Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mallus" data-source="post: 4849339" data-attributes="member: 3887">Oh sure... that's why I italicized 'quite'.Agreed. You would think that most people would select the game system that best suits their play style (and certainly some people do just that). What I find interesting is when that doesn't happen, when people use a particular rule set to do what it isn't suited for --and this is common in my experience.I suspect what's really going on is that gamers select systems that do what they don't want to fix/improve/modify well. If you want to call this choosing a system that supports their play style, so be it. For example, a more narrativist RPG like Spirit of the Century seems to be the best match for my group's play style . Most of use came to gaming through fiction, most of us have a show-offy streak of author (you've read the notes to our campaign setting). A perfect fit, right? Except that we also enjoy a good tactical fight, the thing that 4e does so well it gets derided for. For us, it's easier to add narrativist elements to 4e (or 3e) than to add a tactical wargame to Spirit of the Century. So for now the 4e campaign is our main game, and SotC is a summer replacement.</blockquote>