NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 8516180" data-attributes="member: 82106">Yeah, I don't know. I mean, sure, different implementation would produce different results, seems a fairly trivial result <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> I don't mind so much in a player-facing situation, that is when I'm the player. As a GM I look for systems where there are few, if any, exceptions to handle. It's like HoML, everything is basically a boon, a knack, or some kind of proficiency. The only other sort of 'things' out there are challenges. Even afflictions are challenges (which actually kinda makes sense, 4e should have done that). All play runs through either the 'general' or the 'action' flavor of challenge, and at this point even attack and defense work almost exactly like a regular skill check in a general challenge. There's really very little, rules-wise the GM needs to pay attention to.I am not sure I would label this rules-light though. It is RULES SIMPLE, but that doesn't imply there aren't a lot of rules, they just look like many many instantiations of the same thing, over and over, with the variations being focused on how they impact the fiction or vice versa. Not that I can write rules with the precision or deftness of Luke Crane. lol. I think I might be able to best WotC though, in a sort of general architectural sense. hehe.</blockquote>

Verification