Search results

Let's see if I'm getting this right. The players take actions (or make moves as some systems call them) and the GM comes up with responses to those actions, improvising when necessary and asking for player input when in doubt. A neutral arbiter in the form of a Oracle might be called to spawn...

How would you answer those questions in your system of choice?

I know right? I'm disappointed as well. It's exhausting scrolling past all the 5e guff trying to find something worthwhile.

At this point I have to conclude that you're just trolling so I'll disengage.

It is not though. I’ll put the quote here again to remind myself. What this means is that a good compromise demand that both parties give some ground. This should mean a measure of dissatisfaction but since dissatisfaction isn’t an on/off switch this fine. Also if both parties can see that the...

I would go so far as to agree that creativity has improved significantly since "back in the days" but I would state that that most of todays creativity happens in the indie scene and has little to nothing to do with D&D. D&D is a behemoth, it basically dictates wat ttrpgs are today and in doing...

Thank god this is neither incorrect nor harmful.

“A good compromise is when both parties are dissatisfied” ― Larry David, Curb Your Enthusiasm: The Complete Seventh Season It's a quote and something people tend to say in a jovial manner. Take it easy.

Beautifully written.

Fully agree. They can be really cool pieces of art though.

No inherent difference? Let's check the logs shall we? According to this guy it is different. Wait, that's me. Let's ask someone else. Different eh? You can't trick me internet. One last try. Oh I give up. It's almost like no one has made the claim that there is no inherent difference. In...

Man, whatever happened to Ron Spencer. He was amazing illustrating for Werewolf and Fading Suns. His work on D&D and MtG wasn't to scoff at either.

Please quote where I stated my opinion as fact. Can’t remember doing it.

The thing is that even though I can admit descending AC is more complex than ascending AC it doesn’t change the fact that modern D&D is more complex than say B/X. With subclasses and feats and every other class being a spell caster and four or five different kinds of actions. It’s a lot more to...

It all depends on what you want from your game. For instance… As you yourself say, perhaps you want depth or granularity. I have friend who want rules for combat to have different damage types for bludgeoning, slashing, stabbing and then have armors who act differently against these damages...

You can question it all you want but since taste in games differ easier is not always better. Therefore the facts have no bearing on the arguments made. Addition is easier than subtraction. Scientifically proven (as per your statement and I've learned not to question you authority). However...

But "better" is also opinion. For some the math might just be what they like, making more difficult math into a better system. I'm sure there are guys out there who play and when one of them fires an arrow from a tower they use the pythagorean theorem to figure out if he gets a -2 or -4 to that...

True. I had actually forgotten that.

Wow. This discussion has really gone the extra mile. We're discussing opinions now? Let me rewind the tape to an earlier discussion where people really tried hard to shout me down with "facts". My opinion is that descending AC is neither better, nor worse, than ascending AC, only different (and...

A belated but much needed review to spotlight one of the cooles settings I've ever read in ttrpgs. It does take some getting used to if you're more of a traditional ttrpg guy but it's worth every bit of that effort spent if I do say so myself, and I do.