Search results

Thinking that design is utterly and absolutely different for TTRPGs vs other kinds of games is a nonstarter. You are simply wrong. Yes, we need to consider somewhat different things. But the vast majority of it is the same, because both of them are game design. You... You do realize that...

Or maybe character death isn't the most interesting choice as far as consequences go? Dunno. Might be worth a thought. Yes, I'm aware of the stylistic difference. I don't enjoy that kind of play. I find it, frankly, somewhere between "tedious" and "actively unpleasant". It's not a disparity...

So, the rules aren't rules. They're just suggestions. The GM does whatever they want, whenever they want, for as long as they want--meaning, exactly the thing you said doesn't apply. It's exactly the same as what you said, it's just sneaky, secret, hidden behind a pretense of actually playing...

That....has...nothing whatsoever to do with what I was talking about??? In 5.0, Champions get one and only one source of bonus damage: They crit when their attack roll die says 19 (more at high level, but my math was focusing <11). That's it. That's their one bonus. Everything else is...

Disingenuous players will always be a problem. I guess I just see a pretty substantial problem there because, as a result of this, you'll literally never see players decide to change teams the other way. The only people who will change are the ones who are disingenuous jerks. There will never...

I mean...you can elect to do that if you like. It doesn't actually change what the thing is. I'm calling out these categories because people talk about how 5e is sooooo open to doing things with it, but when the rubber meets the road, anything the GM herself didn't personally create is very...

It is extremely important to distinguish the four following categories when answering this sort of question. Houserules: Tweaks, modifications, or replacements of core systems, e.g., how the game as it already exists works. "Oh, for us, fall damage is d10 per 10 feet, not d6, up to a maximum of...

But, you see, if the players who like Dark Sun allow the book to be published, then people might like Dark Sun being this way, which means they'll learn to like Dark Sun wrong. That can't be allowed. Nobody can like Dark Sun for wrong reasons. They have to like it for the right reasons, or not...

I certainly grant that it is much more engaging. I just don't think that forcing every single magic item into this mold is a viable strategy. The well of inspiration is only so deep, and if you hold things to this standard and they start becoming slop, it's going to be way, way worse than just...

Unfortunately, that simply won't happen. Like I understand where you're going with that, but that will not--ever--be the default rules of the game. This isn't a speculation on my part; it is a statement of fact. People aren't interested in waiting six to twelve IRL months to get something...

Oh, no, that's not my complaint at all! In the absolute nicest terms I can possibly summon: The 2014 encounter-building rules aren't. They aren't encounter-building rules at all. They don't build things. They simply spray and pray.

All I can say is: Literally decades of video game design have consistently shown you are, in every way, wrong on this. TTRPG design isn't that different. The consistent complaints about 3e and 5e have both been exactly the thing you claim people won't complain about: that some things are...

Isn't "going beyond the rules" the exact same thing as the above, just being more secretive about it? You're not actually playing fair--you're pretending they're getting a fair shot, when they aren't.

Okay, but the issue there is the meaninglessness. Don't do meaningless encounters. That's why 4e aimed for making all encounters set pieces. I think that aim was slightly off the mark, but not because making set-piece encounters great was bad. It's because there's still some value in...

Most people. Because people understand that, when you incentivize something, that thing is now inherently more valuable. That's...what an incentive is. Then you need to understand that that is not what most people will do with a game. "Players will optimize the fun out of your game" is an...

Alright. The former strikes me as not really much of a reward--it's just an exchange, giving up short-term power for long-term power, in the context of destroying an opposite-alignment magic item. The latter, however, is a reward--and strongly resembles how Dungeon World did alignment. There...

Okay. Second part is...massive...so it's getting a separate post. My first thought: This is way the hell longer than the original. That leads to various issues. In brief: If every item is meant to look like this, items will take up massive page-space, making them unwieldy in production terms...

Why should it mean only one big encounter for the day? "Set piece" simply means that it's a big spectacle. It could be the last encounter of several, the first encounter of several, or anything in between. I find this assumption extremely confusing.

These are Google mail links. I cannot view them as I do not have access to your Gmail account. I assume you meant to link something else?

Well, I'm afraid you're almost certainly going to have to accept that some people like, not necessarily "wish lists", but aiming for particular goals over time, which will include items. It's unavoidable. The existence of cool things inevitably will mean some people--indeed, a lot of...