Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Deset Gled" data-source="post: 9614306" data-attributes="member: 7808">If you don't like combat, it seems like almost any system (RPG, VTT, or otherwise) focused on it would probably qualify as tedious.&nbsp; But given the tread topic, dwelling on that discussion feels like threadcrapping.FWIW, I can't think of any edition of D&amp;D (or probably any other RPG) that hasn't been called &quot;tedious&quot; at some point.&nbsp; 5e is too simple and doesn't have enough options.&nbsp; 4e is too boardgamey.&nbsp; 3e is too complicated and has too much resource management.&nbsp; 2e has too many subsystems and optional rules.&nbsp; AD&amp;D and earlier systems have too many esoteric and random details to keep track of, and math that doesn't make sense.OTOH, I find MtG and other CCGs to be tedious.&nbsp; But the simple response to that complaint is that I just don't play the game.&nbsp; RPGs are a bit more unique in that people complain about such a vast section of the rules, yet still continue to play it.&nbsp; And D&amp;D in particular, being the Big Fish in the small pond, gets the butt of the complaints.&nbsp; I think there's a lot to be said about [USER=63508]@Minigiant[/USER]'s point that other games simply aren't held to the same standard as D&amp;D in this regard.&nbsp; For any alt-D&amp;D game, you'd just be told to switch to a system that you like more, or make your own house rules.&nbsp; That, combined with the decades of people loudly complaining about what they don't want an RPG to be (rather than a clear statement of what the market actually wants) is what lead to the system we have now.Now, getting away from the meta-discussion and going all the way back to the OP...I for one think that VTTs are actually a great way for WotC to add complexity back into D&amp;D.&nbsp; As a 3.5e fan, I would love for a VTT that has built-in tools to handle things like resource management and more simulation-like combat rules.&nbsp; I really hope that using computer assistance becomes a way for D&amp;D to support a higher degree of complexity without sacrificing speed of play.However, I also think think that this inevitably leads to place where the rules for D&amp;D as a tabletop game and D&amp;D as a VTT game will start to diverge.&nbsp; What's good for theatre-of-the-mind or minis is not necesarily good for VTTS.&nbsp; And there's no easy way to deal with that issue.&nbsp; WotC is currently trying maintain users on all all sides of the fence.&nbsp; Time will tell how much that succeeds, and how long they can successfully straddle.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Deset Gled, post: 9614306, member: 7808"] If you don't like combat, it seems like almost any system (RPG, VTT, or otherwise) focused on it would probably qualify as tedious. But given the tread topic, dwelling on that discussion feels like threadcrapping. FWIW, I can't think of any edition of D&D (or probably any other RPG) that hasn't been called "tedious" at some point. 5e is too simple and doesn't have enough options. 4e is too boardgamey. 3e is too complicated and has too much resource management. 2e has too many subsystems and optional rules. AD&D and earlier systems have too many esoteric and random details to keep track of, and math that doesn't make sense. OTOH, I find MtG and other CCGs to be tedious. But the simple response to that complaint is that I just don't play the game. RPGs are a bit more unique in that people complain about such a vast section of the rules, yet still continue to play it. And D&D in particular, being the Big Fish in the small pond, gets the butt of the complaints. I think there's a lot to be said about [USER=63508]@Minigiant[/USER]'s point that other games simply aren't held to the same standard as D&D in this regard. For any alt-D&D game, you'd just be told to switch to a system that you like more, or make your own house rules. That, combined with the decades of people loudly complaining about what they [B][I]don't [/I][/B]want an RPG to be (rather than a clear statement of what the market actually wants) is what lead to the system we have now. Now, getting away from the meta-discussion and going all the way back to the OP... I for one think that VTTs are actually a great way for WotC to add complexity back into D&D. As a 3.5e fan, I would love for a VTT that has built-in tools to handle things like resource management and more simulation-like combat rules. I really hope that using computer assistance becomes a way for D&D to support a higher degree of complexity without sacrificing speed of play. However, I also think think that this inevitably leads to place where the rules for D&D as a tabletop game and D&D as a VTT game will start to diverge. What's good for theatre-of-the-mind or minis is not necesarily good for VTTS. And there's no easy way to deal with that issue. WotC is currently trying maintain users on all all sides of the fence. Time will tell how much that succeeds, and how long they can successfully straddle. [/QUOTE]

Verification