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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sammael99" data-source="post: 477666" data-attributes="member: 1157">My take is that ultimately, system is secondary. The groups I have games with have always put more emphasis on the setting than on the system. We stopped playing AD&D 1st because we were overly frystrated with the system, true, but more importantly because other games with more stable and interesting settings came out.We came back to 3E because we'd been playing low fantasy or dark modern RPGs for a while and wanted something heroic. We probably wouldn't have moved back to 1E, but 3E fit the bill just fine : a lot more rational and a lot easier to grasp was just what we were looking for.That being said, I majorly disliked the evolutions in Vampire. But it wasn't due to the system changes. It was due to the emphasis on certain elements of the background. VtM 1E was an angst-ridden, dark and wonderful game where you strived for morality because the alternative was too horrible to consider. In other words, it was Interview with a Vampire in a nutshell. VtM 2nd Ed. started on the road to slugfest where you had all these options for being a violent butcher with no effect to your sanity. It was, in other words, a lot more Lestat the Vampire. I stopped purchasing supplements around that time. In any case, the major system flaws in the WW games (mainly combat) never got fixed throughout the re-editions...So all in all, I'd say that if a system isn't so horrible that it actually hinders the fun of roleplaying, I don't much care. The setting is so much more important to me...</blockquote>

Verification