Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="rogueattorney" data-source="post: 1674868" data-attributes="member: 17551">Actually, in the context of character abilities, which is what we were talking about, I would disagree with you.&nbsp; Too many role-players of modern games confine their actions to what's on their character sheet, looking for the answer somewhere in their skills, feets, manuevers, or whatever the system of the day is calling it.&nbsp; I've seen too many players not think their character can climb a wall or swim or ride a horse or whatever because it wasn't on the character sheet.&nbsp; Is that a player problem?&nbsp; Yes.&nbsp; But one I believe is exacerbated by the &quot;be all end all&quot; system contained in 900 pages of core rules.&nbsp;You can say whatever you like.&nbsp; But the proof is in the pudding.&nbsp; I and many others have been playing B/X D&amp;D for 20+ years.&nbsp; Others have been playing OD&amp;D for 30+ years.&nbsp; We seem to get bye O.K.&nbsp; However &quot;horrid and horribly lacking&quot; the system might be, I have yet to find myself unable to resolve a PC action for lack of resolution mechanism.&nbsp;Because R.P.S. players are unmitigated munchkins.&nbsp; Who'd want to game with those uber-geeks.&nbsp; I tried to get into R.P.S. back at Gen-Con in '88, but the R.P.S.-master was such a tool.&nbsp; Besides, it's gone too commercial.&nbsp; None of the supplements put out since the 1992 were any good.&nbsp; Except maybe Fisto's Complete Guide to Rocks, Pebbles, and Boulders.&nbsp; I've exported a lot in that book to my weekly Tic Tac Toe games.&nbsp;We always called it &quot;role-playing&quot;.&nbsp;We're apparently on such a different wave-length when it comes to rules, that I'm not even sure how to respond to this.&nbsp; Why does there need to be rules for it in the first place?&nbsp; If the player wants the set of abilities that comes with being a thief, he should be a thief.&nbsp; If he wants the set of abilities that comes with being an elf, he should be an elf.&nbsp; If he doesn't want to play the game, he should play a different game.R.A.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="rogueattorney, post: 1674868, member: 17551"] Actually, in the context of character abilities, which is what we were talking about, I would disagree with you. Too many role-players of modern games confine their actions to what's on their character sheet, looking for the answer somewhere in their skills, feets, manuevers, or whatever the system of the day is calling it. I've seen too many players not think their character can climb a wall or swim or ride a horse or whatever because it wasn't on the character sheet. Is that a player problem? Yes. But one I believe is exacerbated by the "be all end all" system contained in 900 pages of core rules. You can say whatever you like. But the proof is in the pudding. I and many others have been playing B/X D&D for 20+ years. Others have been playing OD&D for 30+ years. We seem to get bye O.K. However "horrid and horribly lacking" the system might be, I have yet to find myself unable to resolve a PC action for lack of resolution mechanism. Because R.P.S. players are unmitigated munchkins. Who'd want to game with those uber-geeks. I tried to get into R.P.S. back at Gen-Con in '88, but the R.P.S.-master was such a tool. Besides, it's gone too commercial. None of the supplements put out since the 1992 were any good. Except maybe Fisto's Complete Guide to Rocks, Pebbles, and Boulders. I've exported a lot in that book to my weekly Tic Tac Toe games. We always called it "role-playing". We're apparently on such a different wave-length when it comes to rules, that I'm not even sure how to respond to this. Why does there need to be rules for it in the first place? If the player wants the set of abilities that comes with being a thief, he should be a thief. If he wants the set of abilities that comes with being an elf, he should be an elf. If he doesn't want to play the game, he should play a different game. R.A. [/QUOTE]

Verification