Online games are particularly addictive imho especially now with things like loot boxes that have been made illegal and gave legislation pending.
Interactive world's with all your friends, no pause always on 24/7 using techniques casinos use (no clocks etc).
I play online but a lot less than I did. After playing MMO games nether myself or my wife do, mostly because of the time sink and now money (pay to win, loot boxes etc).
I'm not terribly interested in retroclones, but I do like the rules lighter basic designs that have come out of the OSR movement. I would recommend, for example, the Black Hack. Beyond the Wall also does some incredibly neat things, combining OSR with PbtA elements. And for sci-fi on an OSR chassis, Stars Without Number has been making waves.While I figuratively attended the Old School, starting in 1980, I suppose I must have graduated, or something, because I moved on to each new ed in turn, and played many other games in the mean time. Maybe OSR is incorporating some contemporaneous design, but, from my perspective that's just par for the course, what's noticeable is the atavistic aspects of the designs, and the appeal to nostalgia.
And, my 1e books weren't burned in a fire or lost in a move, and held up to years of hard use, and haven't yet been stolen by WotC ninjas, so OSR is just a big non-movement for me. OSRIC is nice when I don't have an old book handy, that's it.
This isn't true. T&T doesn't have a cleric/MU contrast; it is a spell point casting system; it uses group-vs-group combat resolution with no to-hit rolls and armour as a wounds buffer; etc.Tunnels and Trolls only differed from D&D in terms of presentation
I'm not 100% sure what a "story-telling game" is - Prince Valiant describes itself as a story-tellling game, but it's clearly a RPG and its mechanics (which are absolutely first-rate) are important to how it plays.Because in a story telling game it is only presentation that matters. What goes on under the hood is relevant only to engineers.
Maybe I've misunderstood this, but I think you're saying something I agree with: in 4e the maths/stats of PCs and creatures aren't models of anything. They're mechanical elements to be used in a mechanical process for determining outcomes.the meaningful fiction isn't really the illusion, taking the maths as being the fiction, instead of modeling the fiction, is.
So perhaps illusion is the wrong word..
An RPG that, in the 90s, positioned itself on the ROLE side of the Roll v Role Debate's false dichotomy. The eponymous Storyteller, being the prime example.I'm not 100% sure what a "story-telling game" is -
OK, I kinda like 'models' as a term, and I'd translate that last sentence to "they're just a resolution system." But i think we may be may be in danger of agreement, yes.Maybe I've misunderstood this, but I think you're saying something I agree with: in 4e the maths/stats of PCs and creatures aren't models of anything. They're mechanical elements to be used in a mechanical process for determining outcomes.
My question then is why did 4E only last four years, and why were so many of its innovations stripped from 5E? Did WotC put out content at an unsustainable pace, did they cave due to vocal 4E detractors, etc?
The Rick & Morty vs Dungeons & Dragons comic series even skipped talking about 4E, with Morty questioning why and Rick replying with "we don't talk about fourth edition". This after the comic criticized both 1E (too deadly) and 3E (wizards dominate).