Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 8238860" data-attributes="member: 6696971">Here is an example of D&amp;D's metaphorical approach to language (the &quot;natural language&quot; focus of D&amp;D 5e would be another example) causing harm to the player-base.Its an example from a game I love:&quot;Skip the gate guards and get to the fun!&quot;Remember that one from D&amp;D 4e?Well, that one caused a hell of a stir...and it didn't actually technically help a great deal of people.&nbsp; I mean, a lot of people were all &quot;BUT I LIKE GATE GUARD CONFLICTS, SCREW YOU!&quot;But they weren't saying that gate guards aren't fun.&nbsp; What they were saying was, for this game, &quot;at every moment, drive play toward conflict&quot; or &quot;cut to the action.&quot;&nbsp; The first of those axioms is from Vincent Baker in Dogs in the Vineyard.&nbsp; The second of those axioms is from a myriad of games including John Harper in Blades in the Dark.THAT is what they were trying to say.&nbsp; But they said something that was crappy instead because (a) it unnecessarily incited people while (b) simultaneously not explaining exactly what the hell they were saying in a concise, technical manner.Gate guards can be conflict.&nbsp; Gate guards can be action.&nbsp; But a lot of time in D&amp;D, they're just color and characteriation. For this game (D&amp;D 4e), everything on screen, every moment of play should be conflict/action...so if you have gate guards...make sure they're bite and note all bark (yes, the metaphorical language here is meant to be ironic)!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Manbearcat, post: 8238860, member: 6696971"] Here is an example of D&D's metaphorical approach to language (the "natural language" focus of D&D 5e would be another example) causing harm to the player-base. Its an example from a game I love: "Skip the gate guards and get to the fun!" Remember that one from D&D 4e? Well, that one caused a hell of a stir...and it didn't actually technically help a great deal of people. I mean, a lot of people were all "BUT I LIKE GATE GUARD CONFLICTS, SCREW YOU!" But they weren't saying that gate guards aren't fun. What they were saying was, for this game, "at every moment, drive play toward conflict" or "cut to the action." The first of those axioms is from Vincent Baker in Dogs in the Vineyard. The second of those axioms is from a myriad of games including John Harper in Blades in the Dark. THAT is what they were trying to say. But they said something that was crappy instead because (a) it unnecessarily incited people while (b) simultaneously not explaining exactly what the hell they were saying in a concise, technical manner. Gate guards can be conflict. Gate guards can be action. But a lot of time in D&D, they're just color and characteriation. For [I]this [/I]game (D&D 4e), everything on screen, every moment of play should be conflict/action...so if you have gate guards...make sure they're [I]bite [/I]and note [I]all bark [/I](yes, the metaphorical language here is meant to be ironic)! [/QUOTE]

Verification