Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Balesir" data-source="post: 6248830" data-attributes="member: 27160">Hmm, can't really comment. I became disenchanted with D&amp;D around 1980 or so, but not over DM/GM power assumptions. Indeed, I retained those assumptions, originally generated by D&amp;D, I think, for many more years.I don't think the &quot;GM uber alles&quot; approach is necessary or even particularly desirable for D&amp;D, though. When I came back to 3.5e D&amp;D with the GM-superiority &quot;goggles&quot; off, I was quite surprised (and pleased) with what I found. That sensation only increased with 4E.It's implicit and explicit in much of the rules explanatory text, I agree, but it's not actually a useful part of the rules, as such - just a style thing. I think it originally arose due to a perceived need to &quot;challenge&quot; the players - if you are going to do that, you need some power to do it with, was the received wisdom. If you start with rules that create challenge by their nature, however, and teach players the joy of challenging themselves, then the GM dictat becomes a lot less necessary (and a lot less desirable for both GM and players).Well, honestly, transitioning to DQ would, I'm pretty sure, be every bit as simple as going from 2e D&amp;D to 3e D&amp;D. Take a look at the Scribd pages - those are, literally, all the &quot;official&quot; rules there are for DQ. They take up about the same page count as the 3e/4e PHB. True, you need to create/convert the more unusual monsters, but it's not that hard with a clear, coherent system to do that. And you lose all the difficulties with power curves, character classes, &quot;hit points as dramatic immunity&quot; and so on. It's the only system with which I have run a game where I set it up so the PCs got hold of a very powerful magical artifact, and they took it into the middle of a huge forest and buried it, placing wards to stop it being found! <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/devil.png"&nbsp; class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":devil:" title="Devil&nbsp; &nbsp; :devil:" data-shortname=":devil:" />With action adventure? I find that the stakes in action adventure are pretty simple - the aim is to &quot;win&quot; (which might translate as simply surviving, or might mean defeating the BBEG), more often than not. The &quot;stakes&quot; are generally &quot;the destruction of all you hold dear&quot; - and that works with third person stances just as well as immersion.Ah, but authors' characters have the most awesome character &quot;Power&quot; of them all - it's called &quot;Script Manipulation&quot;!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Balesir, post: 6248830, member: 27160"] Hmm, can't really comment. I became disenchanted with D&D around 1980 or so, but not over DM/GM power assumptions. Indeed, I retained those assumptions, originally generated by D&D, I think, for many more years. I don't think the "GM uber alles" approach is necessary or even particularly desirable for D&D, though. When I came back to 3.5e D&D with the GM-superiority "goggles" off, I was quite surprised (and pleased) with what I found. That sensation only increased with 4E. It's implicit and explicit in much of the rules explanatory text, I agree, but it's not actually a useful part of the rules, as such - just a style thing. I think it originally arose due to a perceived need to "challenge" the players - if you are going to do that, you need some power to do it with, was the received wisdom. If you start with rules that create challenge by their nature, however, and teach players the joy of challenging themselves, then the GM dictat becomes a lot less necessary (and a lot less desirable for both GM and players). Well, honestly, transitioning to DQ would, I'm pretty sure, be every bit as simple as going from 2e D&D to 3e D&D. Take a look at the Scribd pages - those are, literally, all the "official" rules there are for DQ. They take up about the same page count as the 3e/4e PHB. True, you need to create/convert the more unusual monsters, but it's not that hard with a clear, coherent system to do that. And you lose all the difficulties with power curves, character classes, "hit points as dramatic immunity" and so on. It's the only system with which I have run a game where I set it up so the PCs got hold of a very powerful magical artifact, and they took it into the middle of a huge forest and buried it, placing wards to stop it being found! :devil: With action adventure? I find that the stakes in action adventure are pretty simple - the aim is to "win" (which might translate as simply surviving, or might mean defeating the BBEG), more often than not. The "stakes" are generally "the destruction of all you hold dear" - and that works with third person stances just as well as immersion. Ah, but authors' characters have the most awesome character "Power" of them all - it's called "Script Manipulation"! [/QUOTE]

Verification