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
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
"Hot" take: Aesthetically-pleasing rules are highly overvalued
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="doctorbadwolf" data-source="post: 8112666" data-attributes="member: 6704184"><p>Lasers and Feelings is playable, IMO, because it's "when there is a conflict between your fiction and mine, we use a coin toss to determine whose fiction is right" layered onto freeform roleplaying to keep things moving. It works for what it is, with its fairly tight theme and game style, but, again IMO, it literally could not support the same kind of play as a more complex system. It is necessarily more limited, by it's extreme simplicity. </p><p></p><p>My friend is wanting to run a series of games wherein we use a single very simple "system" to run sessions with very different themes and tones, where a player chooses each session if the next game will be Horror, Mystery, Pulp Adventure, etc. His preference at first was to literally just have a discription of a character derived from a 5 part questionnaire, and the basic dice mechanic from pbta games (2d6 with a success ladder). That's it. </p><p>However, when I pointed out to him that this would mean that my Constantine style street warlock who is expert in ritual magic, deductive reasoning, and forensics, had no way to actually be expert in anything at all, he agreed that we should at least have some manner of system by which to slightly increase my chance of success on tests regarding my areas of expertise. </p><p>I suggested a simple advantage/disadvantage system, wherein I roll with 3 dice and drop the lowest if I am rolling for something I am expert in, and if the check should be extra hard for me I do the opposite (3d6 drop highest). In this way, who my character is is allowed to matter. </p><p>This system will probably work just fine for us for this specific experiment, and teach us about our roleplaying and storytelling skills, and help us make better games in the future, but it isn't the seed of a great game. It is very limited. It has large pitfalls. It would fall apart in a context other than playing with people who are fully onbaord and not prone to gaming the system in order to "win".</p><p></p><p>In my games, I'm considering a rule that you can use a bonus action on your turn to prepare to interrupt a complex action by someone else on the field, and if you get ot use that Reaction, it interrupts the action rather than happening after it. In this way, you can set yourself up to interrupt casters. If you do, they have to make a Concentration Save to keep the spell. </p><p></p><p>I've also added counterspell variants like a smite that allows you to move up to 10ft as a reaction while the spell lasts and make an attack that interrupts a spell casting, with a little extra damage.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="doctorbadwolf, post: 8112666, member: 6704184"] Lasers and Feelings is playable, IMO, because it's "when there is a conflict between your fiction and mine, we use a coin toss to determine whose fiction is right" layered onto freeform roleplaying to keep things moving. It works for what it is, with its fairly tight theme and game style, but, again IMO, it literally could not support the same kind of play as a more complex system. It is necessarily more limited, by it's extreme simplicity. My friend is wanting to run a series of games wherein we use a single very simple "system" to run sessions with very different themes and tones, where a player chooses each session if the next game will be Horror, Mystery, Pulp Adventure, etc. His preference at first was to literally just have a discription of a character derived from a 5 part questionnaire, and the basic dice mechanic from pbta games (2d6 with a success ladder). That's it. However, when I pointed out to him that this would mean that my Constantine style street warlock who is expert in ritual magic, deductive reasoning, and forensics, had no way to actually be expert in anything at all, he agreed that we should at least have some manner of system by which to slightly increase my chance of success on tests regarding my areas of expertise. I suggested a simple advantage/disadvantage system, wherein I roll with 3 dice and drop the lowest if I am rolling for something I am expert in, and if the check should be extra hard for me I do the opposite (3d6 drop highest). In this way, who my character is is allowed to matter. This system will probably work just fine for us for this specific experiment, and teach us about our roleplaying and storytelling skills, and help us make better games in the future, but it isn't the seed of a great game. It is very limited. It has large pitfalls. It would fall apart in a context other than playing with people who are fully onbaord and not prone to gaming the system in order to "win". In my games, I'm considering a rule that you can use a bonus action on your turn to prepare to interrupt a complex action by someone else on the field, and if you get ot use that Reaction, it interrupts the action rather than happening after it. In this way, you can set yourself up to interrupt casters. If you do, they have to make a Concentration Save to keep the spell. I've also added counterspell variants like a smite that allows you to move up to 10ft as a reaction while the spell lasts and make an attack that interrupts a spell casting, with a little extra damage. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
"Hot" take: Aesthetically-pleasing rules are highly overvalued
Top