dismiss an argument by using personal experience, then immediatelly try to also dismiss it as personal experience of myself? It really gives a vibe that you think yourself better and that your experiences deserve preferential treatment over others.Except of course where the wargaming/dungeoncrawling leads to having the Archmage forget how to use magic because he hit an arbitrary number of spell slots per day and cannot even detect magic now, becomig gloriffied commonner. Or the ridiculous image of pcs carrying dozens of weapons they are afraid to use out of fear they'll break because they break roughly 3-4 weapons per combat in a crtoonish, looney-tunes style, as both of those are implemented solely to satisfy wargaming/dungeocnrawlign need and have nothing to do with simulation.No, you literally said D&D is like Risk, where if you run out of units, you cannot play anymore. And seriously, this desire to render other player's character into useless sidekick doing menial tasks starts to increasingly sound like some weird gameplay hazing thing. Like if you want the game to forcibly humilate the player for wanting to play it. "No, you don't deserve to play the wizard or archer, you get to play a loser who is there to do menial tasks nobody wants to do, while we, who picked classes without artificial limitations, get to actually enjoy the game".I disagree, the competetivenes is toxic in this game. If players are competetive, it is always grounds for conflcit that will destroy the group, and if DM is competetive...what';s the point? You can just drop Tarrasque at level 1 party and bam, you win! The challenges DM gives to the party should be fair and in service of creating interesting situation in which we can together tell a good story. It should be challenging, but you should not come into it with mindset of killing the party or handing them victory.At this rate I will either write separate post somewhere about it or write my own dungeoncrawler game to prove it.1. So much for not clashing with simulaitonism.2. There are limitations that actually make sense. In case of Thief or Fighter the limitation of doing things they do lies solely with how many opportunnities DM provides to do thievery or fighting. In case of Wizard however, the limitations are artificially enforced by mechanics purely to remind you this is a game.</blockquote>

Verification