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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 3599294" data-attributes="member: 22779">Sorry, I meant that *I*[/] had vetted the encounters.  Since I run over OpenRPG, I do up a quick code line for every likely attack a creature will make.  That means I have to take a look at the most likely attacks a creature will make and any large glaring errors tend to jump out at that time.  Sure, a +1 here or there might get missed and I can honestly say I couldn't care less.  But, having vetted lots and lots of encounters, I'm fairly confident in my ability to spot numbers that are off, like allowing someone with a whip-dagger to gain x2 damage bonuses to power attack.  (one that jumped out at me from a module a while ago)It's not a fanboy thing though.  There simply aren't that many sub systems.  You can have some fairly serious complexity, I'll agree with that, but, the actual number of different systems you have to deal with are fairly small.  You use pretty much the same mechanic - d20+x vs target number - for nearly every action.Now, I freely support anyone's idea that if a game doesn't meet their needs, they should change games.  That's the single best advice anyone can give.  But that doesn't mean that the system is bad.  Simply bad for you.  D&D, for all its wrinkles simply isn't that difficult.  Try Traveler character generation sometime.  See how long it takes to make a character in Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.  Heck, even Vampire isn't exactly light.  Are there easier choices out there?  Yup.  But, to say that D&D is on the high end of the complexity spectrum ignores an awful lot of games out there.  D&D, even with splat books, doesn't necessarily get that much more complicated.  Going back to the Basic/Advanced model for a second.Sure, you're right, you get those who want D&D Lite and Heavy (for lack of better terms).  And, if you provide both, you appeal to more people.  How many more people, we don't know, but, we'll say, for the sake of arguement, more people.So, you crank out a Lite Set and a Heavy Set.  We'll say that they sell about equally well.  Good for us right?  Not really.  Selling twice as many books doesn't equal twice as much money if you have to put out more titles.  It's always better to sell one book than two, unless two books are going to massively outsell one.  With your Venn diagram, you get a bunch who will buy heavy, some who will buy heavy because there is no other choice, and those who will never buy heavy.  In other words, more than half the potential buyers will buy a single choice if only one is provided.It comes down to economics.  Selling one title to 51% of the market is better than selling 2 titles to 100% simply because of economies of scale and other costs.  The kind of thing RFisher is advocating is one of the main mismanagements that sunk TSR.</blockquote>

Verification