tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post2238386298975960437..comments2024-03-28T00:41:13.514-07:00Comments on B/X BLACKRAZOR: Resources (No Not Really)JBhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03263662621289630246noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-18459517453932789382013-12-16T12:07:12.510-08:002013-12-16T12:07:12.510-08:00Alexis's points are not reasonable at all. He...Alexis's points are not reasonable at all. He enumerated a slipperly slope, and then somehow didn't even realize that he was on it. You can <i>never</i> anticipate every situation for which it would be nice to have a rule, so stating <i>a priori</i> that having rules for every situation is the only "good" way to play is absurd, quixotic, and by necessity, a frustrating and unfulfilling way to approach the hobby--because you can't ever do it.<br /><br />Now, granted, I get it that some peoples' taste preferences call for more detail rather than less. And clearly Alexis is one of those people. This is his second big error; assuming that his tastes are somehow intrinsic and "true" for gaming overall, rather than simply being his preferences. Now, granted, maybe the clause, "... for me and my own taste preferences" is implicit in every declaration of what is "better" or whatever on the internet with regards to gaming, but I don't think so. For most people, I'd hazard a confident guess, that level of detail is not desireable. In fact, Alexis himself starts off anticipating that very common complaint with d20 games, expressed over and over again <i>ad nauseum</i> in a variety of venues. He already knows that most people are going to disagree with him, but he's going to refuse (or at least fail) to understand that he simply doesn't share the same taste preferences as a vast chunk of fellow hobbyists--it's not a question of them needing it explained so that they can see how they're all wrong, it's just different, and equally valid.<br /><br />The third big mistake he makes, I admit I'm seeing by reading between the lines a bit. Implicit and heavily implied by his post is an adversarial relationship with the GM, where he fundamentally doesn't trust the GM to provide a good game for him without the benefit of a great monstrosity of rules to hedge and limit the ability of the GM to "ruin" his game with GM rulings. There's a truism I've often seen quoted, that goes something like this: all rules problems are actually people problems. My guess--about which, again, I'm pretty confident, although I freely admit that I'm pulling this out by reading between the lines--is that Alexis himself is either a poorly socialized, adversarial gamer, or has played repeatedly with such, and therefore can't envision an environment in which lack of rules and trust in GM rulings could possibly provide a fun experience.<br /><br />Having done both, I can see his point, but his cure is just as bad as the disease. I'd just prefer not to play with people who are adversarial or poorly socialized, argumentative or pushy about what they want in the game, period. There's no fun way to game with people that have those traits, at least for me.Desdichadohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14774274812688958457noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-18813556734445667952013-12-04T18:08:58.807-08:002013-12-04T18:08:58.807-08:00Yo JB, how you livin' man? Hope all is well on...Yo JB, how you livin' man? Hope all is well on your end. Happy holidays!Anthony Simeonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04312134763577949405noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-47835142921914354692013-11-02T12:57:38.379-07:002013-11-02T12:57:38.379-07:00@ Brendan:
Sure...but the parameters are drilling...@ Brendan:<br /><br />Sure...but the parameters are drilling being set by the DM. And obtaining consensus in such matters is easy when the person asking for buy-off is the authority figure at the table.<br /><br />Look, in a game like D&D (any edition) there is a certain amount of trust that's placed in the DM regardless, due to the way the game allocates narrative authority. Players have to be willing to allow the DM a great degree of leeway just by the nature of the game. I'm not saying "don't do it;" I'm just saying there ARE pitfalls and challenges. As with any system you just have to decide what is important to you, and what you're willing to give in order to play.JBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08532311924539491087noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-81442859285147428282013-11-02T11:58:40.734-07:002013-11-02T11:58:40.734-07:00Given a choice between having more “realistic,” co...<i>Given a choice between having more “realistic,” complex rules and being left with little to worry about except their dwindling supply of spells, HPs, and torches, I’d imagine most players would opt for the latter...especially when the only option for the former is to have them implemented in an arbitrary patch fashion by the DM</i><br /><br />No, there is another option. You can talk about the options like adults and come to a shared understanding. "The fort will take 2 + 1d4 weeks to build, and there will be a chance of enemy attack every week... sound reasonable?"Necropraxishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12716340801054739658noreply@blogger.com