Game problems that are really Player/DM problems
Berandor
lunatic
http://www.indie-rpgs.com/_articles/system_does_matter.html
Otherwise, I must say I'm mostly with arnwyn. Conflicts do arise between DMs and players, but if the system didn't have a part in these problem, then system wouldn't matter at all. Different systems facilitate different aspects of play, so problems might do back or even away, or arise and become stronger depending on your choice of system.
Otherwise, I must say I'm mostly with arnwyn. Conflicts do arise between DMs and players, but if the system didn't have a part in these problem, then system wouldn't matter at all. Different systems facilitate different aspects of play, so problems might do back or even away, or arise and become stronger depending on your choice of system.
Quasqueton
First Post
I read the article. I read some of the responses here. And I don't think we're talking on the same subject. I think arwyn has unintentionally hijacked this topic to something I wasn't addressing.
I'm not talking about other games. I'm not talking about Player-DM conflicts. I'm not talking about various play styles.
Quasqueton
I'm not talking about other games. I'm not talking about Player-DM conflicts. I'm not talking about various play styles.
Quasqueton
I woul say I have to disagree with Ron Edwards' article "System does matter"
He breaks it down to 3 game styles, and suggests that a game should focus on one style and have rules that support that style. Then you choose the game that meets the style you want.
The problem is, gaming groups are not homogenous. They're made up of a variety of players with differing tastes. So a good game should cater to all of these tastes as best as it can, given the make-up of the group is likely mixed.
How's that map to Quasqueston's point? As he says, much of the "mechanics complaints" can be resolved on the interpersonal level, and less so on house-ruling the system.
And that summarizes to the following points:
tell players the kind of game you're trying to run
have interesting NPCs
don't give out so much loot if you hate lots of magic stuff
use the right strength of monster for your party's actual strength
don't give players time to optimize their actions
make players be prompt with their combat responses
It's less on what rules you use or don't, more on how you drive the game play, and that's a people thing, not mechanics.
Janx
He breaks it down to 3 game styles, and suggests that a game should focus on one style and have rules that support that style. Then you choose the game that meets the style you want.
The problem is, gaming groups are not homogenous. They're made up of a variety of players with differing tastes. So a good game should cater to all of these tastes as best as it can, given the make-up of the group is likely mixed.
How's that map to Quasqueston's point? As he says, much of the "mechanics complaints" can be resolved on the interpersonal level, and less so on house-ruling the system.
And that summarizes to the following points:
tell players the kind of game you're trying to run
have interesting NPCs
don't give out so much loot if you hate lots of magic stuff
use the right strength of monster for your party's actual strength
don't give players time to optimize their actions
make players be prompt with their combat responses
It's less on what rules you use or don't, more on how you drive the game play, and that's a people thing, not mechanics.
Janx
Quasqueton
First Post
Some compaints about the system come from Player/DM problems, not from the system itself. If all my stories written in Word suck, it is not a problem of Microsoft.
I haven't suggested this.
Quasqueton
Last edited:
Quasqueton
First Post
Not to be rude or flippant, but if I haven't clearly stated it in the above posts, I'm just not able to explain it.
Quasqueton
