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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="PsyzhranV2" data-source="post: 8143738" data-attributes="member: 7015332">From where I'm standing, (not just this particular post but the general trend of this conversation), the whole situation looks like somebody offering you a power drill to tighten some screws but you insisting that your rusty screwdriver that barely fits suffices. Or in more extreme cases, it seems you're trying to tighten screws with a hammer.Where did this idea of combat and exploration being the only things worth mechanizing come about? Why must social interaction be entirely freeform? I understand if you're intentionally shooting for that as a means of stylistic design (namely certain strains of OSR), but as a general rule? Having no adjudication measures for social situations beyond "the GM says so" means that A: those situations lack mechanical weight and impact, and B: players who aren't confident with certain social situations IRL can't participate effectively, just as if a person who didn't know any wilderness survival measures was asked to freeform roleplay an exploration scenario.If that isn't what the game is about - if much more time is being spent on combat or exploration than social situations, I guess it's an acceptable loss. But that requires the recognition that your game isn't about that thing. Yes, the negative space in the D&D rules design does permit the freeform roleplaying of exploring relationships (going back to the current discussion topic), but compare that to Monsterhearts, where the entire game is about relationships, and has mechanical support to match. A much weightier and robust experience can be gained from the latter.</blockquote>

Verification