Community

Also, i agree that we have made significant progress and i think this will make me a better DM in the long run after i've had some time to think things through.

Honestly, i'm glad to have contributed, this is the thing that i've always loved doing and why i do what i do (taking something you love and deconstructing it until you hate it and love it all at the same time).

Thank you for the post Yagami and i think we are almost entirely agreed on everything at this point so i look forward to seeing whether anybody else has anything to say about this.

-Kraik

PS, by about page 20 i could tell how annoyed you were getting with people coming on and asking the same thing over and over again. Did you know the average time somebody spends on a webpage is less than 5 seconds? Focus levels have dropped tremendously since the internet came into being and maybe thats why you had to reiterate a point a thousand times to a thousand different people because hardly anybody has read everything that has been said.

I am prepared

and believe me, i will be. All my previous posts have been lost to the aether of time (its why i have virtually none) as i haven't been on the boards for a long time but i'm back so i think i will stay

-Kraik

Feb 3, 2013 -- 4:05AM, Litmus wrote:

I'll try again:

The design objective of the D&D system is to simulate a world of heroic fantasy and allow players to immerse themselves in a virtual life in said world.

It is a simulation game, not a competitive game.  Thus, your football/poker/fighting game analogies are largely irrelevant, and your argument that there must be a universal 'point' to D&D beyond engaging in a fantasy world is flawed.

As in real life, any other objectives are defined by the players.  You're going to need to either keep ignoring this or abandon your current argument.  As someone that professes to be on a journey to enlightenment, it's an important choice.  Perhaps the true Litmus test...

I don't disagree with you at all and you are right insofar as that those examples are flawed. But I would suggest that ALL examples are flawed; something cannot be likened to something else as there will always be a difference, however this difference is not to say that there are no similarities at all.

I think tabletop RPG's are a journey and, as i have stated previously, the point of all tabletop RPG's are (in an over-generalised way) 'progress', which is exactly what you are saying here. I think the thing is that Yagami (probably through his experience creating games) sees this much mroe mechanically than we do and i really don't think he's wrong. In fact, i think he's mostly right. It's the mechanics side of it that you're getting caught up in and i think that may just be a misunderstanding, the term 'power' is directly linked to that so i'll look at it from another angle.

We 'progress' through a tabletop RPG by gaining power. This power can come from a veriety of sources. Primarily, these sources we see as mechanical in nature (XP, loot etc) BUT this power can also be non-mechanical in nature (favors to certain NPC's, prestige and reputation when we walk into a new town, knowledge on what the BBEG's plans are etc). It is this mechanical nature that you think that Yagami thinks is the be all and end all of D&D. He doesn't. He thinks that 'Power' is.

What is life but the measurement of somebodies gaining of 'power' through experience, knowledge, money, prestige, reputation and deeds? so what is D&D but this if you liken the two?

-Kraik

Feb 3, 2013 -- 6:52AM, baldhermit wrote:

The answer here is:"How dare you define the way I should enjoy my game?"

The way I see it, the "journey" as you describe it, is the entire point, and the power progression, as you called it, no more than milestones along the road. 

I'll deal with your second point first i think.

I proposition this to you based on what you just said; how do we look at a journey except through these milestones? Unless one has progressed in some way (maybe power is the wrong term and is throwing a lot out of the window whenever it is said so i'm ditching it) how do we notice the journey at all?

Now, onto your first point.

I think you are misinterpreting what we are trying to do. The idea isn't the way you enjoy it, its the way the game was designed. It's the seperate of the act of playing the game and the actuality of the game itself. I play D&D because its fun, and in all honesty, i'm not denying that the enjoyment of the game isn't a part of the game itself and how its designed. However the enjoyment of it is external to the actuality of it; in essance what is the game itself intending and how does it get you there?

An example that i can think of (as the game has been likened to art in the past) is that of a painting. When looking at the Mona Lisa, we gain enjoyment from it because it is beautiful and I'm sure that da vinci, in some small and secondary way, wanted that. However that is not the primary reason WHY he painted it; the primary reason why he painted it was because he wanted to applaud this womans (or mans depending on which theory you look at) beautiful smile because it held some meaning for him.

The point of doing and the point creation are two entirely seperate entities. What i am suggesting does not invalidate either however, just seperates them so they can be looked at in different ways.

-Kraik

Feb 3, 2013 -- 7:10AM, baldhermit wrote:

I can only say I am very distrustful of people who make claims as to another persons reasons behind their actions, particularly when they never met this person.


D&D was designed, created by a large group of people, with varying interests and goals. I think the only statement you can make with certainty is that it was published by Hasbro with the intent to make cash.

As am I baldhermit so no worries on that point there, i'll try not to offend as often as i can (i dislike it personally).

And I think you may be right, however i hate being that cynical about things and, honestly, i think it's also overly generalised and misses a little bit of the point. If you take it back to its foundations with Gary Gygax (may he rest in peace) you cannot in good conscience say that he created the game to make money. This next point may be a little anecdotal but the way i heard he created the game was that he was a big fan of wargaming and through that wanted to create a game where, instead of fielding armies, you fielded one character and were given obsticles and challenges to overcome and dungeons to progress through, getting more powerful as you did so.

This, i think, is the intended point.

-Kraik