Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 6023169" data-attributes="member: 1465">Definitely not, but I think it's probably for the best to stay simple, to provide a mechanic that is usable by every gaming group*.Then eventually the concept can be expanded with a tiny module / optional rules to handle more complicated scenario.*At least in my experience, few people in 3e used the counterspelling rules just because using them was not worth the effort of learning the mechanic. Only if you wanted to explore the concept and build some kind of specialist around it...Personally I think this is a general problem in the 3e approach: too many topics were addressed with countless &quot;what if?&quot; questions which lead the designers to add too many modifiers, too many rules detail, too many steps (grappling!), too many exceptions, too many circumstances... It's all good for a group who loves the details, but it's a nightmare for others.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Li Shenron, post: 6023169, member: 1465"] Definitely not, but I think it's probably for the best to stay [B]simple[/B], to provide a mechanic that is usable by every gaming group*. Then eventually the concept can be expanded with a tiny module / optional rules to handle more complicated scenario. *At least in my experience, few people in 3e used the counterspelling rules just because using them was not worth the effort of learning the mechanic. Only if you wanted to explore the concept and build some kind of specialist around it... Personally I think this is a general problem in the 3e approach: too many topics were addressed with countless "what if?" questions which lead the designers to add too many modifiers, too many rules detail, too many steps (grappling!), too many exceptions, too many circumstances... It's all good for a group who loves the details, but it's a nightmare for others. [/QUOTE]

Verification