Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="gizmo33" data-source="post: 3542660" data-attributes="member: 30001">I don't find what Hussar is saying to be as easy to decipher as you seem to.&nbsp; He says stuff like &quot;World building is when you go beyond the needs of the plot.&quot; which is not just a matter of the &quot;world-building vs. setting&quot; terminology.&nbsp; There, at times, seems to be some deeper beliefs at work here, and the impression I get from RC (and which I share) is that conceding some point that would superficially appear to be about terminology is actually agreeing to something more fundemental about the role of the DM and players in the game.Since the creation of the OGL, I really don't think there's a strong case that there's a lack of 3rd party adventures.&nbsp; I also disagree that creating 600 page setting bibles is indulgent, or somehow doesn't support the game by definition.&nbsp; I'm in a position to say what is or is not useful for my game, but I'd be much more careful about condemning what other people find useful, especially in such blanket terms.&nbsp; In one sentence the economics information in the DMG is (apparently) condemned, with no specifics given.&nbsp; The &quot;specifics&quot; given are actually some made up example about window architecture.&nbsp; Again, this largely IMO can be looked at as an issue of logic rather than terminology.So AFAICT you haven't really gotten the gist of the arguments on this post, but then I think it's going on 1000 posts so I guess that's to be expected.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="gizmo33, post: 3542660, member: 30001"] I don't find what Hussar is saying to be as easy to decipher as you seem to. He says stuff like "World building is when you go beyond the needs of the plot." which is not just a matter of the "world-building vs. setting" terminology. There, at times, seems to be some deeper beliefs at work here, and the impression I get from RC (and which I share) is that conceding some point that would superficially appear to be about terminology is actually agreeing to something more fundemental about the role of the DM and players in the game. Since the creation of the OGL, I really don't think there's a strong case that there's a lack of 3rd party adventures. I also disagree that creating 600 page setting bibles is indulgent, or somehow doesn't support the game by definition. I'm in a position to say what is or is not useful for my game, but I'd be much more careful about condemning what other people find useful, especially in such blanket terms. In one sentence the economics information in the DMG is (apparently) condemned, with no specifics given. The "specifics" given are actually some made up example about window architecture. Again, this largely IMO can be looked at as an issue of logic rather than terminology. So AFAICT you haven't really gotten the gist of the arguments on this post, but then I think it's going on 1000 posts so I guess that's to be expected. [/QUOTE]

Verification