Search results

I take "tactics" to mean "having to think about what you are doing in the middle". Or at all, for that matter. Attacks of Opportunity/Opportunity Attacks and limited uses mean you have to control yourself. I hate that. I'd much rather just be able to make snap decisions and be all impulsive.

This is the sort of stuff I don't get: if you don't need mechanics for this why do you need them for other things? I see the use of mechanics to be an interaction between the player and the game. When it's just a matter of personal interaction I question why the game needs to butt in at all.

So if you hate tactics it's not a good game for you? I'm wondering what the frequency is of powers that could be used out of combat despite not seeming designed for it. What I see with rituals is that previously some were spells that you could just snap your fingers and have a little cool...

And what about if you're not tactically-inclined? On a related note, for anyone who can answer: Approximately how many powers have non-battle uses? (Just to clarify: I'm not talking about skill challenge mechanics. I'm asking how many powers (roughly) have mechanics that could be used to do...

And you don't get tired with the similarity of the way moves work? "Push this, slide that, do this much damage of that type, you get to add a bonus from this item". If there were more flavor in the workings themselves I wouldn't think the moves so useless, but as they stand it seems like a lot...

It's not about how flexible it is or not, nor whether it can be abused. It's just too much to see pages upon pages of powers with similar effects. When you play. When you just look at it you don't necessarily see what it's going to become. I don't think one should have to understand the...

This is one of the really big thing that keeps me from 4e: if so many powers and items and monsters have similar effects I don't need each individual one to be built, just a system for doing it myself. The only other thing would be how tied into the grid everything is, but at least if the books...

Until they make a Mac version it's not free for me because I'd have to buy Windows. I have no other need of Windows, so it's not worth the purchase to me.

The thing I'd miss the most this way is posting a witty mid-battle comment. Even along the lines of: DM: Okay, you've just beaten the fire giant chieften when his army bursts into the room. Player: Well, out of the frying pan and into the fire.

Yeah, that's what I was afraid of. The thing is I don't play face-to-face right now, so I need good systems for PbP or chat. It might work on the latter, though based on the descriptions it still wouldn't be as fun. Thanks for the answer.

Does anyone know how well it works in Play-by-Post games? It would seem with Aspects this is a system that requires rulings right in the middle of the action, which would slow PbP down.

While it sounds like a lot of fun I'm waiting for the generic rules-set they said they'd come out with so I don't end up adapting pulp rules to a genre that needs something they don't give me.

Are we talking D&D specifically, or RPGs in general? If the core is restricted that sets up an expectation on how people play the game because to go beyond the core they have to exert themselves (either by spending more money on a supplement or by making their own). This is fine if you want to...

Amen (if I may use a religious word for a non-religious context without offending anyone). And for me there is another side to wahoo: "wahoo brought low", or using wahoo elements and then treating them as mundane in order to make fun of them or to make fun of the mundane.

I prefer wahoo because it feels like there's more variety to draw from. Ex: Traditional races are "humans with funny foreheads". Wahoo races include fantasy robots and half-werebeasts.

May I ask why? I suppose since I started this I should at least post an answer to the question before I forget. What I find dull is the expectation that the PCs are going to do anything. It's equal parts just no fun to ride in and be the hero when that's the obvious solution and insulting to...

I'm on a personal mission to find game settings that are dull, unexciting, lacking in the sort of starter sparks that GMs go on about needing. Not for any real intended use, just because I've gotten curious over the years of reading setting descriptions that make all of them sound like you can...

That does make sense. Having played games with no rules and just storytelling this is really the only area you might need adjudication. The one thing I'd have to say is that at times not knowing if you can succeed is fun. Some people welcome the challenge of having to improvise a response on...

So how would a system model this?

And if you really feel like you want something more ablative there are the hit point rules in the Mastermind's Manual. Most people I've heard from don't like them, but they're there if you need them.