Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="chaochou" data-source="post: 5931236" data-attributes="member: 99817">Good post. As usual, I can't xp. <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/erm.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":erm:" title="Erm    :erm:" data-shortname=":erm:" />I think this provides a segway into an aspect of 'modularity' which I don't see discussed much.The primary assumption seems to be that 'modularity' will allow anyone to chop and change bits of the system to get the game they want.What I think is interesting is that it's the basis for a discussion amongst the whole group on some key playstyle issues before the game actually starts.That is to say, if we're agreeing to use the weapons vs armour type optional module then we've agreed to a certain set of combat rules. if the GM is saying 'Nah, only if I think the circumstances warrant' then we're looking at some ad hoc combat rulings.The discussions used to decide on modules may be as important as the modules themselves.</blockquote>