Do only DMs like rules lite systems?

[BryonD]

Yeah, I see your point. There are certainly ways to address it without stepping on Power Attack and without simply denying a mechanical modifier.

I didn't see this reply before my other two posts.
Lets just agree here and be done, ok?

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

I didn't see this reply before my other two posts. Lets just agree here and be done, ok?

Sure.

 

[PwrMnky]

Whao! Original Question

I DM about 15% and Player about 84%.
(and eat about 1%)

I like rules light systems. The entire game is to build momentuem.

Emotional (combat, interaction, slueth) or mechanical (tons of damage, cool combos) .... it'a sll about risk and building momentuem till you get there. So, if my DM says, "uh, yeah ... roll a 12 sided to see if you can do that backflip into the back of the moving pick up truck. 3, 5, 7, and 12 mean you mess up."

Who cares?
It's the fun. Not the books.

 

[Nightfall]

It is the fun, not the books. But it helps if the books serve the fun too!

Anyway I'm back to roasting PCs by an open dragonfire.

 

[RFisher]

I'm not disputing that. As a matter of fact, you are taking my logical extension fo someone else's claim and representing that as my opinion. To the contrary, my point is that the absurdity of this conclusion shows the flaw in the underlying claim.

No, it wasn't someone else's claim. It was my misunderstanding of your claim. (^_^) The way you phrased it, I completely missed that you were saying that the DM could come up with a weaker power attack-ish thing. I apologize.

& that is indeed a very good point! Just as thief skills don't mean that no-one else can hide, sneak, or climb; the combat feats in 3e do not necessarily mean a character without the feat cannot do something similar. (Although, some of the feats do contain a "Normal" clause that may explicitly limit what those without the feat can do. Easily enough ignored, though.)

Are you REALLY claiming that a GM's skill has no bearing on fun.
I honestly can not see that as a remotely reasonable position.

Translation: It is about having a skilled GM. (Defining skill and then specifically going out of your way to hand wave "this isn't skill I'm talking about" doesn't hold water)

Restate my definition of skill please, because I missed it. (I tried to reword that to read less snarky, but I failed. So, please believe me when I say it is meant as a serious, snarkless request.)

I am coming to the conclusion that GM skill really isn't all that important. If the players choose to have fun, they can do it no matter how unskilled the GM is. A good & helpful attitude in the players can turn a bad GM into a great GM.

OK, OK. No doubt there are a few exceptional GMs that kill the fun no matter how hard the players try. & surely there are extraordinarily great GMs that can make a difference. So, maybe not "no bearing", but perhaps "little".

 

[Nightfall]

*hands off some toasty PCs* Anyone like theirs extra crispy?

 

[Hussar]

Heh, NIghtfall, just turned one of my PC's extra crispy this week. Kill number 21 in 68 sessions. Woot.

 

[Nightfall]

Hussar,

You rock man! that's most excellent indeed. I was hoping the Wind Warriors in Whispering Cairn would...but sadly two extra NPCs made the difference.

 

[Arashi Ravenblade]

All but one of my players prefers the complicated games. I as a Dm prefer the complicated games. And I never had understood why it takes people so long to come up with a game (Either in Prep time or in Story).

In my experience older gamers or younger gamers who grew up playing older games tend to like the Rules lite games. Might not be that way everywhere, but in my neck of the woods there is a definate preference for rules lite among older groups or older game groups (though not necessarily D&D, could be any system).

As far as GM skill goes, it depends. A Gm like me who has a set story but will allow you to do anything thats not totally absurd (Like building a rocket ship in FR. In that case I'll flat out say no! Want to build a Spelljammer? Fine.) seems to my group to be fun. Where the two other GM's could make a good story they dont allow much freedom. One lets you do what you want but sets up the DC's or makes the challnege so hard you cant accomplish what you wanted and the other one straight up railroads you. Neither of which is fun.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

The players in my group can't be bothered to learn rules. They don't read rulebooks for fun nor consult them unless absolutely necessary.

My group is like this as well. Outside of the table they don't read game stuff. So I've decided after talking with some of the others that 3.x isn't for them so we will play C&C after the current Fantasy Trip game ends.