Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ridley's Cohort" data-source="post: 1849702" data-attributes="member: 545">If true, it is because you are a truly exceptional GM.&nbsp; But it runs counter to all my experience at the game table.&nbsp; The ability to whip up codified &amp; balanced game rules is very rare; I base this conclusion on the dozen or so RPGs and dozens of other games I am familiar with.&nbsp; If this talent is common those who possess seem to avoid publishing gaming material.&nbsp; Please understand that I am purposefully neither believing nor disbelieving you in specific, but I would be shocked if the high level of competence you describe were to be found in even 1 in 100 experienced GMs.This opens a more philosophical question:&nbsp; Who are the rules written for?I submit that rulebooks should primarily help &quot;okay&quot; and &quot;mediocre&quot; and &quot;beginning&quot; GMs along the way towards becoming &quot;good&quot; GMs.&nbsp; The alternative would be to assist &quot;good&quot; (or worse) GMs to achieve real excellence.For the second goal, both 1e/2e and 3e are likely failures.&nbsp; IMNSHO 3e is a vastly better bet for most GMs with respect to the first goal.Now if you happen to be a truly great GM already, it is very possible that the 3e approach might bore you to tears.&nbsp; But the 2e approach is likely to be spotty at best as well because inspirational value is a pretty subjective thing.I happen to believe that vast majority of GMs of better served by the 3e approach (although I concede the vast majority are unlikely to agree with me).&nbsp; A number will say they are great at whipping up balanced rules; very few are.&nbsp; I do not doubt such GM exists, but they are rare birds and do not representative of the needs of the gaming community as a whole.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ridley's Cohort, post: 1849702, member: 545"] If true, it is because you are a truly exceptional GM. But it runs counter to all my experience at the game table. The ability to whip up codified & balanced game rules is very rare; I base this conclusion on the dozen or so RPGs and dozens of other games I am familiar with. If this talent is common those who possess seem to avoid publishing gaming material. Please understand that I am purposefully neither believing nor disbelieving you in specific, but I would be shocked if the high level of competence you describe were to be found in even 1 in 100 experienced GMs. This opens a more philosophical question: Who are the rules written for? I submit that rulebooks should primarily help "okay" and "mediocre" and "beginning" GMs along the way towards becoming "good" GMs. The alternative would be to assist "good" (or worse) GMs to achieve real excellence. For the second goal, both 1e/2e and 3e are likely failures. IMNSHO 3e is a vastly better bet for most GMs with respect to the first goal. Now if you happen to be a truly great GM already, it is very possible that the 3e approach might bore you to tears. But the 2e approach is likely to be spotty at best as well because inspirational value is a pretty subjective thing. I happen to believe that vast majority of GMs of better served by the 3e approach (although I concede the vast majority are unlikely to agree with me). A number will say they are great at whipping up balanced rules; very few are. I do not doubt such GM exists, but they are rare birds and [i]do not representative of the needs of the gaming community as a whole[/i]. [/QUOTE]

Verification