Quote from: danbuter;542938At times like these, I wonder how some gamers can even make it out the door without a detailed instruction book on walking.

I was thinking about this earlier today, after reading yet another round of vitriol from pissed off people who absolutely loathe "rulings no rules".  Because it seems an awful simple thing to get pissed off about.

Just because there isn't a specific rule for a specific scenario you want, doesn't necessarily mean it's bad game design, especially if one of the requirements is to allow individual groups to come up with their own interpretations.

For example, show me the rule in 4e that tells me how to handle a situation where there are dozens of poison needle traps all long the hallway ready to get sprung, and I cast a fireball to burn up all the poison.

I don't think there is one.  What we do have, is a bunch of rules that help set context and a precedence on gameplay intent.  The fact that some people are freaking out over "OMG! the ray of frost stops a target, what happens if it's in the air!  Broken crap rule!  Broken crap rule!" is a bit surprising and disappointing at the same time.  How does it work?  It works however your game table thinks it should work.  Move on and quit bitching.

I don't know why that's so hard for people.

The biggest barrier from people having fun playing rpgs is themselves.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;542983I was thinking about this earlier today, after reading yet another round of vitriol from pissed off people who absolutely loathe "rulings no rules".  Because it seems an awful simple thing to get pissed off about.

Just because there isn't a specific rule for a specific scenario you want, doesn't necessarily mean it's bad game design, especially if one of the requirements is to allow individual groups to come up with their own interpretations.

For example, show me the rule in 4e that tells me how to handle a situation where there are dozens of poison needle traps all long the hallway ready to get sprung, and I cast a fireball to burn up all the poison.

I don't think there is one.  What we do have, is a bunch of rules that help set context and a precedence on gameplay intent.  The fact that some people are freaking out over "OMG! the ray of frost stops a target, what happens if it's in the air!  Broken crap rule!  Broken crap rule!" is a bit surprising and disappointing at the same time.  How does it work?  It works however your game table thinks it should work.  Move on and quit bitching.

I don't know why that's so hard for people.

The biggest barrier from people having fun playing rpgs is themselves.

I said pretty much the same thing in that very thread with my own DM interpretation I am SO loving it. Then again they may ban me for a month ...

Quote from: jadrax;542933It says: 'When precision is important, such as during a battle, you spend your speed in segments of 5 feet, unless told otherwise.'

And let's review what I actually said: "The deliberate chunking of all movement into 5' increments puts the playtest document very firmly in the 3.5/4E 'everything is conceived as a battlegrid' camp."

Anybody still want to play the "boy, I don't think the playtest document actually says that you chunk movement into 5' increments during combat" game?

Quote from: Benoist;542934The Rule 0 Fallacy construed as such (a hardline logical fallacy) is a bullshit WotC era meme...

Fair enough. D&D4E must be your favorite game, then. After all, you can always just rewrite it to be whatever you want it to be.

You read it here first, folks: Benoist says that D&D 4E is his favorite roleplaying game.

...

You judge the quality of a published ruleset by what it actually says because otherwise all rulesets are identical to your personal definition perfection.

But what you've been ranting on about in this thread is even more ridiculous than your standard Rule 0 Fallacy. You're actually arguing that it's a good thing the rules are written in a confusing and unclear fashion because that somehow "frees" you to rewrite them.

If you're going to seriously defend the idea that RPG rules should be so poorly written that DMs are forced to rewrite them because they're unusable as written (and that is, in fact, what you're arguing), then it's difficult to understand why you're attempting to participate in playtesting a published set of RPG rules.

Quote from: Spinachcat;542967Benoist, you seem far too pissed off.

I'm not pissed off, not in the least, actually.

Quote from: Marleycat;542973Step one ignore Ben he went to Edition War crazyland 3 days ago anybody that believes Dnd stopped at 1e or eariler is irrelevant to me and went to Fairyland.

And after she acts all innocent like "why is it that you're not nice with me?" This kind of stuff is sure to arrange everything. And really? Blaming the edition wars is like playing the 'politically correct RPGnet card' in a D&D discussion. Yes, I like some versions of D&D and dislike others, and no, I don't feel like shutting up just because people think it's "not proper".

"It's edition warring lulz he's crazy" is not an argument refuting anything I have been talking about. It's an appeal to conformity and an attempt at censure by plebiscite. That's not going to work, and I'll keep on objecting when I feel it's warranted. Since the baseline of the next D&D game is being discussed, I feel it is.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;542996Fair enough. D&D4E must be your favorite game, then. After all, you can always just rewrite it to be whatever you want it to be.

You read it here first, folks: Benoist says that D&D 4E is his favorite roleplaying game.

That's all you got? A weak strawman like this? Well, okay then. I don't think there's any need for me to formally dispute this... whatever that was. Attempt at deception? Divertion of the actual topic being discussed? Joke, maybe? Ah well. Whatever.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;542996You judge the quality of a published ruleset by what it actually says because otherwise all rulesets are identical to your personal definition perfection.

Excluded middle. The extremist here is you, by pretending the game either has to be written by your own standards of completeness, or is a non-existent pile of crap equal to all the other non-existent piles of crap.

The rest is just piling on strawmen.

You can to better. 1/5, for the time you took typing this sorry excuse of a response.

Quote from: Marleycat;542985I said pretty much the same thing in that very thread with my own DM interpretation I am SO loving it. Then again they may ban me for a month ...

Here's my deal with it.  Now, I consider myself a fairly smart guy, but I know I'm not Stephen Hawking.  The spell says that it brings the target's movement to zero.  That's the important thing.  When I read the spell description, that to me is what is really important and is the intent of the spell.

OK, got it.  Stops movement.  All that other stuff? Encased in ice, shivering, hovering vs levitating?  That's not as important as stopping movement because stopping movement is what is the actual requirement of that spell design and function.  So, in my very humble opinion, use whatever flavor text and/or ruling that you want to as long as the spell's core function is applied. Do you want it to drop flying creatures? Great, knock yourself out.  Do you NOT want it to drop flying creatures?  Great, knock yourself out.  But if you're at a standstill and can't figure out a solution, ANY solution?  Sorry, but maybe you shouldn't be playing a game that requires interpretation.

Am I being unreasonable here?

Quote from: Sacrosanct;543002Here's my deal with it.  Now, I consider myself a fairly smart guy, but I know I'm not Stephen Hawking.  The spell says that it brings the target's movement to zero.  That's the important thing.  When I read the spell description, that to me is what is really important and is the intent of the spell.

OK, got it.  Stops movement.  All that other stuff? Encased in ice, shivering, hovering vs levitating?  That's not as important as stopping movement because stopping movement is what is the actual requirement of that spell design and function.  So, in my very humble opinion, use whatever flavor text and/or ruling that you want to as long as the spell's core function is applied. Do you want it to drop flying creatures? Great, knock yourself out.  Do you NOT want it to drop flying creatures?  Great, knock yourself out.  But if you're at a standstill and can't figure out a solution, ANY solution?  Sorry, but maybe you shouldn't be playing a game that requires interpretation.

Am I being unreasonable here?

No, but I do think the spell Is poorly written.. That can be corrected.  At worst it allows hovering. I interpret it as slowing your flying speed if you're a dragon or genie or something unique like that,  don't like my interpretation? Don't play in my games.  Simple.

@Ben, the reason why I am discussing this with you is because you're too black and white so you just ask for it. Personally I can't be bothered if you think I'm playing Dnd per your definition but it's fun to see you explain why not.
 
Call me names all you want, at least it shows that you're not actually not mad. Remember I'm a 2/3e player so 5e is matching my expectations so far.

Quote from: Marleycat;543013@Ben, the reason why I am discussing with you is because you're too black and white so you just ask for it. Personally I can't be bothered if you think I 'm playing Dnd per your definition but it's fun to see you explain why not.

Cool story bro? I don't know. That paragraph didn't make any sense to me.

But it's cool. I'm happy for you.

Quote from: Benoist;543014Cool story bro? I don't know. That paragraph didn't make any sense to me.

But it's cool. I'm happy for you.

Here, I'll explain.  You go off on some rant about whatever you deem isn't Dnd but a good game nonetheless, like say the subject of Gygax's version of Vancian magic.  From there I just roll my eyes and appreciate the passion. It's cool, it gives me me a somewhat logical premise to convince my players it makes sense. I use spellpoints or something similar, wow they've been in Dnd since 1e! I'm shocked!  Pure shocked.

On other stuff you are a virtual DMG guide on what to do for an awesome game hence I ignore the silly stuff because just talking with you about these things makes me a better DM and player even though I disagree with some of your stances.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;543002Here's my deal with it.  Now, I consider myself a fairly smart guy, but I know I'm not Stephen Hawking.  The spell says that it brings the target's movement to zero.  That's the important thing.  When I read the spell description, that to me is what is really important and is the intent of the spell.

OK, got it.  Stops movement.  All that other stuff? Encased in ice, shivering, hovering vs levitating?  That's not as important as stopping movement because stopping movement is what is the actual requirement of that spell design and function.  So, in my very humble opinion, use whatever flavor text and/or ruling that you want to as long as the spell's core function is applied. Do you want it to drop flying creatures? Great, knock yourself out.  Do you NOT want it to drop flying creatures?  Great, knock yourself out.  But if you're at a standstill and can't figure out a solution, ANY solution?  Sorry, but maybe you shouldn't be playing a game that requires interpretation.

Am I being unreasonable here?

It's not unreasonable, its just wrong. ;o)

The intent of the spell is the description, the rules are just there to support that description. You should start with the description of what the spell is doing in the game world and work forward from there, rather than working out the mechanical effect and then trying to explain it.

Quote from: Marleycat;543013Remember I'm a 2/3e player so 5e is matching my expectations so far.

AD&D 1e, Mentzer D&D, AD&D2, Skills and Power, D&D 3e, 3.5, OD&D, 4e, Holmes, Essentials, Moldvay-Cook... I'm going to pass on the near D&D d20 games like AE and IH, the retroclones and retrogames... I think I played all the iterations of the game. I can tell you some positive stuff about all of them. To take a random example, I've had a blast running four campaigns of 3rd ed. You can read about the Ptolus campaign at http://praemal.blogspot.com for instance.

So attempting to portray me as the guy who only knows AD&D and has no experience playing anything else (I haven't gone into the list of RPGs I have actually played or ran here, that'll be for another time) is showing either a complete misunderstanding of what it is I am actually talking about, or an attempt at casting me in a role that is pathetic at best (I prefer to laugh at the face of it usually), or both.

I'm not objecting because you play or like this edition or that other RPG. I'm objecting because we are arguing about what ought to be the D&D game's baseline here. At least I am. The rest is just a figment of your imagination, dearest.

Quote from: Marleycat;543016Here, I'll explain.  You go off on some rant about whatever you deem isn't Dnd but a good game nonetheless, like say the subject of Gygax's version of Vancian magic.  From there I just roll my eyes and appreciate the passion. It's cool, it gives me me a somewhat logical premise to convince my players it makes sense. I use spellpoints or something similar, wow they've been in Dnd since 1e! I'm shocked!  Pure shocked.

You know what? I like the Expanded Psionics Handbook. I don't mind spell points or alternate attrition mechanics in the game's options and supplements. I like this stuff. And I don't really give a shit what you like and don't like, honest, you can play whatever the hell you want and I hope you have a blast with it!

But that is not what we are talking about here. What I am talking about is what I believe should be at the core, the baseline of the D&D game. And spellpoints and my Little Pony RPG at-wills ain't it, IMO.

Get a room you two.

Quote from: jeff37923;543024Get a room you two.

But he's in Canada and I'm in Missouri it will never work.

Quote from: Benoist;543020You know what? I like the Expanded Psionics Handbook. I don't mind spell points or alternate attrition mechanics in the game's options and supplements. I like this stuff. And I don't really give a shit what you like and don't like, honest, you can play whatever the hell you want and I hope you have a blast with it!

But that is not what we are talking about here. What I am talking about is what I believe should be at the core, the baseline of the D&D game. And spellpoints and my Little Pony RPG at-wills ain't it, IMO.

What is this My Little Pony crap you keep mentioning?  I bet I am near your age so this baffles me. Ok, here's a question....would your panties be in such a twist if Magic Missle wasn't at-will? Hate to break to you but Psionics and spellpoints ARE baseline. They are in 1e just like Bards.