Quote from: two_fishes;495361So playing D&D the "wrong way" means you're some kind of pansy who is too attached to his Mary Sue character, but if you play D&D the "right way", you're clever and resourceful and tough. Is that about right? Hold on, I got something for you...

Personally, I prefered the post where Kaldric said that only immature players play in games where you fight monsters.

The mature way to pretend to be an elf is to run like a frightened child from everything in sight, apparently.

Quote from: jgants;495365Personally, I prefered the post where Kaldric said that only immature players play in games where you fight monsters.

The mature way to pretend to be an elf is to run like a frightened child from everything in sight, apparently.

Yeah that was a good one too. Sometimes I just want to stick a dagger in my eye.

Quote from: jgants;495358I agree with Justin.  The "never fight monsters" meme has rose-colored glasses that are so thick they are nearly opaque.

Yes, the game isn't 100% about slaughtering monsters.  Yes, XP is primarily from treasure.

Hold up, I don't think anyone is saying that you should *never* fight monsters.  Obviously you do; hell, there is a reason why combat gets its own section in the rules.  

That said, it isn't a game that rewards you for tackling every group of monsters head-on.  Again, in the early levels its a game of risk-management.

We're all about excluding the middle here Mr. G- especially if we can do it with name calling and manufactured asspain.

The game is called Dungeons & Greedy Paranoid Tacticians for a reason jackholes.

The very math of D&D dictates that if you get into fights you will eventually die.

Smart play mitigates risk in favor of avoiding combat while getting the treasure.

Kind of how in the Conan stories and Indiana Jones movies the protagonists would go into ancient ruins looking for a fight...

Generally speaking, unless it was an obviously mindless/aggressive encounter (with skeletons, say, or slimes and the like) we would and still do often try to talk our way out of the fight by talking to the creature. We still get XP for "defeating" them (that is to say, outwitting or reasoninig with them), but not the treasure of course. Also, as long as we've played we have a pretty good sense of when a fight is just assisted suicide and will usually try to avoid those instead of charging in because we're "supposed" to.

Quote from: jgants;495358But that's treasure you get from defeating monsters.  Treasure just lying around with no traps or monsters guarding it was piddly amount.  The real money was from things like defeating a dragon.

I won't argue that the greatest rewards were generally associated with the higher risks.

"Defeating monsters" has many meanings, not all of which have anything to do with a slugfest. A monster could be lured out of a lair and tricked into pursuing an intruder while others go in and loot the lair. A monster could be tricked, or duped into giving up some treasure to a well executed scheme.

The best thing ever is getting monsters to fight other monsters.

Quote from: two_fishes;495361So playing D&D the "wrong way" means you're some kind of pansy who is too attached to his Mary Sue character, but if you play D&D the "right way", you're clever and resourceful and tough. Is that about right?

not sure about the "clever, resourceful, and tough" or "wrong/right" way to play, but OK.

Also keep in mind you have set encounters and wandering monsters.  The big treasures are to be gotten from the set encounters.

Wandering creatures have little, if any, treasure on them, and are basically a waste of resources to face down every time they pop up.  Good players know to avoid random encounters because the effort is not usually worth the reward.

Quote from: jgants;495365Personally, I prefered the post where Kaldric said that only immature players play in games where you fight monsters.

The mature way to pretend to be an elf is to run like a frightened child from everything in sight, apparently.

I don't remember saying that. If you managed to read that in to what I said, maybe you should ask yourself why you're so sensitive?

Here's what I said - I'll bold a few parts to assist reading comprehension:

QuoteIn my experience, small children tended to play that way when D&D came out - they latched on to fighting the monsters as the point of the game, rather than as the main obstacle to progress. Kind of like little kids will latch on to dessert as the point of the meal, rather than simply one part of it. Kids want every course to be dessert, and only later do they discover that ruins the meal.

How, exactly, did you manage to get "only immature players play in games where you fight monsters" out of that? Buddy, you're reading WAY more into my posts than is there. I say that in my experience, kids think combat is the point of the game, rather than an obstacle in it to be overcome. I never say the game doesn't have combat in it. The game does say it's something to avoid if you can - just like falling into a trap - the game never says you're always going to be able to avoid it. But, just like you wouldn't just jump into every pit trap you find, you don't just moronically fight it out at every opportunity, for no purpose.

Yeah, the best treasure is guarded by monsters - but most monsters don't have the best treasure. The point of the game (for me) is to have a goal, and achieve the goal. Generally, that doesn't mean mindlessly charging into every combat I see, like some rabid doof. Generally, it means avoiding any unnecessary combat. I'm bang alongside necessary combat.

BTW: Pretending to be something means trying to convince someone you actually ARE that thing. I've roleplayed an elf, I've never pretended to BE one.

TL;DR: I believe monsters are the main obstacle to progress, and thus overcoming them by the most intelligent means at hand is a large portion of the game. If you believe fighting monsters is the point of the game, then you have the same beliefs as children who played the game when I started playing it. Do you believe fighting monsters is the whole point of the game, rather than that monsters are the main obstacle to overcome? 'Cuz there's a difference there.

I'm not calling you a child. I'm not even calling you a munchkin. I'm saying you might believe some of the same things as children, or munchkins, that I've known. If that's hurtful... gosh. Sorry.

Quote from: Kaldric;495432I'm not calling you a child. I'm not even calling you a munchkin. I'm saying you might believe some of the same things as children, or munchkins, that I've known. If that's hurtful... gosh. Sorry.

Well, it's a level of passive-aggressive douchebaggery worthy of TBP, at least.

Only if you think liking stuff that kids like or power gaming are somehow bad things.

Spoiler

They aren't.

What the fuck is this shit?  What the fuck?  I go to lurk mode and the next thing I know it's all story this and avoid combat that and indiana jones didn't the other!

you fucking lot of pansies!  Quit reading some finnish death metal failure's od&d repackaging and go back to playing D&D!  Draw your swords, wade in, get some blood on you, call down some eldritch energies, utter a few healing spells or so help me god I will sack the fucking lot of you.  Yes, "this close to christmas".

god amighty.

Quote from: thedungeondelver;495438What the fuck is this shit?  What the fuck?  I go to lurk mode and the next thing I know it's all story this and avoid combat that and indiana jones didn't the other!

you fucking lot of pansies!  Quit reading some finnish death metal failure's od&d repackaging and go back to playing D&D!  Draw your swords, wade in, get some blood on you, call down some eldritch energies, utter a few healing spells or so help me god I will sack the fucking lot of you.  Yes, "this close to christmas".

god amighty.

Notice how this post follows the typical three act structure. I especially enjoyed the references to the "God" character both direct and indirect.

edited to remove bile generated by the usual internet stuff