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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 8111536" data-attributes="member: 29398">Ah - OK.  Now I see where you're going; this makes way more sense. <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=":)" />The problem with things like keywords (or design mechanic) is that once a keyword exists, things tend to get shoehorned into using that keyword or mechanic even when it doesn't 100% suit or when some other term or phrase or mechanic would be better.My current example of this from a design-level perspective is 5e's advantage-disadvantage mechanic.  Great mechanic for some situations.  Not the best for others, where something else e.g. a straight + or - or even rollign a different die size would work better.  Yet once ad-disad was in the game, everhthing got shoehorned into using it - which does 5e no favours at all.In 3e it was the d20 mechanic.  Everything got shoehorned into it even when d% or d12 worked better.I'd disagree about the original idea being sound and interesting - all PrCs ever appeared as from my viewpoint were places where powergamers could make themselves happy.In a mass-market RPG such as D&D there's a fourth value that can't be overlooked: "is the game system as designed flexible enough to be able to handle all the varied and different ways people are likely going to try to play it?"  And value 4A would be "how well can the underlying system tolerate kitbashing?".  Most games don't have to worry about these - there's really only one way to play chess or monopoly, for example, and rarely if ever do people mess with the rules to any great extent - but RPGs have all kinds of options when it comes to how to play them, and also have a long history of end-users tinkering with the rules.I go for practicality first (does this particular rule do the job it's supposed to do), appearance second (is it worded in a way that's both a) clear to understand and b) not boring), and structure third (I don't mind using different mechanics to accomplish different things).</blockquote>

Verification