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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Desdichado" data-source="post: 2388141" data-attributes="member: 2205">You have a lot of nerve posting all those subjective criteria and then taking anyone to task for the "scientificality" of their argument.  If that's what you mean by rules light, how is d20 not rules light?1)  I've never spent more than an hour tops preparing for monsters and encounters for an adventure that will take me through 4-6 evenings of gameplay.  And an hour is a strong outlier -- half an hour or less is more normal.  And much of that time is not preparing mechanics either.2)  With decisive players, d20 character creation can take 5 minutes or less for any character you can think of.  If I've spent more time on it than that, it's been because I've been sweating non-mechanical things like being wishy-washy on character concept or background.3)  With the exception of the massive spell and magic item lists, d20 easily fits all of its rules in less than "volumes"--every game other than D&D uses the system in a single book that includes setting information, and often a sample adventure or two too.  Adjudicating an action is covered in the skill user chapter or the combat chapter, with some support from the GMing chapter of a game like d20 Call of Cthulhu, Wheel of Time, Star Wars or d20 Modern.  Other than character creation (including feats), those three chapters are all of the rules of the d20 system.  And other than the aforementioned spells and magic items, that's pretty much true for the D&D variety of d20 as well.That point would make more sense if it didn't also apply to every d20 game other than D&D--and the reason D&D is larger is because of massive lists of spells, magic items and monsters--all optional rules that are only used if the GM brings it into the game, for the most part.As has been pointed out, you understand incorrectly.  And Dancey and Mearls are stating their opinion.  I don't think either has tried to pass that "research" as definitive.And for that matter, Mr. Analytic, since you (presumably) don't know any better than us exactly what methods were used, you can't do more than question his methods.  You certainly can't condemn them when they have not been publicly described in any detail.</blockquote>

Verification