Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 6133973" data-attributes="member: 82106">Yeah, I don't follow you. D&amp;D is of course intended to be a FANTASY RPG, but within that its no less flexible (certainly not in recent incarnations) than any other system. AD&amp;D with its small list of very specific classes was less so, but having done plenty of hacking in my day I find 4e to be pretty toolbox. So far I ran a heroic save the world high fantasy, a pirates campaign, a lower fantasy dragon-hunting campaign, knights and damsels, and now we're doing a town adventure sort of thing with undead. While D&amp;D has many trappings that go with its stock kitchen-sink low-fantasy its easy enough to reflavor/rewrite a few items and creatures. As for Hero and M&amp;M, I have no idea what you mean. The higher power scale doesn't increase flexibility, in fact I'd say the opposite is more true, games with shallow power curves tend to fit more things with less work, although they can be pretty limiting in the long run. M&amp;M is quite a slick game with its solid reflavoring and attributes, but at best it is only slightly more maleable than 4e, and most because its more explicit about it. I don't think RIFTS or Palladium demonstrates much. Back in the old days we had a 'D&amp;D' campaign that spanned WWI, the Wild West, the post-apocalyptic future, the Cold War, etc as well as the Underdark, space travel, etc etc etc. The 1e rules with whatever we felt like grafting on from other games worked fine for it. I think 4e would work even better for that, and 3e probably also would have been easier to hack on than 1e, but 1e worked fine. D&amp;D really demands few assumptions about setting or genre IMHO. I think that's one reason it is successful, its flexible ENOUGH, which means usually its pretty attractive since people know the rules and have the books etc.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 6133973, member: 82106"] Yeah, I don't follow you. D&D is of course intended to be a FANTASY RPG, but within that its no less flexible (certainly not in recent incarnations) than any other system. AD&D with its small list of very specific classes was less so, but having done plenty of hacking in my day I find 4e to be pretty toolbox. So far I ran a heroic save the world high fantasy, a pirates campaign, a lower fantasy dragon-hunting campaign, knights and damsels, and now we're doing a town adventure sort of thing with undead. While D&D has many trappings that go with its stock kitchen-sink low-fantasy its easy enough to reflavor/rewrite a few items and creatures. As for Hero and M&M, I have no idea what you mean. The higher power scale doesn't increase flexibility, in fact I'd say the opposite is more true, games with shallow power curves tend to fit more things with less work, although they can be pretty limiting in the long run. M&M is quite a slick game with its solid reflavoring and attributes, but at best it is only slightly more maleable than 4e, and most because its more explicit about it. I don't think RIFTS or Palladium demonstrates much. Back in the old days we had a 'D&D' campaign that spanned WWI, the Wild West, the post-apocalyptic future, the Cold War, etc as well as the Underdark, space travel, etc etc etc. The 1e rules with whatever we felt like grafting on from other games worked fine for it. I think 4e would work even better for that, and 3e probably also would have been easier to hack on than 1e, but 1e worked fine. D&D really demands few assumptions about setting or genre IMHO. I think that's one reason it is successful, its flexible ENOUGH, which means usually its pretty attractive since people know the rules and have the books etc. [/QUOTE]

Verification