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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Man in the Funny Hat" data-source="post: 3392305" data-attributes="member: 32740">Actually, it IS that hard.  D&D, despite the wonderful simplifications and uniformity of rules provided by 3rd Edtion, has complicated, intricately interconnected rules and gets VASTLY moreso with successive higher levels.  A quick glance at the FAQ, errata, Sage Advice, and THESE BOARDS will tell you that.  EVERY question posed on message boards about the rules must logically be given a definitive, digitally programmed answer.  Every computer game that has ostensibly used 3rd Edition rules has used a version that is more or less further simplified.  Many spells and effects simply CANNOT be properly represented in a digital environment because their outcomes influence ROLEPLAYING, not numerical variables and totals.The STAGGERING array of EVERYTHING that is possible in a genuine roleplaying game CANNOT be coded.  That is why DM's exist.  They continually re-invent the world with each action and verbal interaction with NPC's and monsters to fit, rather than having players simply follow pre-written sequences of options.If it's so easy why is it that there are so few software character creators and the ones that exist spend all their time squashing rules bugs and exceptions?  And a character creator is FAR from a full-on simulation of the overall game.-*-*-*-I'm not good at prognosticating, and it seems to me I actually tried to swear off it not long ago but I'll take one more shot at it.  I see two possible, general directions for D&D and they are not mutually exclusive - that is we may see a combination, though unlikely.The first is actually further simplification.  Perhaps a new version of rules that all but eliminate the constant interpretational bickering, possibly by placing a great many decisions regarding the outcome back in the hands of the DM.  This would be a move towards a roleplaying-heavy approach to the game, and thus a move back to certain aspects of the roots of the game.The second is actually a more rules-uber-alles approach, though also with a certain degree of simplification.  In this case it would be simplifications that sqeeze roleplaying OUT, AWAY from the game.  This would be the much more intensely tactical game utilizing more miniatures, terrain, and so forth and it is this version that is more likely to be digital or at least have computer components to playing it, because obviously the game then becomes easier to represent digitally.I think the second is more the trend we currently see - and HAVE seen since 3E was introduced, but there is undoubtedly a consistent (if probably minority) call for the former so it can't be totally discounted.</blockquote>

Verification