Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="SweeneyTodd" data-source="post: 2327294" data-attributes="member: 9391">Just wanted to throw some more thoughts in here:I think you should use a system that encourages the behavior you want in your game. If you want a complicated tactical wargame that encourages number crunching and creative applications of a complex ruleset, D&D is right up your alley.However, there's just as much opportunity to come up with cool things in a rules light system -- if your comfort and trust level with the group is such that you feel like your contributions will be valued and validated. (For a lot of people, finding cool things in the rules is more comfortable, because if it's in the book, it's unlikely to be rejected.)There's an interesting thread on RPG.net about this -- unfortunately, it went a little flamey. They discuss how it's interesting that social interactions are something people don't mind handling on an improvisational basis, from rules-light all the way to rules-none.In the games I run, tactics consist of describing your action (be it combat or social) in an interesting, entertaining manner. We've actually got a rule that if someone at the table goes "Cool!", you get a bonus. That leads to things like spears being more useful at a distance and less up close, but it also leads to witty quips, cinematic maneuvers, and actions that resonate with the emotional issues of the characters. That stuff's equally valuable, but it requires the group to be on the same page with each other.If you joined my group, and you wanted to use a lot of interesting combat maneuvers you'd gotten out of a D&D book, I'd let you use them, and I'd give you bonuses. I just don't give them more credence than maneuvers you stole from The Princess Bride. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> I'd also give you tactical bonuses when fighting a hated rival or to defend a loved one. (In fact, in the system we use, "Love for Susan" can be an attribute as important as "Fencing Master".) I'll say this: I wouldn't play in a group where there was a lot of arguing and "You can't do that". No amount of rules mediating things would make me comfortable enough to enjoy myself. That doesn't mean I think that every group that uses detailed rules has a social lack, of course -- it's personal preference. But in practice, I haven't run into any players who've experienced the problems mentioned here with rules-light systems, but I have run into many players who had previously felt like their creative contributions were discounted because they weren't drawn from the rulebook.</blockquote>

Verification