|
4 years ago ::
Sep 16, 2009 - 12:05PM
#1021
|
Date Joined:
Mar 22, 2008
|
2) You confuse the product with the game. The product D&D is something published by WotC; they own and control it legally and by right. The game D&D is something that we, the players, play. It is owned and controlled, in every meaningful sense, by us and us alone. Can WotC influence that by what they publish? Sure - but only if we let them. It's a symbiotic relationship - hopefully, it will continue to be so.
I disagree. By that logic, the product I bought from the car saleman is not a car or automobile unless I say it is. Since it's now owned and controlled by me, I don't need to buy insurance for the orange I drive around because it isn't an automobile. WoTC produces(hence product) a game(hence game) which we can play. They control their game/product's rules. We have absolutely ZERO say in those rules, unless WoTC allows us to have say. All we can do is change those rules after the fact into what we want them to be by house ruling the game.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Sep 16, 2009 - 12:10PM
#1022
|
Date Joined:
Jun 27, 2004
|
Eh, except WotC does allow us to change the ruels by House Ruling - like, not just in a "they can't stop us" way, but in a "they lay out some suggestions, and flat out tell you that you can within the rules" kinda way.
Feedback Disclaimer
Show
Yes, I am expressing my opinions (even complaints - le gasp!) about the current iteration of the play-test that we actually have in front of us.
No, I'm not going to wait for you to tell me when it's okay to start expressing my concerns (unless you are WotC).
(And no, my comments on this forum are not of the same tone or quality as my actual survey feedback.)
A Psion for Next (Playable Draft)A Barbarian for Next (Brainstorming Still)My 4e Projects
Show
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Sep 16, 2009 - 12:14PM
#1023
|
Date Joined:
May 13, 2009
|
Plus they couldn't stop us from changing the rules of the game if they tried 
Epic Dungeon Master Want to give your players a kingdom of their own? I made a 4e rule system to make it happen! Your Kingdom awaits!Update 5th Sep 2011: Added a sample kingdom, as well as sample of play.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Sep 16, 2009 - 12:17PM
#1024
|
Date Joined:
Jun 10, 2009
|
@GreatFrito: exactly (and btw - you disappeared after I sent you the link - busy? or did yo get lost?[it has a tendency to do that to some people]) @Max: Not entirely true - for ANY game, players are free to incorporate whatever rules they want. hence my repeated statements about playing backgammon without a doubling cube, or gin without points. (or monopoly with money for free parking). There are 3 concepts which some people are having difficulty distinguishing (the inevitable result of decontextualization, by the way - hence the linguistical diatribe some time back) written rules, intended play, and "standard" (common use) play. edited to add: @Pluisjen: exactly right
Through the ages, many would wonder "Does art imitate life or does life imitate art?"
I wonder "Does the art of discourse on the internet imitate the art of discourse in life or does the art of discourse in life imitate the art of discourse on the internet?"
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Sep 16, 2009 - 1:13PM
#1025
|
- Forum Guide
- Hero Craftsman Gold Medalist
- Master Dungeon Master
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2005
|
That's fine, so long as refluffing/reflavoring has the same limitation placed upon it concerning proof of how the game works as house rules do. The minute someone tries to prove me wrong about something by saying "Players can just re-fluff that suit of armor.", they're in the wrong.
Don't try to draw me into your assenine semantical debates, Max. I said my piece about what the Glossary will contain. That's all I am discussing. You want to declare who is right and who is wrong in the World Accoring to MaxpersonTM, be my guest. I'm not playing in that particular game (no matter how decontextualized you make it).
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Sep 16, 2009 - 1:33PM
#1026
|
Date Joined:
Mar 22, 2008
|
That's fine, so long as refluffing/reflavoring has the same limitation placed upon it concerning proof of how the game works as house rules do. The minute someone tries to prove me wrong about something by saying "Players can just re-fluff that suit of armor.", they're in the wrong.
Don't try to draw me into your assenine semantical debates, Max. I said my piece about what the Glossary will contain. That's all I am discussing. You want to declare who is right and who is wrong in the World Accoring to MaxpersonTM, be my guest. I'm not playing in that particular game (no matter how decontextualized you make it).
Hey! I finally found that unnoficial glossary that you are claiming is official for the forums. You might want to look up what unnoficial means.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Sep 16, 2009 - 1:44PM
#1027
|
- Forum Guide
- Hero Craftsman Gold Medalist
- Master Dungeon Master
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2005
|
Hey! I finally found that unnoficial glossary that you are claiming is official for the forums. You might want to look up what unnoficial means.
When did I claim that the glossary is "official"? Why are you making up statements that are untrue, Maxperson? I created this iteration of the glossary and I named it, so I'm pretty sure I knew what the word "Unofficial" means when I used it in the title of that thread.
As I said, stop trying to draw me into your assenine semantical games. In addition, discontinue lying about what I've said.
Oh, and congratulations about "finally finding" the thread. I'm sure that must have been very difficult for you, given that it's a stickied thread at the top of the forum.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Sep 16, 2009 - 1:59PM
#1028
|
Date Joined:
Mar 22, 2008
|
When did I claim that the glossary is "official"? Why are you making up statements that are untrue, Maxperson? I created this iteration of the glossary and I named it, so I'm pretty sure I knew what the word "Unofficial" means when I used it in the title of that thread.
Go back and look at your post where you claim that on these forums, your glossary is the way things are when it comes to how a house rule is defined.
As I said, stop trying to draw me into your assenine semantical games. In addition, discontinue lying about what I've said. Oh, and congratulations about "finally finding" the thread. I'm sure that must have been very difficult for you, given that it's a stickied thread at the top of the forum.
Hey, I've never looked for it before. I looked at the wiki and other places for this glossery on "How things are on these forums." No need to act like a **** towards me over it. Hell, your own glossery doesn't even back you up(unless you've since changed it in an effort to make me look bad)
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Sep 16, 2009 - 2:41PM
#1029
|
- Forum Guide
- Hero Craftsman Gold Medalist
- Master Dungeon Master
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2005
|
Go back and look at your post where you claim that on these forums, your glossary is the way things are when it comes to how a house rule is defined.
I said no such thing. Stop lying. All I said is that the glossary represents how the term is used informally on the boards. I did not say that the glossary is in any way "official", which would imply a primatur from Wizards of the Coast, the owners of the forums.
Hell, your own glossery doesn't even back you up(unless you've since changed it in an effort to make me look bad)
Back me up on what? And no, I haven't changed it in a week. (I post whenever I make a change.) But continue to make baseless accusations about me even as you lie about what positions I've taken in this thread.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Sep 16, 2009 - 4:23PM
#1030
|
Date Joined:
Jun 21, 2006
|
As used in these forums, house rule is changing game mechanics, refluffing/reflavoring/house fluffing is changing other aspects of the game, and other things (like choosing a physical description of a character or a character name) haven't received a common term at all.
That's fine, so long as refluffing/reflavoring has the same limitation placed upon it concerning proof of how the game works as house rules do. The minute someone tries to prove me wrong about something by saying "Players can just re-fluff that suit of armor.", they're in the wrong.
No we're not. Changing something's flavour does not change how it functions in the game mechanics. In essence, players can refluff that suit of armor. They can make it change color, add symbols, change its apperance. They aren't house rules, because no rules have been changed.
If anything I say is wrong, clueless or spelt incorrectly, it is because, I am, in general, wrong, clueless and... Well, I'm usually spelt correctly.
|
|
|
