Search results

I played it for about 18 months, struggled with it, and then abandoned it as an RPG, keeping it as a rules vehicle for occasional arena fights. We went back to 1e and stuck with that until 5e came out.

The only one of those I'm completely on board with is "anti-railroad revolutionaries. The rest are moving away from my preferences.

General interest and profits are two different things.

Seems very judgmental to me, but you do you. I agree about the situation changing in the dungeon, but your solution reads as too aggressive to me.

Matters in what sense? Is this discussion actually about profit? Because I can't see a person's opinion not mattering otherwise.

So you have no interest in the hobby or the industry beyond 5e?

Why not talk about the official WotC books? Is their content somehow less exhausting because WotC makes it?

I prefer the RP part too personally. But technically the G is just as important.

I have seen more than one group try to do this; as has been said,, the game mechanics incentivise it, so by that metric it is understandable. People want to win. It's hardly being a "weirdo".

The problem IMO is, video games have taught players to more or less expect infinite resets. If any problem can't be fixed with a night's sleep, IME many players will literally consider it unfair.

"Works" in what sense? Obviously it depends on your goals. If your goal to allow for anyone that could be available, weighted by in-setting rarity, random generation works just fine.

Sure, there's more to do, and fixing healing is part of it. I like a proportional model myself.

So in a way, modern play is less driven by player action?

Hit points have been around long before "6-8 times a day" was a thing, and you can absolutely use them as part of a sim mechanic provided they are used in tandem with a long-term injury system of some kind. In that case they become mostly stamina points outside of the occasional need for...

Couldn't you create a random encounter table and make tokens for every creature on it?

It's interesting from an academic point of view (which I do appreciate), but I don't see what real value it has now for game designers in 2025. We do have decades more accumulate.

The GM is not mechanics. And the actual mechanics serve to model the world. It's that world, and the PCs interactions with it, that drive the game, not the mechanics themselves.

The GM has a hand in narration of events, creation and depiction of NPCs, and the results of actions, and of course they build the setting. The rules model the setting and how the PCs interact with it mechanically.

Can't tell you wasn't playing in the '70s. I'm telling why I do it now.

That's how I run every game.