NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JamesonCourage" data-source="post: 6067550" data-attributes="member: 6668292">I'd suggest that if many people quite enjoy that style of game, as it seems extremely far from being small in scope, then the rules should be created to support that. That might mean toning down magic, if it's too powerful. I don't see why we'd need to go back to a style that many people don't prefer (always start at level 1, simple strong Fighter at low levels, etc.). Is it simpler? In the short term, yes. But my new players have routinely tried to do things that are not supported by the rules, after they've got the basics down, in D&D games. And that's where the game starts to fail me. But I'm a rules guy. I don't mind deviating from them, but I definitely want them there as support.Yeah, I brought up Diablo for a reason (even if I never finished Diablo 2 or 3... just couldn't take it). Obviously, the game would be much more than that. Just the pen and paper medium, with a GM and players, is going to allow much more. The RP potential alone gulfs what Diablo can support. But, the style of play described in the original post strikes me as a very Diablo-style RPG: go into dungeons, kill stuff, loot treasure, and see how far you can get, risk versus reward style. And that's cool, but I don't think the majority of people play that way anymore (but I don't know for sure... who can know?). At any rate, I just don't feel like going to that style pays off in the long term. It's simpler in the short term, but it doesn't have the broad appeal to get people interested in the first place ("you mostly just kill and loot stuff? Eh."), and in my experience, it starts to feel limiting past a certain point ("there's no rules on running a business? Or mass combat? Or ruling nations? Or gambling? Or having an addiction? Or underwater rules? Or chase rules? Or crafting unique object rules?" etc.). Mind you, yes, none of those are probably enough to stop the system being used, but it starts to drag on the more your players want to use those rules (especially long term, like running a territory, owning a business, being a gambler, being addicted, fighting underwater, being a craftsman, etc.). And that's why I want rule support for those things.tl;dr: Simple, in the short term, is nice. It really is. But it starts to fail me in the long term. And, the style described in the original post (Diablo RPG) is simple (good for new players), but it doesn't have broad appeal in campaign style supported (bad for new players). But that's just my view.I also don't know about this. Having the ability to cut things is actually very versatile. It's why I carry a knife with me in real life. Sure, it can be used for defense, but I've never used it that way. I cut things with it. I open things. In the wild, it'd help me (not that I have wilderness skills). Could fire at (if spellcasters can do it at will) will be useful? Sure it will. Lighting fires in the wilderness, creating smoke, causing distractions. Useful.An the Wizard can carry a knife, to boot! But the Fighter can carry flint and steel. Are either as good as what the other has? No, not really. The Fighter will be able to cut more (or smash more with a mace, like locks or chests) than the Wizard, and the Wizard has range (though a Fighter could use a flaming arrow) and damage. But I'm kind of okay with that. They're better in their respective fields; awesome. As always, play what you like <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification