log in or register to remove this ad

 

What you love about D&D, isn't D&D

Bullgrit

First Post
It's a strange thing I see often in discussions here on ENWorld about D&D.

Take two people who like D&D.

D&D-Lover #1 also likes X style or aspect of play. A major reason DDL1 likes D&D is because it has X. He sees X throughout the game, and he is happy about it. He always plays D&D with X. Always has.

D&D-Lover #2 dislikes X style or aspect of play. A major reason DDL2 likes D&D is because it does not have X. He doesn't see X anywhere in the game, and he is happy about it. He never plays D&D with X. Never has.

Someone posts a discussion topic of "What do you think of X in D&D?"

DDL 1 and 2 get into arguments over the existence and non-existence of X in D&D.

DDL1 argues that X is all throughout D&D, or maybe X is not directly in D&D, but it is at least strongly suggested and supported by D&D.

DDL2 argues that X is not in D&D, or X may show up in D&D, but it is strongly discouraged and unsupported.

It's kind of weird because the two sides are basically saying that what the other likes about D&D isn't D&D.

Bullgrit
 

log in or register to remove this ad



Theo R Cwithin

I cast "Baconstorm!"
The problem with a lot of the arguments is that people have certain definitons in their heads and forget that others might not be working from the same definitions.

In a *ahem* recent thread, a question phrased "Is D&D about X?" has so many wsys of looking at it, that the discussion was doomed to devolve into people talking past each other. The arguers have differeing ideas about the term "D&D" in that context (Is it the rules? Is it the design intention? Is it individuals' games? Is it the topic of the game?). Even worse, they have differing ideas on the deceptively innocuous word "about" in that context (Does it mean "on the general topic of"? Does it include "how" as well as "what"? How does one measure "aboutness", and which measure is "correct"?)

Worst of all, of course, is that some people just like to argue. Layer onto that the annoying habit of some people to threadjack-- to change the discussion from the parameters of the OP without having the courtesy to fork the argument-- and it can become very tiresome.
 

Crazy Jerome

First Post
What if I'm both people? I like D&D version A because it does have caboodles of X. And then I like D&D version B because it cut it out.

I guess I'm going to need to start arguing with myself on the internet or be forced to turn in my geek card. I'm so confused! :p
 
Last edited:


Pentius

First Post
Why would anyone like X in their D&D to begin with? That's just stupid. There was no X when I started playing. Sure, some people might have added some X into their games back then, but they were playing wrong.

I don't understand how you can be this wrong. X is the very foundation of all D&D, and is the only possible way to get an enjoyable experience. I guess if you tried, you could tear X out of D&D, but you'd have mangled it so badly, it wouldn't be D&D anymore.
 


Dannager

First Post
Worst of all, of course, is that some people just like to argue. Layer onto that the annoying habit of some people to threadjack-- to change the discussion from the parameters of the OP without having the courtesy to fork the argument-- and it can become very tiresome.

I'm not certain that it's threadjacking when the parameters of the thread are "Put the least amount of thought into your answer as possible!" Using the poll as a springboard for an actual, substantive discussion isn't threadjacking. It's responsible use of a discussion board.
 



Theo R Cwithin

I cast "Baconstorm!"
I'm not certain that it's threadjacking when the parameters of the thread are "Put the least amount of thought into your answer as possible!" Using the poll as a springboard for an actual, substantive discussion isn't threadjacking. It's responsible use of a discussion board.
It is a good springboard for an interesting discussion, but it's still a threadjack. Seriously, not everybody reading that thread expecting to see knee-jerk reactions was interested in that particular springboard. Some just want to see the off-the-cuff remarks and who said what, without having to pick through long-winded explanations of why those knee-jerk reactions are wrong or not.

One wouldn't interject such analysis into a thread asking "give me a bunch of quick plot hooks involving domesticated desert animals and undead", right? So why feel compelled to do it in a more opinionated but equally short-form response thread?

It's just, imho, more sensible to fork off a new thread for tangential discussion. Then the readers who want to follow that discussion can; while those who don't aren't forced to give up on the initial thread. That is responsible use of a discussion board.


[and this, by the way, is another threadjack ;) ]
 
Last edited:



SnowleopardVK

First Post
One wouldn't interject such analysis into a thread asking "give me a bunch of quick plot hooks involving domesticated desert animals and undead", right? So why feel compelled to do it in a more opinionated but equally short-form response thread?

I think one would. A lot of threads seem to head that way at some point or another. Some just hold out longer than others.

and this, by the way, is another threadjack ;)

It's been one for awhile now...
 

Ahnehnois

First Post
I never use published adventures. Several years after I learned the rules and had played a while and DMed a campaign or two, I received a published adventure as a gift (Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil). I remember reading through it and almost laughing as I thought This isn't D&D. Obviously, it is D&D. It has a D&D logo on it, and I'm sure there are many people who consider it a classic, but everything about the content and the way it was presented was completely at odds with the way I play D&D.

D&D is a hobby that you put some much of yourself into (above and beyond what's in the books) that it's no wonder people's experiences with it are so diverse or that they feel so strongly about them.
 

Heathen72

Explorer
What you just wrote had nothing to do with D&D. :lol:

Arguments are what the internet forums are made of. I'd like to say it was not true but people will argue, sometimes, just for the argument.

What you wrote has nothing to do with internet forums. Arguments are what life is made of.
 



Aeolius

Adventurer
Why would anyone like X in their D&D to begin with? That's just stupid. There was no X when I started playing. Sure, some people might have added some X into their games back then, but they were playing wrong.

punch-chemical-x.gif
 

Level Up!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top