Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5424266" data-attributes="member: 42582">I've got no objection to those who explain why they don't like to play a game. I do that often enough. I don't mind even that they point out features of the game that give rise to the aspect of it that doesn't appeal to them. I do this to. It's when they draw a conclusion along the lines of ". . . and therefore no creative/rational/sane/non-causal gamer could enjoy this RPG" that I tend to get irritated.The sort of criticism I don't mind receiving (and don't mind making!): Rolemaster has no encounter build guidelines, which can make designing combat encounters a very hit and miss affair (I know this from a lot of experience GMing Rolemaster). It can also be very swingy, especially at low levels when PCs don't have the magic that will let them compensate for the effects of high- and low-open-ended rolls. For me, these aren't the main reasons I moved from Rolemaster to 4e, but they did contribute. I could perfectly understand someone who thought these features of Rolemaster were, for them, a perfectly good reason not to consider playing the game at all.I don't have so much 3E experience, but it seems to me that the issue of monster/NPC building, especially at high levels, is a pretty clear one in that game that might put off some people. I can equally see that others regard the resulting mechanical detail as a virtue.When it comes to 4e, I don't mind at all when others explain how it's non-simulationist approach to encounter design and action resolution isn't for them. What does irritate me is when they go on to assert that these non-simulationist elements mean the game doesn't support serious roleplaying. I don't know if I'd say that's insulting, but it's pretty annoying, especially when it's not backed up with an analysis of the relationship between other non-simulationist games and roleplaying (eg HeroQuest, Burning Wheel). Serious discussion of the potential pitfalls of non-simulationist action resolution, on the other hand (eg the potential for players to bypass the gameworld altogether when thinking about PC actions, and simply to talk in mechanical terms) is always welcome.</blockquote>

Verification