Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Imaro" data-source="post: 4202599" data-attributes="member: 48965">Well for starters, I really like that it feels complete...as in all the basis for a fantasy game are covered in the one book.  You can play the traditional, adventuring party type fantasy or you can play the leaders of a mercenary band (where there are rules that are elegant and easily grasped for followers), or even the ruling a kingdom level where, again there are rules that take it to a level where you can actually control and maneuver the soldiers, land, wealth, spies, etc. that you control.Not sure if this is necessarily something no game does...but I haven't come across a game that does it all in one book and in a way that even a new player will easily grasp it after a game session or two.Another thing I enjoy about Reign is that the supplements are produced on a ransom model...basically fans donate until a certain pre-set amount is reached and then the supplement is released for everyone to enjoy.  It allows you to donate for those things that interest you or not for things you don't really want.  Yet everyone can stay current with all the supplements.Not really familiar with the Laws test (link please, as you have piqued my interest).  But if I had to garner a guess, I would say traditional gamers.  I wouldn't classify Reign as similar to most indie games I have tried out.  It is very much a traditional GM and players set up.ORE in a nutshell is a dicepool system.  Most actions are accomplished with a PC taking their number in a Stat and relevant skill and rolling that many d10's (this pool is never higher than 10 dice).  From the resulting roll a player looks for "sets", which are matching groups of number.  The defaullt is successes with a single set but the GM can increase the difficulty of an action by requiring a minimum set or taking dice away from a player's pool.  So if you roll 7 d10's and get 4,4,5,2,2,2,1 then you have two sets...2x4 and 3x2.  These sets give you a height(the number rolled in a set) and a width (the number of dice that compose that set) so in the previous example the height of the first set is 4 and it's width is 2 in the second set the height is 2 and the width is 3.IMHO the cool thing is that height and width generally translate into two measures of how you accomplished a skill.  Height is how well you achieved the result while width is how quickly you accomplished it.  So in the above example the 2x4 set would be a slower accomplishment but with higher quality...while the 3x2 set would be a quicker result of lower quality.  Depending on what the PC is trying to do the GM determines what is more important.  An example would be...in a footrace width would be the determining factor, while in crafting a beautiful gift for a king (with ample time) then height would be more important.I would say medium light up to medium heavy (depending on what level of maneuvers you use for combat).  The system is easy to grasp and is a unified system for skills, combat, magic, etc.  Yet the options you add to your game can increase the crunch factor.Hmm...I would say about 50/50...though some of the fluff like the esoteric disciplines (special feat like training paths that allows you to do extraordinary things with skills) and martial paths (special feat like training paths that allow you to do extraordinary things with weapons) technically have fluff attached to them...but can easily be used in a homebrew with a change of name and description.</blockquote>

Verification