Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Storyteller01" data-source="post: 1995328" data-attributes="member: 20931">Haven't read the whole post, but my two cents...My problem stems from the games lack of story flexibility. I found it annoying that the rules are difficult to adjust to an environment that doesn't fit the miniatures mold. Reading the posts here, you can find dozens of examples of 'the rules say this, but how does it work in this situation?' (How do I do a running backflip off a wall, Like I saw in Mortal Combat?)'. If there is an answer, it generally requires a) having memorized the rules or b) more than a little research time.The rules also predispose players to use them strictky as defined. I didn't see skill variations from WotC until I bought the 3.0 splat books (haven't bought 3.5 yet). I agree that it is the priority of the GM and the players to use their imagination, but the rules don't go out of their way to endorse variations (maybe that's what the OGL is for). I can think of a few times where a player has boxed themselvse into a corner, and don't apply a spell/skill/etc that could help simply because that method wasn't listed in the description. Or worse, you as the DM attempt to use the rules in a new way, just to have a player state 'you can't do that. It isn't listed in the PHB'.These examples are the fault of the group, but the 3.x system doesn't seem to help the situation.PS: Not bashing 3.x per se, but when I play much of the rules gets left out. It just takes too long to measure everything, and the result isn't worth the time needed. Less quantity could speed up to game and allow the players a greater amount of rules interpretation.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Storyteller01, post: 1995328, member: 20931"] Haven't read the whole post, but my two cents... My problem stems from the games lack of story flexibility. I found it annoying that the rules are difficult to adjust to an environment that doesn't fit the miniatures mold. Reading the posts here, you can find dozens of examples of 'the rules say this, but how does it work in this situation?' (How do I do a running backflip off a wall, Like I saw in Mortal Combat?)'. If there is an answer, it generally requires a) having memorized the rules or b) more than a little research time. The rules also predispose players to use them strictky as defined. I didn't see skill variations from WotC until I bought the 3.0 splat books (haven't bought 3.5 yet). I agree that it is the priority of the GM and the players to use their imagination, but the rules don't go out of their way to endorse variations (maybe that's what the OGL is for). I can think of a few times where a player has boxed themselvse into a corner, and don't apply a spell/skill/etc that could help simply because that method wasn't listed in the description. Or worse, you as the DM attempt to use the rules in a new way, just to have a player state 'you can't do that. It isn't listed in the PHB'. These examples are the fault of the group, but the 3.x system doesn't seem to help the situation. PS: Not bashing 3.x per se, but when I play much of the rules gets left out. It just takes too long to measure everything, and the result isn't worth the time needed. Less quantity could speed up to game and allow the players a greater amount of rules interpretation. [/QUOTE]

Verification