Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="The Shadow" data-source="post: 5915152" data-attributes="member: 16760">Not quite.&nbsp; Mind you, your other statement:has an element of truth to it as well.&nbsp; Nevertheless, judgment of quality is not wholly subjective.&nbsp; It is possible to tell when a game system is *getting in your way*.I had many hours of fun with AD&amp;D, and have a lasting treasure of memories of those hours.&nbsp; I would not willingly part with them.Nevertheless, when I moved from AD&amp;D to other systems, it became clear that AD&amp;D had serious design flaws.&nbsp; It was, in a word, clunky - it was constantly getting in my way, drawing attention to itself.&nbsp; It had too many fiddly rules that were unnecessary.&nbsp; I got frustrated with it.Of course, those other systems had their own flaws.&nbsp; I can't see myself playing Champions again, now that I have Mutants &amp; Masterminds.&nbsp; M&amp;M is just plain better at what it does - deliver fun superhero gaming - with very little downside.&nbsp; Still, Champions (and GURPS, and others) showed me what was wrong with AD&amp;D, because their warts were in different places.I reiterate:&nbsp; I had many, many hours of fun with AD&amp;D.&nbsp; But likewise I can't see myself ever playing it again, because there are newer systems that just plain deliver the gaming experience better.That said, I do agree that rule codification has been carried to far, and I applaud the 5e designers for trying to get back to more GM adjudication;&nbsp; it's a positive effort to recover something that I agree has been lost.&nbsp; But the excessive codification of 3e was an overreaction to a real problem in AD&amp;D as I see it.&nbsp; For the most part, and not without flaws, it was a real improvement.Then there's 4e.&nbsp; Here is a clear example of the non-subjectivity of quality judgment:&nbsp; I think 4e is a completely brilliant example of game design.&nbsp; I am in awe of the ambition of the effort and the degree to which it succeeded.&nbsp; Not to say that 4e doesn't have its own problems, but wow, there's no question the design is amazing.&nbsp; And I can't stand the game. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />The problem?&nbsp; All that brilliance was directed at producing a type of game I have no interest in playing.&nbsp; I'm just not interested in tons and tons of tactical options - it bores me to tears.&nbsp; If it floats other people's boats, more power to 'em, but it doesn't float mine.I haven't actually played D&amp;D in a while.&nbsp; (A little bit of Pathfinder, but mostly M&amp;M and True20.)&nbsp; I'm here excitedly talking about 5e because AD&amp;D was my first love.&nbsp; I can see now we weren't meant for each other, but that doesn't change the fact that we had a great time together.&nbsp; So I can't help but hope that this time it will all work out. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="The Shadow, post: 5915152, member: 16760"] Not quite. Mind you, your other statement: has an element of truth to it as well. Nevertheless, judgment of quality is not wholly subjective. It is possible to tell when a game system is *getting in your way*. I had many hours of fun with AD&D, and have a lasting treasure of memories of those hours. I would not willingly part with them. Nevertheless, when I moved from AD&D to other systems, it became clear that AD&D had serious design flaws. It was, in a word, clunky - it was constantly getting in my way, drawing attention to itself. It had too many fiddly rules that were unnecessary. I got frustrated with it. Of course, those other systems had their own flaws. I can't see myself playing Champions again, now that I have Mutants & Masterminds. M&M is just plain better at what it does - deliver fun superhero gaming - with very little downside. Still, Champions (and GURPS, and others) showed me what was wrong with AD&D, because their warts were in different places. I reiterate: I had many, many hours of fun with AD&D. But likewise I can't see myself ever playing it again, because there are newer systems that just plain deliver the gaming experience better. That said, I do agree that rule codification has been carried to far, and I applaud the 5e designers for trying to get back to more GM adjudication; it's a positive effort to recover something that I agree has been lost. But the excessive codification of 3e was an overreaction to a real problem in AD&D as I see it. For the most part, and not without flaws, it was a real improvement. Then there's 4e. Here is a clear example of the non-subjectivity of quality judgment: I think 4e is a completely brilliant example of game design. I am in awe of the ambition of the effort and the degree to which it succeeded. Not to say that 4e doesn't have its own problems, but wow, there's no question the design is amazing. And I can't stand the game. :) The problem? All that brilliance was directed at producing a type of game I have no interest in playing. I'm just not interested in tons and tons of tactical options - it bores me to tears. If it floats other people's boats, more power to 'em, but it doesn't float mine. I haven't actually played D&D in a while. (A little bit of Pathfinder, but mostly M&M and True20.) I'm here excitedly talking about 5e because AD&D was my first love. I can see now we weren't meant for each other, but that doesn't change the fact that we had a great time together. So I can't help but hope that this time it will all work out. :) [/QUOTE]

Verification