Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Azlan" data-source="post: 781393" data-attributes="member: 2340">If Intelligence and Wisdom can be calculated as independent variables, why can't Str and Dex?You &quot;know&quot;... ? What, you make this personal assumption about my non-RPGing endeavors based on my debate, here? P-lease. Give me a break.&nbsp;Irrelevant? Don't you realize, most of&nbsp; the &quot;innovations&quot; -- i.e. the game mechanics and concepts -- in 3E D&amp;D were taken from other RPGs that came out after 1st and 2nd Editions D&amp;D?So, then, are you saying D&amp;D nowadays is more in league with &quot;arcadey, Diablo-like&quot; computer RPGs than it is with its true peers, the &quot;pencil &amp; paper, tabletop, person-to-person&quot; RPGs?Heh. I've seen the myriad rules for attacks of opportunity, for flanking, and for the various combat actions (normal, partial, full-round, move-equivalent, etc.) bog the game down. Not that I'm suggesting we do away with any of those rules, but just that &quot;abstraction&quot; and &quot;simplicity&quot; are not the be all to end all, in 3E D&amp;D.Again with the personal assumptions (attacks?) on me. Well, at least this time you're assuming things about me regarding my RPGing endeavors.I didn't say D&amp;D has got it *all* wrong, or even suggest that. I didn't even say or suggest that D&amp;D has got it *mostly* wrong. The focus of the discussion here was, as the title says, &quot;Why is Str used for melee attack rolls instead of Dex?&quot;Now it's my turn to make a personal assumption: Judging by how you're getting bent all out of shape, here, over what I've said; and by how you're twisting around what I've said and expounding upon it (with seemingly your own agenda); I dare say that you, Celebrim, are a D&amp;D zealot. And I *know* you are a D&amp;D rules lawyer.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Azlan, post: 781393, member: 2340"] If Intelligence and Wisdom can be calculated as independent variables, why can't Str and Dex? You "know"... ? What, you make this personal assumption about my non-RPGing endeavors based on my debate, here? P-lease. Give me a break. Irrelevant? Don't you realize, most of the "innovations" -- i.e. the game mechanics and concepts -- in 3E D&D were taken from other RPGs that came out after 1st and 2nd Editions D&D? So, then, are you saying D&D nowadays is more in league with "arcadey, Diablo-like" computer RPGs than it is with its true peers, the "pencil & paper, tabletop, person-to-person" RPGs? Heh. I've seen the myriad rules for attacks of opportunity, for flanking, and for the various combat actions (normal, partial, full-round, move-equivalent, etc.) bog the game down. Not that I'm suggesting we do away with any of those rules, but just that "abstraction" and "simplicity" are not the be all to end all, in 3E D&D. Again with the personal assumptions (attacks?) on me. Well, at least this time you're assuming things about me regarding my RPGing endeavors. I didn't say D&D has got it *all* wrong, or even suggest that. I didn't even say or suggest that D&D has got it *mostly* wrong. The focus of the discussion here was, as the title says, "Why is Str used for melee attack rolls instead of Dex?" Now it's my turn to make a personal assumption: Judging by how you're getting bent all out of shape, here, over what I've said; and by how you're twisting around what I've said and expounding upon it (with seemingly your own agenda); I dare say that you, Celebrim, are a D&D zealot. And I *know* you are a D&D rules lawyer. [/QUOTE]

Verification