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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dausuul" data-source="post: 5204584" data-attributes="member: 58197">To me, it all boils down to gain versus cost.Every layer of complexity added to a game imposes a cost; it reduces the level of energy at the gaming table, adds pitfalls where lack of system mastery can result in getting burned, and steepens the learning curve. So the question is: What are you getting in exchange? What does this rule add to the gaming experience and is it worth it?Taking your example regarding weapon types: What are you planning to do with your weapon types? 4E D&D, for instance, has some very fine-grained distinctions - a longsword and a broadsword have slightly different stats. I have yet to see such distinctions provide any kind of benefit. Mostly it's just a "gotcha." "Oops, you took Focused Expertise in the longsword, but this is a broadsword! Gotcha!" "Oops, you chose to wield a broadsword, but if you crunch the numbers, you'll find the longsword is statistically a better weapon! Gotcha!"On the other hand, there are good reasons to make distinctions between certain weapons. Verisimilitude is one; it strains credulity when a longbow and a greatsword are equally good at killing enemies from a hundred paces. Tactics is another; the "combat mini-game" is more interesting and has greater depth if the swordsman and the archer have different moves.So, I would say you should have exactly as many weapon types as you can find ways to make unique and interesting in play. Past that, don't bother.I can play and enjoy a simple, fast-paced game, or a detailed, complex game. Each has its appeal. But if I'm going to play the latter, I want to get my money's worth out of the complexity.</blockquote>

Verification