Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DMZ2112" data-source="post: 6222213" data-attributes="member: 78752">Perhaps, but your post does not tell me it was incorrect.&nbsp; I painted your wagon well enough (see what I did there).I know optimizers who might disagree with you.No, but I can see why you might think that.&nbsp; There is a third option.&nbsp; I am the kind of dungeon master who, when running D&amp;D4 (or D&amp;D3.5, for that matter), hands his players the PHB1 and says, &quot;This is it.&nbsp; There is no D&amp;D outside of this book.&nbsp; Use this book.&nbsp; Just this one.&nbsp; All that other stuff?&nbsp; What other stuff?&nbsp; This book is D&amp;D.&nbsp; D&amp;D is this book.&nbsp; Don't make me stab you in the eye.&quot;I don't really agree, but I see your point.&nbsp; It's more the combination of D&amp;D4's design and the character creator that I find distasteful, rather than the character creator in and of itself.&nbsp; But, to bring this post back into line with the thread topic, I do not necessarily think that an online character generation tool is good stewardship.&nbsp; I would genuinely rather see those development funds allocated elsewhere.&nbsp;Oh, absolutely!&nbsp; Just not at the table.&nbsp;That's certainly not my case.&nbsp; Systems mastery and powergaming ruined D&amp;D3.5 for me, and it is only by the narrowest of margins that I still find Pathfinder playable.&nbsp; But I continue to refute the idea that making everyone a master of an unnecessarily complex ruleset is the way to overcome systems mastery as a barrier to rewarding roleplay.&nbsp; The preferable strategy is to reduce complexity across the board.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DMZ2112, post: 6222213, member: 78752"] Perhaps, but your post does not tell me it was incorrect. I painted your wagon well enough (see what I did there). I know optimizers who might disagree with you. No, but I can see why you might think that. There is a third option. I am the kind of dungeon master who, when running D&D4 (or D&D3.5, for that matter), hands his players the PHB1 and says, "This is it. There is no D&D outside of this book. Use this book. Just this one. All that other stuff? What other stuff? This book is D&D. D&D is this book. Don't make me stab you in the eye." I don't really agree, but I see your point. It's more the combination of D&D4's design and the character creator that I find distasteful, rather than the character creator in and of itself. But, to bring this post back into line with the thread topic, I do not necessarily think that an online character generation tool is good stewardship. I would genuinely rather see those development funds allocated elsewhere. Oh, absolutely! Just not at the table. That's certainly not my case. Systems mastery and powergaming ruined D&D3.5 for me, and it is only by the narrowest of margins that I still find Pathfinder playable. But I continue to refute the idea that making everyone a master of an unnecessarily complex ruleset is the way to overcome systems mastery as a barrier to rewarding roleplay. The preferable strategy is to reduce complexity across the board. [/QUOTE]

Verification