Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Does pathfinder strike anyone as too gamey?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="gamerprinter" data-source="post: 6193494" data-attributes="member: 50895"><p>You're assuming a lot. Our PCs don't earn XP either, we just level up after 4 or 5 sessions, or after the completion of an adventure module, and we've been doing this since AD&D 1e. So NPCs and PCs in our game level the same way, pretty much - when it's appropriate and at no other time. When my players level, my surviving NPCs level up to, and the exactly same way as PCs - there is no difference. Perhaps you don't have games with the same villain over 20 levels of play - we do this a lot, thus we gain the full experience of leveling up every given class, PC and NPC, as GMs. We don't wing it, we do it by the book.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Nobody did this - you're assuming again.</p><p></p><p>Nothing is banned in our game until we try it first. That's what play-testing is all about. Once tested, if we find something bad for our table, we ban it, plain and simple. However, just because something is banned at our table, doesn't apply to anyone else's game. I would never suggest what doesn't work for our group, might not be the perfect mechanic for someone else's game. However, is it wrong to ban a particular aspect of a game if it doesn't work for you?</p><p></p><p>I never said "that you shouldn't have your own idea of fun" (only you did). I don't judge your table, your accepted rules - so why are you judging my table's game?</p><p></p><p>Some definitions:</p><p></p><p><strong>Broken Book</strong></p><p>If a book is broken for anyone's personal game - it is indeed broken (as in the game-changing aspects of using a particular mechanic ruins the experience for our group). It doesn't mean it's broken for everyone's game, only the one we actually play in.</p><p></p><p><strong>Lots of Players don't Like...</strong></p><p>If every player you've ever met agree with a particular mechanic as being a poor one, wouldn't "lots of players like/dislike" be meaningful. I cannot say what the players I've never met have opinions on, I can only measure what I've witnessed. In my experience, every player I've ever sat a table with (even at our FLGS) thought that martial adepts sucked as classes and a general mechanic. It very well might not be true for every group, but I have no experience with every group.</p><p></p><p><strong>I will never let it in my game...</strong></p><p>I've never made this claim about any game mechanic. Every game mechanic that we include and exclude from our table was play-tested first at our table. We don't arbitrarily judge a particular mechanic as bad without trying it, so I would never outright ban something we did not test first. We drew up martial adepts for all our players, ran them through an entire module (well most of a module, since we all decided to hate Bo9S before we finished that module). We didn't just read the book and decide without trying.</p><p></p><p>I've never used the phrase "badwrongfun", so would never compare any mechanic with such a stupid phrase. However, if something doesn't work for your group - is it wrong that we don't choose to use a mechanic, as if you shouldn't be allowed to ban anything? I think martial adepts suck, but am perfectly willing to agree that it might be the most wonderful thing for you. Since you don't play at my table, I just don't care what works for you - that's completely meaningless for my game.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="gamerprinter, post: 6193494, member: 50895"] You're assuming a lot. Our PCs don't earn XP either, we just level up after 4 or 5 sessions, or after the completion of an adventure module, and we've been doing this since AD&D 1e. So NPCs and PCs in our game level the same way, pretty much - when it's appropriate and at no other time. When my players level, my surviving NPCs level up to, and the exactly same way as PCs - there is no difference. Perhaps you don't have games with the same villain over 20 levels of play - we do this a lot, thus we gain the full experience of leveling up every given class, PC and NPC, as GMs. We don't wing it, we do it by the book. Nobody did this - you're assuming again. Nothing is banned in our game until we try it first. That's what play-testing is all about. Once tested, if we find something bad for our table, we ban it, plain and simple. However, just because something is banned at our table, doesn't apply to anyone else's game. I would never suggest what doesn't work for our group, might not be the perfect mechanic for someone else's game. However, is it wrong to ban a particular aspect of a game if it doesn't work for you? I never said "that you shouldn't have your own idea of fun" (only you did). I don't judge your table, your accepted rules - so why are you judging my table's game? Some definitions: [B]Broken Book[/B] If a book is broken for anyone's personal game - it is indeed broken (as in the game-changing aspects of using a particular mechanic ruins the experience for our group). It doesn't mean it's broken for everyone's game, only the one we actually play in. [B]Lots of Players don't Like...[/B] If every player you've ever met agree with a particular mechanic as being a poor one, wouldn't "lots of players like/dislike" be meaningful. I cannot say what the players I've never met have opinions on, I can only measure what I've witnessed. In my experience, every player I've ever sat a table with (even at our FLGS) thought that martial adepts sucked as classes and a general mechanic. It very well might not be true for every group, but I have no experience with every group. [B]I will never let it in my game...[/B] I've never made this claim about any game mechanic. Every game mechanic that we include and exclude from our table was play-tested first at our table. We don't arbitrarily judge a particular mechanic as bad without trying it, so I would never outright ban something we did not test first. We drew up martial adepts for all our players, ran them through an entire module (well most of a module, since we all decided to hate Bo9S before we finished that module). We didn't just read the book and decide without trying. I've never used the phrase "badwrongfun", so would never compare any mechanic with such a stupid phrase. However, if something doesn't work for your group - is it wrong that we don't choose to use a mechanic, as if you shouldn't be allowed to ban anything? I think martial adepts suck, but am perfectly willing to agree that it might be the most wonderful thing for you. Since you don't play at my table, I just don't care what works for you - that's completely meaningless for my game. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Does pathfinder strike anyone as too gamey?
Top