Which element could D&D stand to lose more?

[Raven Crowking]

No, no rejoiner here. I just don't see how free speech is relevant. We're not talking about being repressed by the government, we're talking about the mores and conventions of civilized social interaction.

It's only relevant in the context of the rejoiner described above.

If you don't make that rejoiner, it isn't relevant.

I am merely answering what seems to me (given my experience on EN World) an obvious rejoiner that was likely to be made, prior to its being made.

That said, my complaints about some folks possibly thinking that their complaining about other folks' complaining is somehow better than the complaining of those other foks is also no better than the complaining of either the initial complainers, or of those complaining about the complaining. As is plain to see.


RC

-

 

[Dausuul]

That said, my complaints about some folks possibly thinking that their complaining about other folks' complaining is somehow better than the complaining of those other foks is also no better than the complaining of either the initial complainers, or of those complaining about the complaining. As is plain to see.

But I didn't. I only knew that you'd know that I knew.

Did you know that?

 

[Nifft]

But I didn't. I only knew that you'd know that I knew.

Did you know that?

Only in the Biblical sense.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Hussar]

Oh please.

"Help, help, I'm being oppressed" is ridiculous.

Yes, you have the absolute right to bitch and whine whenever it so pleases you. I also have the right to point out that doing so in certain venues only hurts all of us and the hobby.

Or perhaps you'd prefer to silence my complaints Raven Crowking.

 

[Umbran]

Maybe so, Umbran.....But surely the person making the complaint gets to decide when and where they feel that complaint is justified? What context is appropriate? What is the right timing?

*blink*

You ask that of a guy tasked with policing and enforcing a particular standard of appropriate posting on a message board? One of the folks enforcing the "No politics, no religion" and Grandma rules?

No. Not always. I'm rather more a, "your right to flail your (metaphorical) fist around stops in the vicinity of someone else's nose," kind of guy.

There's no such thing as a conversation that doesn't take place in a social context, and along with the right to speak in that context, the speaker has the responsibility to take that context into account. You are, I suppose, free to fail in your responsibilities...

 

[Ariosto]

It seems to me that "cut psionics" could actually not mean much.

(1) If there's already a rules system called "psionics" in the current edition, then ... it's there.

(2) If you're preparing a new edition, it's not as if you were going to use the old rules anyhow, eh?

There were notable changes from OD&D to AD&D, even, and those look like twins next to the changes to psionics in later editions.

So, if "cutting psionics" just means there won't be yet another new sub-game with that heading, then it seems to me like rather a vague sort of "cut". I have not closely examined the "psionic power source" in 4e, but I don't think it's a radical departure from the 4e powers framework.

On the other hand, it could be a pretty sharp cut if it means that there won't be any effects that might be characterized as, for instance, "ESP" (an actual spell name from the original set).

Depending on how much one lumps under the heading -- Aura reading? Clairvoyance? Empathic healing? Levitation? Mesmerism? Telekinesis? Teleportation? -- a "no psionics" rule could change the game very notably!

The elf, on the other hand, seems to have retained more of a common identity. Calling it an eladrin might piss off some people who know and care what "eladrin" meant in 2e Planescape (or wherever it was they figured before), but I reckon it is still recognized -- for good and ill -- as an "elf".

If it ducks like a quack ...

 

[FireLance]

three hundred people taking the time to go on CNN and tell all and sundry how 4e sucks, instead of celebrating the fact that D&D (in any form) is being carried on a major news outlet in a positive way.

Frankly, this gets my vote for "what element D&D could stand to lose more".

IMO, three hundred people passing nasty and negative comments in the public domain hurts tabletop RPGs more than three hundred people making similar comments about books, movies, sport, music, or computer games, because of all these leisure activities, a tabletop RPG is the only one that requires you to interact with other people who have similar interests. And I don't know about the rest of you, but I personally would stay well away from people that I know to be nasty and negative.

Come to think of it, perhaps that's the best way to advertise 4E: play 4E and you can be assured that you will never interact with these people.

 

[frankthedm]

Which element could D&D stand to lose more?

Fire elemental damage. Too much fire damage gets chucked around in D&D.

 

[Ariosto]

If you rebranded psionics as a fantasy equivalent of some sort of spirit (as in mental spirit, not the ghost type) powers, I'd probably be happy with it.

Why not make it so and call it a day? Or does this involve a lot of riding and roping to catch the psionics first?

Dwarves get personality. Halflings get personality. Elves get to be humans.

Personality = stereotype?

Why be a person when you can be a personality? Why live a life when you can live a lifestyle? It's not imitation anything -- it's soft Corinthian Naugahyde!

 

[Ariosto]

See H. Beam Piper for a very excellent example of how psi is used in very early SF.

That may be, although I wouldn't call his own work "very early". Piper's first story appeared, IIRC, in 1947, and he was a 1950s-60s (d. 1964) phenomenon.

Even Jack Williamson had probably not written much yet in 1912, when Edgar Rice Burroughs' first tale of John Carter's adventures among telepathic Martians was serialized.

The narrator of Wells' The War of the Worlds (1898?) also, I think, attributed to Martians the power of mental communication.

Psionics has always been an SF trope. It's almost never been a fantasy one. You don't bother calling it psionics in a fantasy story - you call it "Borrowing" or "Soul Power" or "The Will and the Word" or some such thing.

It's just a word, then? Like giving elves glam-punk hairdos and calling them Eldar, and painting orcs green and spelling them Orks?

It doesn't seem as if we need a lot of special rules for that. Or for the vice-versa, if you squeak my linguish.