Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Scott Christian" data-source="post: 8115182" data-attributes="member: 6901101">I think this is an insightful statement that I've never heard expressed as succinctly as this. I also ten to agree. I do wonder if it is because it allows us, as GM's, more freedom of expression, than using just a watercolor style. The camp that I am overbearingly stubborn on is - the setting creates the mechanics. When it doesn't it just feels so wrong (IMO).Rolemaster's old Middle Earth was a dangerous world. Crit tables represented that danger. Sam being able to seriously injure Shelob is a great example of this. Killing orcs with one blow. Another great example. And it's ability to use luck points or defense or whatever it was called seemed logical. D&amp;D is mildly dangerous. Hence, death saves, HP bloat, etc. And it makes sense from what I see of the settings they create. (I mean, how many times should Drizzt or Bruenor have died? I think PF's Golarion falls into this category as well. (I would throw in VtM also.) So these mechanics seem to match their settings.Conan and Dangerous Journeys does an ok job, but not great. I feel the same with Numenera.&nbsp; The Witcher RPG does not match the setting. It is mildly frustrating, and made me stop playing after one session.I don't know, maybe that is just my pet-peeve. But, a game's mechanics should be built around its setting. When it isn't it is blindingly obvious. Half the rules seem like wooden square pegs smashed through round holes, leaving splinters everywhere.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Scott Christian, post: 8115182, member: 6901101"] I think this is an insightful statement that I've never heard expressed as succinctly as this. I also ten to agree. I do wonder if it is because it allows us, as GM's, more freedom of expression, than using just a watercolor style. The camp that I am overbearingly stubborn on is - the setting creates the mechanics. When it doesn't it just feels so wrong (IMO). Rolemaster's old Middle Earth was a dangerous world. Crit tables represented that danger. Sam being able to seriously injure Shelob is a great example of this. Killing orcs with one blow. Another great example. And it's ability to use luck points or defense or whatever it was called seemed logical. D&D is mildly dangerous. Hence, death saves, HP bloat, etc. And it makes sense from what I see of the settings they create. (I mean, how many times should Drizzt or Bruenor have died? I think PF's Golarion falls into this category as well. (I would throw in VtM also.) So these mechanics seem to match their settings. Conan and Dangerous Journeys does an ok job, but not great. I feel the same with Numenera. The Witcher RPG does not match the setting. It is mildly frustrating, and made me stop playing after one session. I don't know, maybe that is just my pet-peeve. But, a game's mechanics should be built around its setting. When it isn't it is blindingly obvious. Half the rules seem like wooden square pegs smashed through round holes, leaving splinters everywhere. [/QUOTE]

Verification