Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="steeldragons" data-source="post: 7158233" data-attributes="member: 92511">There has been no indication from any numbers I've seen over the past couple of years (as far as has been shared here on Enworld) that 5e's &quot;design&quot; or level of &quot;balance&quot; is leading to any &quot;sizable chunks of the game's fan base to leave.&quot; If anything it has brought significant chunk back and seems to be drawing in new players in a way D&amp;D hasn't since the 80's.&lt;Emphasis mine&gt; Why does this read to me so much as hearing, &quot;Resistance is futile&quot; from a chorus of robotic voices?I think I may have found something that could be a cause of some of the...&quot;misunderstanding&quot; and cross-talk:So, when you say, &quot;games&quot;....what do you mean? I've seen in your posts the terms &quot;gamers,&quot; &quot;gamists,&quot; &quot;game designers,&quot; and of course &quot;games&quot; thrown around as if some universal standard. What do you mean? You can not defend a certain definition of a term with other different specialized and undefined terms. Athletics contests are balanced because everyone is [supposed to be] following the same rules...same team sizes...and we're told from an early age that &quot;cheating&quot; is morally and ethically objectionable as it makes things unfair. Some side will win. Some side will lose.Board games, which are largely just elaborately dressed up &quot;races&quot; - follow the path, get the end/finish line first - are similarly &quot;balanced&quot; by those involved...because everyone is following the same rules and [presumably] not cheating. Your adversaries are known quantities (however many people are on the board with you). You objective is clear. Someone will win. Everyone else loses. Video games by and large can go a multitude of directions, but at a point have no choice but to be similarly linearly constrained. Number of character options, costume choices, possible directions or choice of action...Only so many options of code can be facilitated to take things in divergent directions. There are not so much &quot;rules&quot; in video games as there are &quot;options of code.&quot; Why can't I do &quot;X&quot;? Because &quot;X&quot; wasn't written into the game, i.e. the computer can not just decide to &quot;let you.&quot; It's not about following or breaking rules...it's about what the code is &quot;designed&quot; to allow. You win...if you're playing interconnected games, maybe you have some pals who also win with you.Miniatures wargames and/or 3D &quot;tactical&quot; recreations/simulations are, again, &quot;follow this preset system of accepted rules. No cheating.&quot; Winner. Loser.D&amp;D (as one of the first) and all TTRPGs, actually, is NOT like other games. TTRPGs are NOT designed to play like other games. They are designed to play within the imagination, even if you are using &quot;maps and mini's.&quot; Yes, there are accepted &quot;rules&quot; to provide a framework &quot;norm&quot; that people understand and can be followed to gauge wealth, powers, advancement...give you some things to strive to achieve or succeed at...Note: &quot;achieve&quot; and &quot;succeed,&quot; not &quot;win.&quot; But there is no direct or set &quot;us vs. them.&quot; It's &quot;You IN [not necessarily &quot;Against&quot;] the [Fantasy/Scifi/Superheroes/etc...] World.&quot; The game just keeps going...as long as you want it to...there is no finish line, no World's Cup, no &quot;Blackjack!&quot; Saying &quot;all games...,&quot; as relates to D&amp;D, gets a discussion/debate nowhere. Comparing board games or video games to a TTRPG and saying &quot;Why doesn't it ---- like this...&quot; will never get you anywhere.They are different animals and just throwing the term &quot;games&quot; around or cordoning off yourselves as &quot;gamists&quot; or &quot;gamers&quot; [I liked that, as if &quot;roleplayers&quot; are not &quot;gamers&quot;] like it's something universally different (because you've decided to define it and identify as such) will not get any discussion anywhere...nor, for that matter, convince anyone of any preferences or perspective that &quot;Huh, I guess shoak1 is right! I've been mistaken all of this time.&quot;</blockquote>

[QUOTE="steeldragons, post: 7158233, member: 92511"] There has been no indication from any numbers I've seen over the past couple of years (as far as has been shared here on Enworld) that 5e's "design" or level of "balance" is leading to any "sizable chunks of the game's fan base to leave." If anything it has brought significant chunk[I] back[/I] and seems to be drawing in new players in a way D&D hasn't since the 80's. <Emphasis mine> Why does this read to me so much as hearing, "Resistance is futile" from a chorus of robotic voices? I think I may have found something that could be a cause of some of the..."misunderstanding" and cross-talk: So, when you say, "games"....what do you mean? I've seen in your posts the terms "gamers," "gamists," "game designers," and of course "games" thrown around as if some universal standard. What do you mean? You can not defend a certain definition of a term with other different specialized and undefined terms. Athletics contests are balanced because everyone is [supposed to be] following the same rules...same team sizes...and we're told from an early age that "cheating" is morally and ethically objectionable as it makes things unfair. Some side will win. Some side will lose. Board games, which are largely just elaborately dressed up "races" - follow the path, get the end/finish line first - are similarly "balanced" by those involved...because everyone is following the same rules and [presumably] not cheating. Your adversaries are known quantities (however many people are on the board with you). You objective is clear. Someone will win. Everyone else loses. Video games by and large can go a multitude of directions, but at a point have no choice but to be similarly linearly constrained. Number of character options, costume choices, possible directions or choice of action...Only so many options of code can be facilitated to take things in divergent directions. There are not so much "rules" in video games as there are "options of code." Why can't I do "X"? Because "X" wasn't written into the game, i.e. the computer can not just decide to "let you." It's not about following or breaking rules...it's about what the code is "designed" to allow. You win...if you're playing interconnected games, maybe you have some pals who also win with you. Miniatures wargames and/or 3D "tactical" recreations/simulations are, again, "follow this preset system of accepted rules. No cheating." Winner. Loser. D&D (as one of the first) and all TTRPGs, actually, is NOT like other games. TTRPGs are NOT designed to play like other games. They are designed to play within the imagination, even if you are using "maps and mini's." Yes, there are accepted "rules" to provide a framework "norm" that people understand and can be followed to gauge wealth, powers, advancement...give you some things to strive to achieve or succeed at...Note: "achieve" and "succeed," not "win." But there is no direct or set "us vs. them." It's "You IN [not necessarily "Against"] the [Fantasy/Scifi/Superheroes/etc...] World." The game just keeps going...as long as you want it to...there is no finish line, no World's Cup, no "Blackjack!" Saying "all games...," as relates to D&D, gets a discussion/debate nowhere. Comparing board games or video games to a TTRPG and saying "Why doesn't it ---- like this..." will never get you anywhere. They are different animals and just throwing the term "games" around or cordoning off yourselves as "gamists" or "gamers" [I liked that, as if "roleplayers" are not "gamers"] like it's something universally different (because you've decided to define it and identify as such) will not get any discussion anywhere...nor, for that matter, convince anyone of any preferences or perspective that "Huh, I guess shoak1 is right! I've been mistaken all of this time." [/QUOTE]

Verification