Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
With Respect to the Door and Expectations....The REAL Reason 5e Can't Unite the Base
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Underman" data-source="post: 5994720" data-attributes="member: 6696705"><p>Yes I know, except there's no need to have responded with "Actually, that's not..."</p><p></p><p>You restated: According to the D&D ruleset, PC is still fully capable at 1 hp as much as 100hp.</p><p></p><p>However, I attributed it like so: According to D'karr, hit points don't make sense under intense scrutiny at least because the PC is still fully capable at 1 hp as much as 100hp.</p><p></p><p></p><p>That's all fine and dandy, but the point remains that anything like "Oh the people of D&D are hungry for sim? Let them eat pure sim cake" is still ivory tower thinking IMO. Sim-oriented D&D players who have co-opted D&D with their sim agenda will not abandon D&D en masse to try pure sim games.</p><p></p><p>Plus, in the playtest, there's no sign of that happening for the core rules.</p><p></p><p>So it's not a practical solution to Manbearcat's problem. I was arguing about the lack of pragmatism, to which you wrote "huh?".</p><p></p><p>Neonchameleon is referring to an assertion that was never made by me but he doesn't seem to want to let go of that misconception. I was referring to the fact that mutual understanding is best accomplished by avoiding contemptuous language like "flak", "crud", "some value of 'enjoy'", "dysfunctional", "inevitable, miserable fate", "arbitrary crap", and "ignorance", which makes me hesitant to engage with someone.</p><p></p><p>I think so, but I'm not sure.</p><p></p><p>I understand that you've changed your expectations. With that, I also believe that your blindspot (ie., willing suspension of disbelief) was moved from there to here.</p><p></p><p>What I don't understand is why are you (the general you) accusing people (like me) of "ignoring the problem", "ignoring the contradictions", "not scratching the surface", "not scrutinizing" and having "lowered expectations"?</p><p></p><p>Certainly, D'karr is happy to pounce on the unreasonableness of D&D process sim rules. Yet he's happy to accept or gloss over any "reasonable" narrative his players come up with without the same level of scrutiny.</p><p></p><p>It seems to me that your style does the same thing (in your own mind and in regard to your fellow players) but rephrased as "different expectations".</p><p></p><p>ie., your "blindspot" is couched in neutral terms, but the other "blindspot" is couched in negative terms. Why is that?</p><p></p><p>It seems to be the worst form of snobbery: the double standard couched in semantics.</p><p></p><p>Unlike certain other people, I want to be open-minded and be disabused of inaccurate assumptions, but I still have these hang-ups about people's choice of words.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Underman, post: 5994720, member: 6696705"] Yes I know, except there's no need to have responded with "Actually, that's not..." You restated: According to the D&D ruleset, PC is still fully capable at 1 hp as much as 100hp. However, I attributed it like so: According to D'karr, hit points don't make sense under intense scrutiny at least because the PC is still fully capable at 1 hp as much as 100hp. That's all fine and dandy, but the point remains that anything like "Oh the people of D&D are hungry for sim? Let them eat pure sim cake" is still ivory tower thinking IMO. Sim-oriented D&D players who have co-opted D&D with their sim agenda will not abandon D&D en masse to try pure sim games. Plus, in the playtest, there's no sign of that happening for the core rules. So it's not a practical solution to Manbearcat's problem. I was arguing about the lack of pragmatism, to which you wrote "huh?". Neonchameleon is referring to an assertion that was never made by me but he doesn't seem to want to let go of that misconception. I was referring to the fact that mutual understanding is best accomplished by avoiding contemptuous language like "flak", "crud", "some value of 'enjoy'", "dysfunctional", "inevitable, miserable fate", "arbitrary crap", and "ignorance", which makes me hesitant to engage with someone. I think so, but I'm not sure. I understand that you've changed your expectations. With that, I also believe that your blindspot (ie., willing suspension of disbelief) was moved from there to here. What I don't understand is why are you (the general you) accusing people (like me) of "ignoring the problem", "ignoring the contradictions", "not scratching the surface", "not scrutinizing" and having "lowered expectations"? Certainly, D'karr is happy to pounce on the unreasonableness of D&D process sim rules. Yet he's happy to accept or gloss over any "reasonable" narrative his players come up with without the same level of scrutiny. It seems to me that your style does the same thing (in your own mind and in regard to your fellow players) but rephrased as "different expectations". ie., your "blindspot" is couched in neutral terms, but the other "blindspot" is couched in negative terms. Why is that? It seems to be the worst form of snobbery: the double standard couched in semantics. Unlike certain other people, I want to be open-minded and be disabused of inaccurate assumptions, but I still have these hang-ups about people's choice of words. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
With Respect to the Door and Expectations....The REAL Reason 5e Can't Unite the Base
Top