Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Alzrius" data-source="post: 6163928" data-attributes="member: 8461">Given that games like D&amp;D and Pathfinder already require fairly hefty books full of rules to learn to play, I don't think that point-buy character-generation systems are that much more complex than classed systems are. Now, the manner of presentation does count for a lot, but that's largely independent of what it's presenting. Likewise, enthusiasm and having someone to help walk you through the process are also more important, I'd say, than the complexity of the rules unto themselves. I don't like min-maxing either, but I think that class-less systems are actually better in this regard.The reason I say that is that there's a zeitgeist in contemporary game design (no, not the EN Publishing campaign saga, though I've heard that's quite good) that says that the GM should play no part in a player designing their PC. I don't think that's true, and that's doubly so when using a class-less system, since a class-less system can potentially allow you to build anything. The GM needs to be part of the process, denoting which powers (or combinations of powers) aren't available, analyzing what PC builds are disruptive, and otherwise taking an active, not passive, role in making the game fun for everyone...which sometimes means saying &quot;we need to talk about your character.&quot;It's true a point-buy system can allow you to completely eschew things you don't think work for your character concept, focusing only on what does, but min-maxing is fundamentally a player issue, I think. You can't design a system that encourages free-form building while also having it defend against any and every possible build that could be min-maxed (particularly since that term means different things to different people).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Alzrius, post: 6163928, member: 8461"] Given that games like D&D and Pathfinder already require fairly hefty books full of rules to learn to play, I don't think that point-buy character-generation systems are that much more complex than classed systems are. Now, the manner of presentation does count for a lot, but that's largely independent of what it's presenting. Likewise, enthusiasm and having someone to help walk you through the process are also more important, I'd say, than the complexity of the rules unto themselves. I don't like min-maxing either, but I think that class-less systems are actually better in this regard. The reason I say that is that there's a zeitgeist in contemporary game design (no, not the EN Publishing campaign saga, though I've heard that's quite good) that says that the GM should play no part in a player designing their PC. I don't think that's true, and that's doubly so when using a class-less system, since a class-less system can potentially allow you to build [i]anything[/i]. The GM needs to be part of the process, denoting which powers (or combinations of powers) aren't available, analyzing what PC builds are disruptive, and otherwise taking an active, not passive, role in making the game fun for everyone...which sometimes means saying "we need to talk about your character." It's true a point-buy system can allow you to completely eschew things you don't think work for your character concept, focusing only on what does, but min-maxing is fundamentally a [i]player[/i] issue, I think. You can't design a system that encourages free-form building while also having it defend against any and every possible build that could be min-maxed (particularly since that term means different things to different people). [/QUOTE]

Verification