Search results

Sometimes time is an issue and the PCs are all we've got, and sometimes someone else can pick up the slack. Just like real life.

It's an issue for some people, a non-issue for others. That's all we can fairly say. All this "most people agree with me" stuff is irrelevant.

They can be in D&D, if you decided that skills are different than D&D presents them. Sounds like a houserule. Nothing wrong with that, but that's what it is IMO.

Wrong for the person, not wrong in general. Why are you so "exhausted" by dealing with people who don't like what you like?

I think that for a lot of people, "I don't like that" is the most important consideration. We are talking about a leisure activity here.

But if someone has a preferred method, why is that a problem for you? How does that affect your play?

That's my understanding. How is that the same as simulationism?

Eye of the beholder. IMO ACKS is one the best games out there that does what it does.

There are some changes otherwise, and it is very nice to have everything integrated and easily referenced, but that is largely correct. ACKS is designed to have a lot of modular options to expand with more detail any aspect of the game, and to have clear formulae for how the game elements are...

I am curious about other styles of games, I've just come to the conclusion after years of discussing them in threads like these that the subjective drawbacks outweighs the subjective benefits for me. That doesn't mean they're not great games for other people. Heck, I still want to run Star Trek...

Well, I'd much rather that Things Happen situations be exceptions handled on a non-systematic, case-by-case basis.

But...it's a leisure activity. Why should you have to be interested in a leisure activity that isn't fun for you? It still reads to me as, "your side is wrong because you're not interested in things you don't like".

Ok, I see "module", I think, "linear adventure", not simply, "event based on prep".

Whereas in my view if you don't like to prep, that's fine. As a player I am fine with a much wider variety of games than I would ever run. But if the style really doesn't work for me I'm unlikely to play long.

Honestly, that attitude from the non-traditional side is the whole reason I'm still here.

Because the second statement is an outright insult to traditional-leaning gamers? It suggests that it's wrong to not be interested in non-traditional games and techniques, rather than just being a preference.

Wouldn't that be nice? Like I said above, I still feel folks are treating this thread as an excuse to bash on traditional games and the people who like them, because they find folks who aren't interested in non-traditional techniques "exhausting". It's right there in the OP.

Mostly agree, but I'm not sure where "the module" comes into it.

But "I like simulation and prep" is part of the preference. You have to accept the whole thing as a preference, not pick it apart because some parts are like your preference and other parts aren't.

For some reason there are folks who can't just accept the idea of different strokes.