Search results

I fo it to make the game I want. Is there another reason?

You do some working on making hit points make more sense from a Sim perspective, and you've got more breathing room to work on the other issues you mentioned.

Man I wish Harnmaster was more reasonably priced...

Haven't they been doing that though? How much of the game really supports high level play?

How do you suggest that be done?

Agreed. Big fan of having to take your long rest at a haven myself.

Maybe the WotC 5e designers should have been more clear about their intentions. Maybe they still need to do that.

There's a difference between denying what the game recommends, and just not wanting to play that way.

Find a group that wants to play that way, and Bob's your uncle!

If you stop caring about verisimilitude and "treat the game as a game", you will divide the player base rather severely IMO. 4e more or less tried this, and we all know how that turned out. On the other hand, if you want a game targeted at a smaller fraction of the fantasy RPG player base, have...

I do get soggy about hit points, because bringing it up as a counterargument to any desire for simulation in RPGs is very much beating a dead horse. I prefer that, if a game is going to use hp, that they don't use it exclusively. Some kind of stamina mechanic, long-term injury potential, or...

This is the sort of stuff I'm talking about (although I don't care for your implication that sim and fun are somehow mutually exclusive. I find sim rules extremely gratifying).

Beyond Level Up and ACKS II, games I would happily run as a 60+ session campaign include Legend of the Five Rings (any edition prior to 5th), Star Trek Adventures, Marvel Multiverse, any of Kevin Crawford's ...Without Number series of games, a 1e/2e AD&D hybrid (my jam for 20+ years), or BECMI.

I don't know...a lot of stuff in TSR D&D was designed to represent a thing in the world, not just to facilitate "fun" for the players. Why bother to discuss history and setting logic at all otherwise? The 1e DMG is full of sim mechanics. And abstraction is a necessary component of any RPG. It's...

To be honest, I've never really believed him on that. I'm not sure he did either.

The whole, "elves have no souls" joke made the rounds many times in my long-running 1e group.

So you're cool with multiple nonhuman classes (as suggested in the post to which you responded), but only want one human class?

...Yeah. I do that with every game I like. Finances, allowing, why wouldn't I? For me, play is driven by the player's actions through their PCs, moderated through the settings qualities and events.

Perhaps not everyone agrees with your assessment of spell point systems?

I agree. Since I strongly disagree with that idea, it really explains why I don't care for most modern mechanics. Thanks!