Search results

I consider that pretty absolute. If it just applied a failure change I think you'd have an argument. Far as that goes, I think you're wrong about OD&D; mages and thieves flat out weren't allowed to wear anything (mages) or anything but leather (thieves).

Not routinely. The only cases where they do is when there's either a long distance initial encounter distance, or when one side has an unassailable position (usually flight). Neither of those is the common case in my experience, and without it you can end up having a ranged weapon sit on your...

I don't know if they're "proper"--there were distinctly some problems with the first of these two, but if anything they were the opposite of being able to just roll over things--but the two 1-20 APs I played in were https://paizo.com/store/pathfinder/adventures/adventurePath/ageOfAshes and...

Yeah, but its not a mystery those are off the beaten path as GURPS approaches generally go.

That sounds probable. While PF2e has a lot of conditional attacks and such, if one's played 4e, there's no where near the amount of pushing targets around the battlefield; there's just enough to screw up their action economy by the combination of needing to get up and reclose (at least for ones...

While I agree with a lot of this, I think it underestimates the degree positioning matters for many character types in PF2e.

Ah, that explains it. The GM is putting things out that are downhill in AC. Yeah, that'd do it, but IME its not exactly a typical thing for all or at least most fights, and when there are such things out there, there tend to be rather a lot of them. Well, if most encounters are far enough...

No doubt. Its kind of a strange feeling for me to understand not being able to find players or GMs for a given game system because I spent much of my gaming career with access to a lot of players around who weren't wedded to one system (even D&D) so much they wouldn't try other things and...

The weirdness I can see coming up with that is movement. You can just multiply it out, of course, but then some people find it strange they couldn't shoot at the person running from cover to cover.

I was thinking more in terms of the question of six surrounding opponents (varied by terrain) as compared to four (or eight, if you allowed the corners).

You just used "abstract" and "GURPS" in the same sentence, didn't you? :)

I don't remember how GURPS facing rules work any more, but I'd think going from hexes to squares would have some impact there.

I get some of the problems the 1-second round was trying to address; particularly in modern games, the rate of fire is glacially slow compared to what most firearms can do, and even in melee it often underestimates the speed of attacks seriously. The problem is, it ignores the other side of...

Not when its absolute. I've played a number of games with armor training rules (Alternity comes to mind, as does AGE) but they don't stop you from wearing armor you're not trained in if you want to; they just make it somewhat unattractive.

Game systems that evolve (in the actual sense of change to fit new environments) are going to leave some people behind. That's not a flaw, but neither is not feeling great if you're one of the people left behind. It can be particularly painful if its the big dog that you've been able to be...

You mean the things (particularly immersion) that people disagree about what helps and hurts all the time as-is? I think you're being an idealist if you don't think they'd just bring those axes to the new topics you want.

Had one of the later until comparatively recently.

Given I'm specifically talking about hit points here, that's kind of a nonsensical ask. The whole point with talking mooks is mostly about them doing the same sort of thing elevating hit points do in the opposite direction.

Sure. The problem I'm suggesting is a lot of people want overlapping things. They aren't going to be easily separated out because they share some desires with Group A and some with Group B, and may not wish to sacrifice either of those sets of desires. That doesn't mean there aren't some with...

I don't really think so, because I think there'd be both too many silos, and some that were counterproductive (in that they separated off discussion that has some relevance to people who wouldn't see them). Even there you're going to have problems because relatively few games are so narrow...