Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Wicht" data-source="post: 6193953" data-attributes="member: 221">Heh. An amateur getting paid a &quot;couple times,&quot; I was always taught, made them a professional. Some people are just more fortunate to be able to be paid enough to make a living at it (and some of us have other things we think are more important). For what its worth, I didn't say &quot;its not looking right.&quot;&nbsp; Its not an issue of whether it can work or not. Obviously it can. Plenty of boardgames use that sort of artificial delineation to achieve &quot;balance.&quot; However, I pointedly think, for an RPG like Dungeons and Dragons, the very idea is itself a bad idea. As in &quot;It goes completely against the grain of what I want in an RPG like DnD.&quot; As in, &quot;no level of polish or professionalism is going to make it a good idea for what I want from DnD.&quot; Such a system works fine at a certain level of abstraction. I could see something like Burning Wheel getting away with it. But for a game like DnD, I don't want that same level of abstraction, and if I did, I would be playing a different game.&nbsp; I prefer a more detailed oriented approach. If I am playing a fighter, and I find boots of stealth, I want to be able to be the fighter that now, via the magic boots, can be as stealthy as any rogue. I don't want to be told, &quot;no, those boots are for a different sort of character and your fighter can't use them because it does not fit the character type or the 'group type' of your character.&quot; I had hopes of WotC producing a game I could like and play, but if they are following this sort of design philosophy, I think its looking very good for Paizo. :/</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Wicht, post: 6193953, member: 221"] Heh. An amateur getting paid a "couple times," I was always taught, made them a professional. Some people are just more fortunate to be able to be paid enough to make a living at it (and some of us have other things we think are more important). For what its worth, I didn't say "its not looking right." Its not an issue of whether it can work or not. Obviously it can. Plenty of boardgames use that sort of artificial delineation to achieve "balance." However, I pointedly think, for an RPG like Dungeons and Dragons, the very idea is itself a bad idea. As in "It goes completely against the grain of what I want in an RPG like DnD." As in, "no level of polish or professionalism is going to make it a good idea for what I want from DnD." Such a system works fine at a certain level of abstraction. I could see something like Burning Wheel getting away with it. But for a game like DnD, I don't want that same level of abstraction, and if I did, I would be playing a different game. I prefer a more detailed oriented approach. If I am playing a fighter, and I find boots of stealth, I want to be able to be the fighter that now, via the magic boots, can be as stealthy as any rogue. I don't want to be told, "no, those boots are for a different sort of character and your fighter can't use them because it does not fit the character type or the 'group type' of your character." I had hopes of WotC producing a game I could like and play, but if they are following this sort of design philosophy, I think its looking very good for Paizo. :/ [/QUOTE]

Verification