Recent content by EzekielRaiden

While I do like the general concept here...I suspect that this is a bit overly fiddly for a lot of players. That's why I went with the idea I did. A nice, relatively short list (say, 10) of "Disciplines", each of which has some number of basic Deeds and a couple of Master Deeds (or whatever we...

Are these rules baked into the core game? What page of the PHB or DMG features them?

Which is why I keep calling for things like novice levels and incremental advances. They are very literally the tools you need to craft the kind of experience you want. Like those are literally THE rules needed for cultivating a diverse array of experiences. They equip the GM with multiple...

Yes, and social is beyond any designer's ability to control. Hence, while the social sphere is essential and unavoidable, it is also completely irrelevant as far as rule design goes. Unless you're finally going to agree with me that well-made rules help prevent problems cropping up in the...

Everybody? Well no, but I didn't say EVERYBODY, did I? I mean a reasonably-large plurality, if not majority, of most cadres of gamers. I genuinely believe it is not only possible, but completely feasible to do. WotC just doesn't have the guts to do it. It requires real, serious playtesting. It...

This isn't possible. There's more I could've said to the rest of your post, but that's not possible. You cannot design something without purpose. To even begin designing "a game" means you, necessarily, have purposes in mind. Inherently purposeless design is never good design. Now, purposeless...

Okay. I...don't see how that actually responds to what I was saying to Lanefan. Lanefan is very specifically saying that you CAN teach preferences. That you can somehow make people like the meatgrinder deathfest that is early-edition D&D.

Sorry, but...screw that noise. I should not have to create the game. That's literally what we pay nearly two hundred dollars ($180, not counting shipping, from WotC directly) for. If the book actually said, "This is not a game, it is merely our suggestions for how you can build your own game"...

Are they, or are they not, part of the game system? Are they, or are they not, part of the intended design balance? No, it is not. It is one kind of D&D. It is not ALL of D&D, it never was, and it never will be. To assert otherwise is to tell me that I'm having badwrongfun. Or, I suppose, if...

Preferences cannot be taught. They simply exist, or don't. They might arise from exposure...but they also might not. "I can teach you to like this!" is a massive error. Except it isn't. Like it literally isn't. A "sheer gamble" makes it a roulette-wheel situation. That is not what it is. At...

No, it does not. What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

That's a pretty damning conclusion. If most editions are so badly designed that it is not hard to improve any of them, doesn't that mean we've been paying designers for sub-par product for years and years now? Why should I pay for product that is so flawed?

I certainly believe this, but...you were the one arguing that old-school GMs were super generous. Now you seem to be undercutting your own point. I don't understand. Yes, I'm aware. I consider this a short-term design benefit, long-term design mistake. The treasure tables were a hidden Fighter...

I. Don't. Care. The design is what the game is, and not only can but should be evaluated for all of its contents, not merely the commonly-used parts. The whole thing matters, and if there are designs in it that are ill-considered or outright deleterious, they should be addressed (fixed if...

While I would not require that myself (since it would imply that every class that can cast spells should have spell lists of equal length, for example, which I don't think is necessary--and likely harmful!), I certainly agree with the underlying conception. Functionally, all of a class's spells...