Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Jeremy Ackerman-Yost" data-source="post: 5138564" data-attributes="member: 4720">Depends.&nbsp; The game as a whole might be focused on the inter-character conflicts, but if combat with outside threats still takes up a portion of game time.... yeah, it might.If the people playing enjoy that kind of combat, it's a value add, even if it isn't the explicit focus of the campaign.&nbsp; Even if it only takes up 20% of your game time, you might as well make that 20% fun for everyone there.&nbsp; If that means tactical complexity or it means super-abstract hand-waving is entirely up to the group.&nbsp; The value for your group might not be as high as it is for a group that prefers to spend 90% of their time kicking arse and taking names, but unless you prefer a diceless system or something of that nature, I doubt the value of tactical combat reduces to zero.Something that has driven me crazy since 3e was new and we had that edition war.... A complicated combat engine and less detailed social/skills engine does not preclude complicated social/skills play.&nbsp; Now, as the combat engine gets more complicated, some groups may find more of their time gets eaten by combat than they like.&nbsp; But that doesn't make the combat engine objectively bad.&nbsp; It makes it less suited to the needs of that group.&nbsp; And it can be tailored very easily.&nbsp; Take a power card and write &quot;At will: Talk&quot; on the fool thing.&nbsp; I also keep around an &quot;Encounter: Parlay&quot; and &quot;Daily: Palaver&quot; for emergencies.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Jeremy Ackerman-Yost, post: 5138564, member: 4720"] Depends. The game as a whole might be focused on the inter-character conflicts, but if combat with outside threats still takes up a portion of game time.... yeah, it might. If the people playing enjoy that kind of combat, it's a value add, even if it isn't the explicit focus of the campaign. Even if it only takes up 20% of your game time, you might as well make that 20% fun for everyone there. If that means tactical complexity or it means super-abstract hand-waving is entirely up to the group. The value for your group might not be as high as it is for a group that prefers to spend 90% of their time kicking arse and taking names, but unless you prefer a diceless system or something of that nature, I doubt the value of tactical combat reduces to zero. Something that has driven me crazy since 3e was new and we had that edition war.... A complicated combat engine and less detailed social/skills engine [I]does [B]not[/B] preclude[/I] complicated social/skills play. Now, as the combat engine gets more complicated, some groups may find more of their time gets eaten by combat than they like. But that doesn't make the combat engine objectively bad. It makes it less suited to the needs of that group. And it can be tailored very easily. Take a power card and write "At will: Talk" on the fool thing. I also keep around an "Encounter: Parlay" and "Daily: Palaver" for emergencies. [/QUOTE]

Verification