Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 4286079" data-attributes="member: 42582">For what it's worth, a typical starting age is suggested on PHB p 30 (18 to 25 for humans), the issue of prior jobs is discussed on p 24, and the significance of worship on p 20 (and under the god descriptions that follow).A question, however: how does a game become more flexible and more of a toolbox by mandating via a dice roll the starting age of a PC?No version of AD&D supported Beholders as PCs. 3E offered an approximation to it. The particular mechanic that tries to achieve this is widely (though not universally) regarded as unsuccessful.I just don't see it. Yes, 3E tells me how to play a CN Half-Orc Druid. 4e tells me how to play a Good Tiefling Warlock. Tropes come and go, but they don't really tell us much about whether or not a game is a toolbox, a serious game, a casual game, or whatever.Now this is a more important point. 3E did deploy a wide range of character build and action resolution mechanics in the very same game. The question is, did it succeed? Or is it like a supposedly universal points-based system in which everyone knows that 100 points of Spartans can't actually take on 100 points of Space Rangers and hope to win?Play experience shows that 3E did not (on the whole, for most players most of the time) succeed in this respect.  Instead, the per-day mechanics (which govern healing and firepower) dominate, and those players whose PCs are hostage to different mechanics become subordinated to the dominant mechanics.3E is not the only game to suffer from this problem. I know from long experience that it happens in Rolemaster also, with its PPs per day spell recovery rules.Even if 4e does end up with a 15-minute day (and I am mildly optimistic that it won't) it still won't be as problematic as 3E, because at least it will be a democratic 15-minute day - it won't be one group of players having their play subordinated to those who chose a different (and dominant) resource management mechanic.If you are one of those who are in the minority, and did not find that one particular resource management mechanic emerged as dominant, than I could see why you might dislike that aspect of the 4e rules changes.I was wondering if someone else had thought of it. For those who really do like rules tinkering and a very flexible system that supports a wide range of PCs and campaign tropes, try Rolemaster. It's a great game with two editions currently in print. Plus there's HARP, which is sort of RM lite, from the same company. And there's HARP lite, which is a free download from their website.As a long time RM player, I do find the notion of 3E as a tinkerer's paradise a bit odd, because when I look at it through Rolemaster eyes I see a lot of stuff that would not be very easy to tinker with while maintaining game balance.</blockquote>

Verification