Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Natural 20" data-source="post: 3976909" data-attributes="member: 27840">... good discussion going on here ...To me, allowing the setting to be flexible by not pre-mapping POL, makes sense and is consistent with how I abstractly think about D&D the game. This is especially true at the outset of a new edition. I am a relative newcomer to the game, however I predate the game. I started with 3.5 after re-entering gaming via Magic: the Gathering. I say re-enter because as a kid I play some AH games, just enough to "qualify" as a gamer. When I first heard about D&D all I knew about it was that players, in assumed roles, adventured into "dungeons" and along the way maybe encountered "dragons". The latter of which seemed to be a stand-in for any number of fantasy-based, scary creatures. Discovery of the dungeon, which the DM knew ahead of time, involved in-character exploration and "mapping as go" by the adventuring party. At the atomic level the dungeon is a key fundamental unit. The game is not called "Settings & Dragons" after all. The setting can evolve to expand the scale of the adventure which in turn can establish a broader context for the game. For me, a map-less setting at the beginning of a new edition helps promote that sense of exploration and adventure which is fundamental to what makes D&D the great game that it is.</blockquote>