Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="catastrophic" data-source="post: 5637799" data-attributes="member: 81381">I'm seein all these scenarios, and it really convinces me that the only viable way forward would be to ensure that the subsystems are laid out using- A)uniform mechanics and language, including a core exchange mechanic, eg universal and splittable points B)dials tweaked within those systems to change things like complexity, stakes, while still functioning within the same balance and assumptions about outcomes.  and, C)certanily not a system where players nostalgic for 3e wizards get their toys back. In other words, a lot less about tacking on modules, and a lot more about a strong robust Core that could hangle various kinds of Events, Challenges, and Resources. The modules would then me suplements that would offer norms for the kinds of events, challenges, and resources might be involved in say, building a castle of piloting a pirate ship.  And I get what people are saying about wanting to keep noncombat freeform, but to me, rules are no threat to that. One, they're optional, and two, good mechanics don't restrict the GM- they just give them more options, and better support to do what they (and the players) want to do. My point would be that essentially the mastery of 3e is in builds, hence strategic. The problem isn't just the downtime, it's disproportionate downtime. 3e was terrible in this respect, some people would play a ten second turn, others a five minute turn, round after round. 4e still has turns which are far too slow, but it's headed in the right direction.</blockquote>

Verification