Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6861662" data-attributes="member: 996">I'm not sure what you think those parameters are.&nbsp; Within the parameters of a class/level based RPG, for instance, they work pretty well.&nbsp; Similar rules were in other games before D&amp;D cribbed them, and worked well.&nbsp; They model the kind of grunt foot-soldiers you see constantly in genre, that the hero just tears through, looking bad-ass, even though they are dangerous.&nbsp; Prior to 5e bounded accuracy, a horde of merely much-lower-level monster never delivered on that trope too well for D&amp;D.&nbsp; It still doesn't deliver it quite as well as minions did, IMHO.&nbsp; The Rod /was/ errata'd, so not too late to fix, in that sense.&nbsp; And, yeah, monstercide is an edge case.So far you've brought up two, neither that legitimate.&nbsp; Maybe exception-based-design felt like a collection of edge cases, though.&nbsp; It kinda is in some sense.The assumptions are both simple and surprisingly numerous, and inherited from genre.&nbsp; D&amp;D is an heroic fantasy TTRPG.&nbsp; That's a lot of assumptions of a different kind.&nbsp; The biggest one being that hps are some sort of in-world scientific law, rather than a game mechanic.&nbsp; It's also a bit of an assumption that it matters how many hps a miner has if he's just mining his whole life.You may have read that into it, but, as cute as the ecology articles were they were hardly that exhaustive.&nbsp; 2e, like all editions of D&amp;D assumed you were going to be playing a character, that you only wanted to play a character that could be modeled by a set of classes - a pretty small set in 2e, really - and that you'd go out killing things and taking their stuff.&nbsp; Among a lot of other things.&nbsp; It also de-facto invoked a lot of the assumptions of the fantasy genre, and failed to deliver on them.&nbsp; Again, just like D&amp;D had always done and continued to do.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 6861662, member: 996"] I'm not sure what you think those parameters are. Within the parameters of a class/level based RPG, for instance, they work pretty well. Similar rules were in other games before D&D cribbed them, and worked well. They model the kind of grunt foot-soldiers you see constantly in genre, that the hero just tears through, looking bad-ass, even though they are dangerous. Prior to 5e bounded accuracy, a horde of merely much-lower-level monster never delivered on that trope too well for D&D. It still doesn't deliver it quite as well as minions did, IMHO. The Rod /was/ errata'd, so not too late to fix, in that sense. And, yeah, monstercide is an edge case. So far you've brought up two, neither that legitimate. Maybe exception-based-design felt like a collection of edge cases, though. It kinda is in some sense. The assumptions are both simple and surprisingly numerous, and inherited from genre. D&D is an heroic fantasy TTRPG. That's a lot of assumptions of a different kind. The biggest one being that hps are some sort of in-world scientific law, rather than a game mechanic. It's also a bit of an assumption that it matters how many hps a miner has if he's just mining his whole life. You may have read that into it, but, as cute as the ecology articles were they were hardly that exhaustive. 2e, like all editions of D&D assumed you were going to be playing a character, that you only wanted to play a character that could be modeled by a set of classes - a pretty small set in 2e, really - and that you'd go out killing things and taking their stuff. Among a lot of other things. It also de-facto invoked a lot of the assumptions of the fantasy genre, and failed to deliver on them. Again, just like D&D had always done and continued to do. [/QUOTE]

Verification