Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Vyvyan Basterd" data-source="post: 5662200" data-attributes="member: 4892">Was that in this thread? I'd be interested to see how he accomplished that in Rifts. I found Rifts to be unplayable. I wanted to play a anthropomorph a la TMNT, while another player played a Dragon. The GM tried to handle this problem by sending tanks after the Dragon (which my character could not scratch) and foot soldiers after the rest of us. Seemed like an OK solution. Except the player of the Dragon turned her attention on the foot soldiers in the second round, wiping them all out in one gout of flame. The rest of us tried to attack tanks at that point, but couldn't even pry the hatches open to get at the soldiers inside. One solution would be to tell the player of the Dragon that she should focus on the tanks, but this would be a major railroad, IMO, and would have totally ruined the game for me whether I was playing my TMNT or the Dragon because of the artificiality of the division.Agreed. But not a good solution if your group likes supplements. I want a game that I can add official supplements to that doen't cause the problmes I encountered. The newest edition of D&D has met that goal for me.Agreed. But not a good solution if the players who are capable of creating powerful characters enjoy doing so and would not enjoy the game if asked to reign themselves in. And not if those who are not as capable of creating powerful characters would not enjoy the game if their characters were built partially or in full by the other players. I want a game that allows the most skilled at making powerful characters to have their fun, while guiding those with less skill or different goals to a capable character, without the wide gap in powers levels. The newest edition accomplishes that for me too. Add to that the melding of ideas from my favorite RPG of all time, Earthdawn, and I have what I like. I'm glad others still have support for the system of their choice.</blockquote>

Verification