Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Interesting Ryan Dancey comment on "lite" RPGs
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="scadgrad" data-source="post: 2390678" data-attributes="member: 766"><p>I'm certainly not in this thread to "bash 3.X," but rather to suggest that the silliness that Dancey claimed is complete BS. I saw it as standing up for the truth really, rather than letting someone talk out of the side of their...well you know. I think the "job of us C&C types" is to answer questions about the game, dispel spurious comments, and spread interest through word of mouth, nothing more really. I can't imagine that C&C could possibly benefit by a bunch of us hanging out over here on EnWorld of all places, and just blathering on about how "suckified" 3.X is. One system is better for some folks while the other is the superior choice for those other groups.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I think part of what's being misconstrued here is that the C&C crowd, at least those of us who are active in the society, are for the most part, an older group of grognards. For the record, Scadgrad states that rules-heavy games are for, well, people who like a lot of rules. I really do think that Der_Kluge hit upon this in a recent thread where he speculated that certain personality types might be drawn to one game system over another.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I would hope so. But at the same time, it's in my nature to suggest C&C to folks who might be looking for a change, just like I honestly tell folks that, you know, maybe C&C isn't for you. Different strokes, but none the less Dancey's "equal time" comments still seems like hogwash to me.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Not sure what problem you have with the SIEGE engine since I think it works surprisingly well, but since you've asked:</p><p></p><p>The ability to use <strong>ANY D&D</strong> product from <strong>ANY</strong> edition easily, and on the fly</p><p>A far simpler rules set</p><p>A bridge between D&D 3.X and the incredible amount of material produced for all other editions</p><p>A very simple way to teach kids and non-gamers how to play D&D</p><p>Combats that don't bog down into Battletech-like drudgery</p><p>A game experience that feels more like the D&D that I DMd for 22 years prior to the release of 3.X rather than say, Diablo.</p><p>Prep time that is far easier on pressed-for-time DMs</p><p>A game that is far easier for the DM to adjudicate when the PCs "go off the map"</p><p>A very simple way for D20 players to enjoy the modules of the past without requiring their DM to spend days doing the conversion to 3.X</p><p></p><p>I could go on and on, but those are just a few off the top of my head.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="scadgrad, post: 2390678, member: 766"] I'm certainly not in this thread to "bash 3.X," but rather to suggest that the silliness that Dancey claimed is complete BS. I saw it as standing up for the truth really, rather than letting someone talk out of the side of their...well you know. I think the "job of us C&C types" is to answer questions about the game, dispel spurious comments, and spread interest through word of mouth, nothing more really. I can't imagine that C&C could possibly benefit by a bunch of us hanging out over here on EnWorld of all places, and just blathering on about how "suckified" 3.X is. One system is better for some folks while the other is the superior choice for those other groups. I think part of what's being misconstrued here is that the C&C crowd, at least those of us who are active in the society, are for the most part, an older group of grognards. For the record, Scadgrad states that rules-heavy games are for, well, people who like a lot of rules. I really do think that Der_Kluge hit upon this in a recent thread where he speculated that certain personality types might be drawn to one game system over another. I would hope so. But at the same time, it's in my nature to suggest C&C to folks who might be looking for a change, just like I honestly tell folks that, you know, maybe C&C isn't for you. Different strokes, but none the less Dancey's "equal time" comments still seems like hogwash to me. Not sure what problem you have with the SIEGE engine since I think it works surprisingly well, but since you've asked: The ability to use [B]ANY D&D[/B] product from [B]ANY[/B] edition easily, and on the fly A far simpler rules set A bridge between D&D 3.X and the incredible amount of material produced for all other editions A very simple way to teach kids and non-gamers how to play D&D Combats that don't bog down into Battletech-like drudgery A game experience that feels more like the D&D that I DMd for 22 years prior to the release of 3.X rather than say, Diablo. Prep time that is far easier on pressed-for-time DMs A game that is far easier for the DM to adjudicate when the PCs "go off the map" A very simple way for D20 players to enjoy the modules of the past without requiring their DM to spend days doing the conversion to 3.X I could go on and on, but those are just a few off the top of my head. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Interesting Ryan Dancey comment on "lite" RPGs
Top