Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="GMMichael" data-source="post: 6578679" data-attributes="member: 6685730">Agreed.&nbsp; Why should only players and GMs get all the forum-use?&nbsp;In my world (my fantasy version of reality, not campaign world) bottom-up sounds like designing the &quot;core mechanics&quot; first, and stacking the peripheral rules on top of them.&nbsp; Top-down sounds more like taking an entire game and chiseling at the unsightly bits.&nbsp; But your definitions work too.One reason that alignment was troublesome was that it was subjective.&nbsp; Everyone has a slightly different idea of Good and Bad.&nbsp; It did give tremendous flavor to the game.&nbsp;&nbsp; It may have been implemented at the core, but it always felt like an optional rule to me anyway.I'd like to see Cyber Run's character actions that are tied to morality.&nbsp; I bet it's awesome, but it sounds like it would have the same problems alignment did.&nbsp;Interesting contrast.&nbsp; When I hear &quot;realism&quot; in games, I think &quot;simulation,&quot; and the next thing I think: &quot;numbers.&quot;There's one good way to reflect reality in games: get out your physics books, and do a ton of math.&nbsp; The further you get from that, the less realistic the game is, and perhaps coincidentally, the more fun the game is.&nbsp; (Yes, there's probably a limit to this.)Shields were a fun one for me to handle in designing Modos RPG.&nbsp; I did the same thing as attevil: using another rule as my starting point.&nbsp; I believe it was Final Fantasy Zero...or just the video game.&nbsp; My observation was that shields serve a different function than armor, so they should be simulated with a different rule or rule implementation.Let's throw the GM under the bus.&nbsp; An experienced GM (depending on personality type) can run a good light- or heavy-rules game; an inexperienced GM can't run either type of game.&nbsp; This issue might be served by talking about rules that restrict.&nbsp; A poor GM can run a great game of Monopoly, because the game is highly restrictive.&nbsp; Early video games were highly restrictive, but could still be awesome if they had enough artistic flavor.&nbsp; A GM is responsible for conveying, amongst other things, that flavor - and if he fails to do so, the game suffers.&nbsp; Light or heavy.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="GMMichael, post: 6578679, member: 6685730"] Agreed. Why should only players and GMs get all the forum-use? In my world (my fantasy version of reality, not campaign world) bottom-up sounds like designing the "core mechanics" first, and stacking the peripheral rules on top of them. Top-down sounds more like taking an entire game and chiseling at the unsightly bits. But your definitions work too. One reason that alignment was troublesome was that it was subjective. Everyone has a slightly different idea of Good and Bad. It did give tremendous flavor to the game. It may have been implemented at the core, but it always felt like an optional rule to me anyway. I'd like to see Cyber Run's character actions that are tied to morality. I bet it's awesome, but it sounds like it would have the same problems alignment did. Interesting contrast. When I hear "realism" in games, I think "simulation," and the next thing I think: "numbers." There's one good way to reflect reality in games: get out your physics books, and do a ton of math. The further you get from that, the less realistic the game is, and perhaps coincidentally, the more fun the game is. (Yes, there's probably a limit to this.) Shields were a fun one for me to handle in designing Modos RPG. I did the same thing as attevil: using another rule as my starting point. I believe it was Final Fantasy Zero...or just the video game. My observation was that shields serve a different function than armor, so they should be simulated with a different rule or rule implementation. Let's throw the GM under the bus. An experienced GM (depending on personality type) can run a good light- or heavy-rules game; an inexperienced GM can't run either type of game. This issue might be served by talking about rules that restrict. A poor GM can run a great game of Monopoly, because the game is highly restrictive. Early video games were highly restrictive, but could still be awesome if they had enough artistic flavor. A GM is responsible for conveying, amongst other things, that flavor - and if he fails to do so, the game suffers. Light or heavy. [/QUOTE]

Verification