Search results

In the case of AwoN, as I recall it has a selection of default settings for the (I want to say either three or four) type of apocalypses it talks about, but more than most of Crawford's other Without Number games really leans into rolling (sometimes literally) your own.

I also have to say I'd personally be more likely to give something a look with a one time purchase, even if it was halfway substantial, than a subscription. I'm not a fan of, effectively, renting software.

Though not what I currently use, I have to admit Foundry would probably be my drop back choice if I switched at this time.

I can state the second here was a pretty good setting; the first version of it had a bit of a design problem at one point, but the author fixed it in the second edition. There's also the question of what translates into "post-apocalypse" here. It technically fits, but I suspect the OP wouldn't...

Since we've had a habit of keeping character sheets and running characters for people when missing, I'd just do that until an opportunity for them to leave arrived, and then not make a big deal about the reasons unless it seemed a very unlikely development.

This is not a universal view of being a GM, and GM-only choice here. Its traditional, but its not a law of nature.

Genuine question here: even with VTT's that can roll both ways, I'd think a given session is still being hosted one way or the other, so it seems like this is one of those things different people in a group both can't have it the way they want it. Am I wrong here?

I'm firmly in the "self-hosted or bust" school; even with the best of intentions I don't want to be dependent on someone else to host my game. Edit: Past that, I'm a man of simple needs; though I now use some macros, all I really need is map and token hosting, and perhaps some minimalist light...

Not much more to say on the subject then. But I wanted to keep that visibible to people, because there's a lot of criticism that acts like its back in the 3e days of a good dozen modifiers. (To make it clear, I didn't respond to the rest because I consider pursuit of speed almost always...

Only a criticism if you don't find fun in the extra steps.

It may very well be the smarter way to go but--surprise, we're not all smart about all things, and can take a long time to learn even if we do. Like I said, I took literally years to decide much as I was going to regret it, GMing for the group I'd played with for decades just wasn't working any...

You at least understand that some people legitimately want some distance and are working from a writer-level approach to the game. They may not give you what you want out of other players, but you don't seem to consider their approach illegitimate.

Hmmm. I didn't remember there were any cases where a Raise wasn't in steps of four. Some Edge or another? Normally you're not necessarily getting an Advance every session, either. And its one thing when you do. Yeah, you have choices, but "having choices" seems to be an odd thing to have...

Well, yeah, if they say they were sabotaging it, that's a different story. Its when they say "I did X" but someone adds on in their head "because Y" I start to roll my eyes. Internet Telepathy is notoriously poor.

How's that any different than DC or AC numbers? I'm guessing they hadn't played with damage absorbtion armor systems at all before? (I'm not being snide, people who've freshly emerged from the D&D ecosystem often haven't). I'm not sure why that'd be difficult, but if they did they did...

An entirely defensible argument. But not the only place people keep telling themselves if they just try again... I just do have to point out there can be a lot of practical constraints for a lot of people (transportation, time frames) that can make them very slow about doing that sort of...

That's what I wondered. Huh. Odd. Only thing I've ever had trouble explaining to people about SW is the slightly odd way skills and attributes interrelate, and in the case of people unused to it conceptually, the open ended dice.

I should note that PF2e has a maximum of about five steps you can play there, and some of them are hard to apply at will. That's because they compressed the modifier types from what it once was so you're not doing the 3e era "chase a dozen potential modifiers" thing.

I'll give them the first part of this is at least an arguable point. The second one is the same defense Advantage/Disadvantage is let off on, and I roll my eyes about it there, so it doesn't sell me better here.

Well, without referencing the system I'm not going to say there might not be a good reason to do it that way in the context of other structural elements (I'm not going to give D&D the same benefit of the doubt because I understand its mechanical structure better), but it still doesn't strike me...