Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 7679432" data-attributes="member: 42582">If this is meant to be truthful description, what is the evidence base? Because it doesn't really fit with my experience.But in fact to me it just reads as more prescription, of your own prerefences over others.On challenges and killer-dungeons: as far as I know the OSR is still a fairly big thing, and that deliberately harks back to classic D&D play, where the dungeon is the challenge.On empty battlefield battles: I think that M:tG and WoW have mostly absorbed that part of the RPG market. But there are plenty of players who enjoy playing D&D as a challenge but regard dynamic battlefields and opportunity-exploitation as elements of the challenge. Disintegrating the bridge on which a golem is standing is one example of that sort of play.And as someone who actually runs a game in which PC backstory is a principal driver for play, I hardly recognise your attempt to describe that sort of RPGing. Maybe all the creative players you know are po-faced fun police?Classic D&D modules that I've used in d20 D&D games are Night's Dark Terror, G2, D2 and Castle Amber. Only one of those is particularly whimsical, and it didn't give the best play experience of those four modules. And that's not because I was "misusoing" D&D or misunderstood what it's good for.</blockquote>