|
9 months ago ::
Sep 16, 2012 - 8:49PM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Apr 12, 2008
|
A major point of contention seems to be when one person suggests (or outright states) that someone else is playing D&D "wrong". "I want to ignore X rule". "You're doing that wrong". I think X should be changed to Y". "You can't because (long explanation that boils down to 'you're doing it wrong')". It's a sure-fire way to spark debates and get people nettled.
In a game in which the rules specifically state that you can change the rules, is it really possible to play it wrong? If you change enough of the game to a point where the rules are only a shell of what they used to be, are you still within the "doing it right" arena? Can you go so far in your changes that you actually reach a point where you are doing it wrong? Is ignoring a rule wrong? What about forgetting a rule? Is that "doing it wrong"? Is changing the D&D rules into a clone of Vampire: the Requiem doing it wrong? Is there a limit? Is there a finite point where you actually can be told that you're doing it wrong?
My own thought on it:
It's your game. You paid for it. You're going to be using it. You're going to be deriving pleasure from it. I think you can change whatever you want about it to make it so that it is as enjoyable as you want it to be.
That being said....
When you finally make your D&D into the perfect game for you and your group, please don't expext anyone else to think that your ideas are somehow better than their's, or better than the people who play the game as-is, straight from the books. Keep in mind that "doing it wrong" and "doing it differently than I do" are two totally different things and, most often, are mutually exclusive.
What do you all think?
Is there a point where someone actually can do it wrong? Is the sky the limit, and there is absolutely no way to do it wrong?
In fond memory of Mark "Wrecan" Monack.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 16, 2012 - 8:54PM
#2
|
|
|
In my opinion, if the game goes to a point where the players are burning down the DMs house while shooting rocket-propelled grenades at passing cars, the game has probably taken a turn towards the "wrong." That being said, I have always seen some level of home-rules in every campaign I've played in for every edition. In the end, if the players in the campaign are having fun, then it's being done the way it should be. Certainly, these players may end up confused if they don't know the current rules because of this and try to get into sanctioned events, but I would imagine that most of us know the rules pretty well, even if we homerule the baljookas out of it. A very interesting topic you bring here! 
I prefer 2nd Edition AD&D. But I have played basic, 1E, 2E, 3.5, & 4E, and found all to be fun.
IF IT'S D&D, I'LL PLAY IT, NO MATTER THE EDITION.
Just roll some dice.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 16, 2012 - 8:55PM
#3
|
Date Joined:
May 22, 2003
|
I agree on all points!  My thoughts on playing D&D wrong:
- Undermining collaboration
- Inhibiting the ability to share
- Compromising the integrity of fun
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 16, 2012 - 8:56PM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Oct 28, 2008
|
For what it is worth, I have been playing D&D wrong for 35 years now. I don't intend to stop.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 16, 2012 - 8:56PM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Apr 12, 2008
|
I agree on all points!
My thoughts on playing D&D wrong:
- Undermining collaboration
- Inhibiting the ability to share
- Compromising the integrity of fun
Out of curiosity, what would be some things that could undermine collaboration or inhibit the ability to share?
In fond memory of Mark "Wrecan" Monack.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 16, 2012 - 9:01PM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Jun 16, 2007
|
Is there a point where someone actually can do it wrong? Is the sky the limit, and there is absolutely no way to do it wrong?
There's ways to do it wrong, but even those ways are subjective -- if you or your fellows are not liking what you're playing, you're doing it wrong. D&D should, first and foremost, be an overall amusing experience. I'm choosing the word "amusing" because D&D doesn't have to be an overall joyous experience -- people could play the game for any number of genres and types of amusement, the same way that people watch (and make) all kinds of movies of different varieties.
I don't use emoticons, and I'm also pretty pleasant. So if I say something that's rude or insulting, it's probably a joke.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 16, 2012 - 9:03PM
#7
|
Date Joined:
May 22, 2003
|
Out of curiosity, what would be some things that could undermine collaboration or inhibit the ability to share?
Anything that challenges the ability of a group to work together in order to achieve their goals of storytelling and entertainment is undermining to collaboration.
Anything that challenges the ability for an individual member of a group to contribute in terms of tactics or tale is inhibiting to their ability to share.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 16, 2012 - 9:15PM
#8
|
|
|
To mrpopstar, I agree with your sentiment that if the group doesn't work together to achieve goals and story is a form of "wrong" (per se). Upon further reflection, yeah, if the changes disturb the very essence of what D&D is (a collaborative, cooperative game that develops a story amongst players) the system is no longer D&D anymore, really.
I prefer 2nd Edition AD&D. But I have played basic, 1E, 2E, 3.5, & 4E, and found all to be fun.
IF IT'S D&D, I'LL PLAY IT, NO MATTER THE EDITION.
Just roll some dice.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 16, 2012 - 9:20PM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Apr 12, 2008
|
I'm sure we've all seen the debates. Alignment. AEDU vs Spell Points. Major fluff vs limited fluff. Great Wheel vs World Axis. Psionics. Some are quick to proclaim that something someone else did violates the "true spirit" of D&D and, basically, tells them they're doing it wrong. Is there any merit to these claims?
In fond memory of Mark "Wrecan" Monack.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 16, 2012 - 9:20PM
#10
|
|
|
I would say there is a very easy way to play wrong - not follow the rules.
The problem seems to stem from people posting and then you find out they run a home campaign, have built their worlds, adjusted the rules to match it, and then state: "The rules are meant to be changed. It says it right there in the PH!" Then they take their viewpoint and never see beyond that.
Now, walk into a gaming store, that is community based. Go to a convention and play at a community table, not with your friends. This is how almost all the people I know of play. (And I feel like I know quite a bit.) All of these people must follow the rules - as written! Why? Try walking up to a group of strangers and playing chess, but let them know you've incorporated your own rule on what a pawn can do, or that there are no queens in the game. Try going to your church's boardgame night and letting everyone know that in your game of Stratego the spy can revive. Try entering a fantasy football league and letting everyone know that you have extra points to spend because you represent a wealthy team. All of these things are ridiculous, just as playing D&D in a community setting and house-ruling is.
There needs to be codified rules, ones that the players follow, this way new people and veterans can meet one another and share a given experience.
This of course leads me to think how absurd modules will be unless they're campaign specific.
|
|
|
