Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="TwinBahamut" data-source="post: 3899716" data-attributes="member: 32536">I know you say that deconstructing these arguments won't do any good, but I will go ahead and do so anyway.As a whole, #1 just seems like a statement that "tabletop RPGs are better than computer RPGs because they let you use your imagination". As a whole, that is an opinion that I don't share at all, but it really isn't something I can argue against easily (it being a pure subjective opinion and all). However, it is a statement that does not apply to rules, just presentation and DMing style. It can't be logically used as the basis for arguing against the inclusion of a rule.Your second argument is simply illogical. So long as there is a DM to interpret events and rules, and there is freedom to create houserules, then tabletop RPGs will always maintain a less closed and finite set of rules than a videogame (though because of flexible rules, the possibility of modding, and simple player agreements to do things a certain way, I don't think videogames are so closed and finite as this argument assumes). Also, boardgames like chess and the wargames that D&D evolved from are far more closed and finite than videogames are, yet there is not such a backlash against their influence on the game here in these forums.In addition, I don't agree that there is any single rule or set of rules that could possibly affect the closedness or openness of the game rules of D&D. That sort of thing depends entirely on the medium and the players of the game. Individual rules are irrelevent, it is completely determined by individual playstyle and personal preferences.As such...I have no objection whatsoever to game designers taking every good idea they can get from videogames.</blockquote>

Verification