Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 8269481" data-attributes="member: 18">Yeah, my point is modern vs naive. HERO/Champions is ancient, largely naive design, only tweaked gradually to modernise it. Steve Kenson is a designer I think of as part of the whole modern thing. SAS, M&M and so on show clear attempts to move Supers towards a modern, genre-supporting design. M&M is a genuine example of working towards a market, given the d20 mechanic, which I suspect he'd rather not have used, but attempting to avoid as much of the d20 baggage as possible. And this is, for my money, modern design. Early-modern but modern, conscious stuff. Looking at his bibliography you can see even since the '90s he's been involved with games which take an increasingly conscious approach to design, and aren't merely "here's a system, how do I represent things in it".I'm sure that's true but that doesn't make it typical or common, and I think most of the times I can think of designers saying things like this it's been a matter of "we could use a better mechanic, but the audience is used to this one" and there's an underlying vibe of "and we don't think they're smart enough or daring enough to change", which I think at least in the modern era is underestimating the audience (I feel like it was at all times except during the d20 boom, but YMMV).These are to me "inside-the-box" things that evolved from when it becomes obvious the system is failing at supporting something about the subject matter, rather than conscious design - i.e. reactionary corrections. Not sure what you mean re: disadvantage system though.I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at here. Could you expand on this?You and me both lol.</blockquote>

Verification