Weak Rules and Troublesome Players

123 posts / 0 new
Last post
"So, let me get this straight. You are shooting the arrow, while bent over, through your legs, using a blindfold, standing on one leg, spinning a tambourine with your free foot, humming the national anthem and using a unicorn hair for a bowstring?" 

"Yes, its a million to one sh..err.. its cool so it just might work"

I would tend to not bother too much with the realism on the sunrod-arrow, but it just made me think of Terry Pratchet so i had to

 
To DME, or not to DME: that is the question: Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer The slings and arrows of outrageous powergaming, Or to take arms against a sea of Munchkins, And by opposing end them? To die: to sleep;No more;
Sometimes it's nicely and eloquently stated, as in zammm's 12/14 12:33 AM post[...]

You really sent me for a loop here--I was frantically searching my posting history for posts in mid-December before I realized the 12 was probably a typo and you were probably on Eastern time rather than Pacific. So thanks for that.

Just to clarify, I'm not saying that the D&D rules couldn't be more defined than they currently are--not being much of a D&D player, I don't know enough about their current state to be able to make that judgment. But I am saying that they can't be completely defined without sacrificing either elegance and playability or realism, to one degree or another, and since at least a storytelling level of realism is one of the major aims of D&D, you're not likely to ever be able to construct a set of completely defined rules that are at once both realistic enough that absurd situations don't arise, and yet streamlined enough that people actually enjoy playing.

Come join me at No Goblins Allowed


Because frankly, being here depresses me these days.