Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 5994791" data-attributes="member: 54877">First bit, no I mean something more like a person is unhappy with the nature or frequency of criticals happening on a natural 20--as this sometimes leads to results that they don't like.  So the DM fudges die rolls or introduces some kind of damage resistance or includes enough healing to nullify the criticals.  That is, they ignore or change (usually complicate) the process. Which is fine as far as it goes, but then they can't honestly say that the process was working just fine.  And more important, they miss that their process changes would have unacceptable results at other tables.  To be precise, I'm not arguing against anyone who says that D&D is the best process sim out there.  If I saw that statement, I wouldn't respect it with the dignity of an answer. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />  I'm arguing against the attitude that D&D is more process sim than it can justly be said of it, and that if it were more process sim it would make the general D&D audience happier.  There's really nothing there I can say that Gygax didn't tell them in no uncertain terms while 1E was still the latest thing, but since people ignored him then, I supposed they will certainly ignore the rest of us now. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /> As for you, no blindspot is not the term I would use. Bluntly, I think there is a hole in your understanding that would be best examined by trying another game or three, and is unlikely to be filled by merely talking with us.  If there was a blindspot, you wouldn't be asking these questions.  You are under no obligation to examine this hole, or even in any way to accept that it might be there, I hasten to add--much less do anything about it.  However, that you are asking these questions makes me guess that you are aware of it, and would be pleased to fill it.  When I studied German, I didn't retain it, I never used it, and I didn't particularly like doing it.  Just not my thing (and not the best choice for me to try).  But I learned a heck of a lot about my native English while trying German.  I think sometimes that a lot of the good bits of D&D are only fully appreciated from the perspective of someone who has given something different a good try. And often the limitations, too.  My comments on fidelity to process-sim are addressed to those with the blindspot.  I think in your case, that you haven't really found out for yourself the necessary limits of process-sim, even though you can accept that there are limits for practical reasons.   So again, if you are curious about those, don't ask me!  Go exploring!  You'll make your own conclusions, as everyone should. I apologize in advance if that is patronizing.  I don't mean it to be, but it's late, and maybe not worded as well as it could be.  There's no easy way to say, "The questions you are asking make me think there is some experience you are missing," when I do think exactly that.<img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/ponder.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":hmm:" title="Hmmm    :hmm:" data-shortname=":hmm:" /></blockquote>

Verification