Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="rmcoen" data-source="post: 7730103" data-attributes="member: 6692404">Thank you for writing the article, and bringing this new system to light (for me).&nbsp; I'm always interested in seeing other options and opportunities.Ultimately, the *story* is what brings and keeps the players in an RPG; otherwise, you're playing a miniatures game, which tends to attract a different sort of gamer.The mechanics of the system can influence the way the story plays out, and the background of the world (such as in WOIN, the understanding/statement that &quot;magic is freely available, even a farmer likely knows a cantrip or two&quot;).&nbsp; A system that emphasizes warrior capability at low levels should consequently have a game world where military might is ubiquitous; if mages that survive to high level are world-shaking (or -breaking), then the biggest and baddest of the BBEGs will be mages.&nbsp; If classes are &quot;balanced&quot; against each other, then threats at all levels could come from all class types.&nbsp; Neither is &quot;wrong&quot;, from the story side; neither will save a bad story.As a player, I don't like being a fighter when my only choice, round after round is &quot;I hit the X with my weapon&quot;.&nbsp; I especially don't like it when my companions are charming things, blasting them with fire (holy or arcane), changing them into toads, sending them on perilous microjumps through elemental planes, or trapping them in giant globes of water.&nbsp; Or even putting them to sleep.&nbsp; I much prefer &quot;I hit the X with my weapon, and knock it backward into the [hazardous thing on the map, posisbly created by my allies]&quot;, or &quot;I force all the foes to focus on me for a round&quot; [i.e. taunt], or some other interesting effect.&nbsp; When I run out of HP, I'm done.As a player, I don't like being a mage that &quot;runs out&quot; of magic.&nbsp; Like a gunslinger with only 1 or two bullets.&nbsp; My skills with a weapon (I tended to pick the crossbow, depending on the game system) shouldn't be the majority of my contribution for many levels of play.&nbsp; With my spells being such a limited resource, they tended to be hoarded (like those precious scrolls - can't tell you how many campaigns ended with scrolls and potions unspent!).&nbsp; If we reached mid-level play (6th-8th level), things were balanced.&nbsp; If we reached high-level play... the campaign usually ended, or devolved into &quot;The casters will decide on the goal, how to get there, how to execute it.&nbsp; The warriors will stand here, here, and here, and take hits.&quot;&nbsp; (Generally, I didn't even bother with &quot;combat spells&quot; at low level... instead focusing on long-lasting defense/buffs, and utility magic.)As a player, then, these are reasons I would look for the &quot;not-incompetent-warrior spellcaster&quot; - be that a cleric, a druid, a multi-/dual-/hybrid-class, whatever.&nbsp; Can survive battle, and can participate in the &quot;fun&quot; magical side that is why we play a *fantasy* game, and not a &quot;medieval simulator&quot;.Having gotten all wordy about &quot;as a player&quot;, let me turn around and say... as a GM, *my* personal ideal system is one where combat is dangerous regardless of level - especially if you aren't smart - and skill is more important than equipment (<a href="https://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=86" target="_blank">https://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=86</a> IRON HEROES).&nbsp; I like magic being confined to the magical, but where player character spellcasters can be participants in all combats; flashy, powerful, but not eclipsing.&nbsp; No amount of swordmastery will get you across that ravine like a Jump/Fly spell can, but no mage can lay waste to an army alone - or indeed, survive ambush by a handful of bandits.Basic Fantasy might not be that system, but I don't mind taking a look and seeing what ideas and innovations can inform my stories, and the ever-changing &quot;ideal&quot; in my head!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="rmcoen, post: 7730103, member: 6692404"] Thank you for writing the article, and bringing this new system to light (for me). I'm always interested in seeing other options and opportunities. Ultimately, the *story* is what brings and keeps the players in an RPG; otherwise, you're playing a miniatures game, which tends to attract a different sort of gamer. The mechanics of the system can influence the way the story plays out, and the background of the world (such as in WOIN, the understanding/statement that "magic is freely available, even a farmer likely knows a cantrip or two"). A system that emphasizes warrior capability at low levels should consequently have a game world where military might is ubiquitous; if mages that survive to high level are world-shaking (or -breaking), then the biggest and baddest of the BBEGs will be mages. If classes are "balanced" against each other, then threats at all levels could come from all class types. Neither is "wrong", from the story side; neither will save a bad story. As a player, I don't like being a fighter when my only choice, round after round is "I hit the X with my weapon". I especially don't like it when my companions are charming things, blasting them with fire (holy or arcane), changing them into toads, sending them on perilous microjumps through elemental planes, or trapping them in giant globes of water. Or even putting them to sleep. I much prefer "I hit the X with my weapon, and knock it backward into the [hazardous thing on the map, posisbly created by my allies]", or "I force all the foes to focus on me for a round" [i.e. taunt], or some other interesting effect. When I run out of HP, I'm done. As a player, I don't like being a mage that "runs out" of magic. Like a gunslinger with only 1 or two bullets. My skills with a weapon (I tended to pick the crossbow, depending on the game system) shouldn't be the majority of my contribution for many levels of play. With my spells being such a limited resource, they tended to be hoarded (like those precious scrolls - can't tell you how many campaigns ended with scrolls and potions unspent!). If we reached mid-level play (6th-8th level), things were balanced. If we reached high-level play... the campaign usually ended, or devolved into "The casters will decide on the goal, how to get there, how to execute it. The warriors will stand here, here, and here, and take hits." (Generally, I didn't even bother with "combat spells" at low level... instead focusing on long-lasting defense/buffs, and utility magic.) As a player, then, these are reasons I would look for the "not-incompetent-warrior spellcaster" - be that a cleric, a druid, a multi-/dual-/hybrid-class, whatever. Can survive battle, and can participate in the "fun" magical side that is why we play a *fantasy* game, and not a "medieval simulator". Having gotten all wordy about "as a player", let me turn around and say... as a GM, *my* personal ideal system is one where combat is dangerous regardless of level - especially if you aren't smart - and skill is more important than equipment ([url]https://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=86[/url] IRON HEROES). I like magic being confined to the magical, but where player character spellcasters can be participants in all combats; flashy, powerful, but not eclipsing. No amount of swordmastery will get you across that ravine like a Jump/Fly spell can, but no mage can lay waste to an army alone - or indeed, survive ambush by a handful of bandits. Basic Fantasy might not be that system, but I don't mind taking a look and seeing what ideas and innovations can inform my stories, and the ever-changing "ideal" in my head! [/QUOTE]

Verification