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: 7573627" data-attributes="member: 42582">I think the account of the action of my Traveller session falls pretty well under this description. This is why I don't agree with    [MENTION=29398]Lanefan[/MENTION] and    [MENTION=23751]Maxperson[/MENTION] that D&D-style resource tracking is more realistic. That degree of rational control over one's resources is unrealistic even for a modern bureaucracy, let alone the notional fiction of a typical fantasy RPG.I was also struck by the irony of this:D&D is full of elements whose principle function is to circumvent what would otherwise - at least notionally - be an element of play: quivers of endless arrows, bags of holding, continual light spells, Magnificent Mansions, etc. And typically these are gated behind levels in some fashion (either directly for spells, or indirectly for magic items).If tracking encumbrance is boring, then why make it (pseudo-)mandatory for the first N levels of each campaign before dropping it?Or if choosing when to rest is meant to be an exciting, skill-testing element of play, then why introduce a game element which means, from level N onwards, it ceases to be part of the game? (How many 5e threads have I read about Rope Trick or Tiny Hut breaking the encounters-per-day paradigm of that system?)These are games. Their contents are (or ought to be) driven by considerations of what makes for good game play: there's no obligation of reason or morality that requires them to have Magnificent Mansion spells, or encumbrance tracking, or whatever. "Eating one's vegetables" might build character in real life, but there's no need for it to be part of game design.</blockquote>

Verification