Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="SteveC" data-source="post: 9113683" data-attributes="member: 9053">I think sometimes you just have to come out and say it: I don't care. I don't care about rules for digging because I can't imagine them being an interesting part of the fiction that I want to explore. That doesn't mean I don't care about a shovel, for instance, but the existence of a shovel on the equipment list tells me that there will be interesting things for me to dig up as part of the game. If you've played BG3 you know what this means. When I came across a shovel I thought &quot;why do I care about this?&quot; and then I later learned why.The things you put into a game tell you what the designers think are important, or at least they should tell that. In my experience, a lot of equipment in D&amp;D is there because it's always there, and someone arbitrarily said &quot;yeah, that makes sense for it to be there.&quot;You only have limited space in a game and putting things that a majority of players think are important to interact with and will think of as important is how (in my opinion) you should do equipment if you're not going to abstract it. You have a tent, but do you have a tent pole? Stakes to mount the tent with? A tent floor to keep you dry? Don't know, but we assume things, don't we? It's the level which we want to spell things out in detail as opposed to just making assumptions or abstracting them that matters when we discuss equipment.I don't think it's going out too far on a limb to say that many complex use cases for different equipment are more than the typical D&amp;D player wants to go in terms of rules. What we're discussing is where the line is drawn for making that happen.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="SteveC, post: 9113683, member: 9053"] I think sometimes you just have to come out and say it: I don't care. I don't care about rules for digging because I can't imagine them being an interesting part of the fiction that I want to explore. That doesn't mean I don't care about a shovel, for instance, but the existence of a shovel on the equipment list tells me that there will be interesting things for me to dig up as part of the game. If you've played BG3 you know what this means. When I came across a shovel I thought "why do I care about this?" and then I later learned why. The things you put into a game tell you what the designers think are important, or at least they should tell that. In my experience, a lot of equipment in D&D is there because it's always there, and someone arbitrarily said "yeah, that makes sense for it to be there." You only have limited space in a game and putting things that a majority of players think are important to interact with and will think of as important is how (in my opinion) you should do equipment if you're not going to abstract it. You have a tent, but do you have a tent pole? Stakes to mount the tent with? A tent floor to keep you dry? [I]Don't know[/I], but we assume things, don't we? It's the level which we want to spell things out in detail as opposed to just making assumptions or abstracting them that matters when we discuss equipment. I don't think it's going out too far on a limb to say that many complex use cases for different equipment are more than the typical D&D player wants to go in terms of rules. What we're discussing is where the line is drawn for making that happen. [/QUOTE]

Verification