Search results

Vehicles are a grey area, but in science fiction games tech is often used to substitute for things magic would do in a fantasy game. That's what I'm talking about.

That reads as rather unkind, if you're unaware, and makes assumptions that your feelings in this area are objectively superior to others.

There are definitely games designed for and/or suited for a different focus, but I rarely have any interest in those games, and sim is still a priority for me even there. Games that don't play properly unless everyone is aware of and following genre conventions, like supers or something like...

I'm sure it starts with that history because it's interesting to the writer and they hope it's interesting to the reader. You are assuming adventure playability at the table is obviously the highest priority, and that's just not a universal truth.

As I've said above, I believe everything a creature can do in the setting should have a mechanical implementation (to a minimum degree of tolerable abstraction) in the game. Simulating the world as logically as possible (within the bounds of playability) is my goal.

Maybe? I don't buy WotC anymore, and most of what I came for was the proprietary IP (the only thing they have going for them as far as I care, and even then I prefer when non-WotC people work with it).

For what game is your example designed?

Again, it depends on why you're buying the adventure. If you're here for the lore and/or to pull elements for your own homebrew (as I am), more is better. More bang for your buck, more material for your reading enjoyment. If you're just there for an easy adventure to run, a lot of that will be...

No, I mean any skills not directly associated with physical combat, magic or technology (in a utilitarian role similar to magic). So infiltration skills, but also social skills, trade skills, and exploration skills outside of infiltration (like navigation, vehicles, and survival).

I'm just glad they aren't specifically talking about D&D, or I wouldn't be allowed to participate.

You don't have to call it "thief" or "rogue" (to use the modern parlance), but in order to have a reasonable simulation of a world, fantasy or otherwise, IMO a skill-based character is very important, to complement the combat or magic/technology-based characters. If those things are all aspects...

Since I only use modules as fodder for my homebrew campaign, I prefer they be made to read rather than made to run as a single piece I'm not going to use like that anyway. Perhaps others feel the same.

Of course, if the narrative movement isn't of interest to you, RPGs become that much more "solved".

Agreed. All my own design starts with the fictional concept and then tries to find a way to make that work mechanically, with a closer eye on simulation than PC balance.

As I said above, good thing I love Oregon Trail. I do agree though that RPG-style adventure goes well with the traditional kind, and can enhance the experience without abstracting the exploration part of the game away.

Yeah, if I had my way I would use more detailed rules for Supply than those to which Level Up defaults, but I don't have the right players for that unfortunately.

My second RPG read was MERP. My second RPG played was TNMT & Other Strangeness I think, both after the "B" in BECMI and AD&D 1e.

How close is too close though? Everyone has their own line, and the only ones that should matter to you in your own game (which is what we're talking about) IMO is yours and your players.

Fair enough. To each their own, but I generally take play too seriously to enjoy fourth wall breaking unless comedy is the point.

The rules for journeys in several games (mentioned by me above) do a great job of handling stuff like that as exploration challenges.