Search results

Both I and my wife love it, uneven as its sometimes been.

And even Hero had rules that applied to specific genres and not elsewhere. But it seems like that isn't enough.

Usually I'm more likely to port rules over conceptually than literally, because trying to do it literally is fraught unless two systems are very similar. As an example, I'd be more likely to port over the idea of "clocks" than any specific expression of them.

Sadly, past history has suggested we're actually perfectly capable of getting worse at it.

Yeah, I've seen more than one do the "power ring conjured gatling cannon" trick on occasion. I mean, in the end, its no more irrational than giant green hammers.

Its just that at that point its pretty much tautalogical; if you want everything exception based to the specific context, and aren't even willing to acknowledge tools to apply more flavor and color being enough, you've pretty much declared a generic system impossible definitionally. At that...

And honestly, sometimes I've seen "bland" meaning "not exception based to the degree I'm used to and comfortable with."

That used to be common in the BRP-adjacent sphere, but I think there's being some tendency toward taking a blackjack approach now (which might just be me overfocusing on limited samples), so they're tending to, as you say, bake it into the roll in other ways.

Almost all cornbread is too sweet for me, and I'm not a fan of the degree to which it disintergrates.

At the very least, I don't think that there's any point in continuing in this particular thread.

It does not appear to me that I can properly express my view of a particular position here without it being taken as my expressing my view of the people, and as such I don't think I can usefully continue.

I've already mentioned it, but I think after the mod reaction I'm going to step out of this thread.

Its funny, I'm pretty fond of country gravy on chicken-fried steak, but on biscuits it doesn't do much for me.

Otherwise good GMs have blindspots and bad elements all the time. In particular, this is one a lot of old-school style GMs fall into, and I'm sure at least some of them are excellent in other ways.

If someone has decided to ignore emails on game topics, then they can't care too much about rules decisions in the first place.

I have no idea how you are as a GM. That's a gestalt of a number of factors, most of which can't be seen from a distance. And I haven't said you specifically belittle your players. But I stand by my opinion your position belittles non-GM gamers as a group.

You are either deliberately disregarding my distinction between individuals and groups, or blind to the distinction. In the first case I see no reason to not find your own position insulting. In the second case you're apparently incapable of actually conducting this conversation, since I made...

Which means it behooves the GM to try and even that out; its not an excuse for deciding to do it all himself. We exist in the days of Discord and email. If you want to tell me someone can game regularly but not present his opinion in downtime, that's going to be a hard sell.

I maintain half of the problem with game systems is lack of, or insufficient blindtesting. And sometimes its selective; people who run con games of their system will often learn about it in play, but may very well miss pitfalls in character generation since there's rarely time to mess with that.

A lot of it probably has to do with amount.