Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Mearls On D&D's Design Premises/Goals
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 7759062" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>I don't think that this is true in general. Like most things about mechanical design, it depends on the details.</p><p></p><p>Moldvay Basic is a reasonably simple game. It can be made more complex by eg bringing in bits and pieces of AD&D, like the separation of race and class, or differential weapon damage for size S-M and size L, or more and more complicated spells, etc.</p><p></p><p>Prince Valiant is a reasonably simple game. I have no idea how you woud go about making it more complex. The advice in the rulebook (at least my version, which is from the recent Kickstarter; I don't know if this was in the original book) is "If you want a more complex Arthurian game, try Pendragon". Which seems the right suggestion to me.</p><p></p><p>Burning Wheel in its full glory is a complex game, but it can be pretty easily simplified (by dropping the detailed combat and magic systems) to be a game of simply "GM sets the DC, player makes a check on the appropriate attribute on his/her sheet" - which is fairly simple in mechanical terms at least (not necessarily in its demands on the GM's ability to adjudicate).</p><p></p><p>Classic Traveller is a moderately complex game (though simpler, I think, than any post-Moldvay edition of D&D) and I can't see how any of that complexity could be stripped out without narrowing the range of play the game allows for (ie unlike Burning Wheel, dropping subsystems equates to dropping that aspect of play, be it starship travel or planetary exploration or whatever).</p><p></p><p>5e could fairly easily be made more complex by eg introducing more intricate rules for setting DCs out of combat, by lengthening the spell lists, by introducing more feats that are more mechanically intricate, etc. But it couldn't be made more complex by eg introducing 4e-style PC gen (ie power-based) - you might write up new classes based on the warlock, but if you look at eg the Champion fighter there's simply not the design space to reconstruct that as a power-based fighter. (Which contrasts, say, with Moldvay Basic which makes it pretty easy to separate race and class and thus take the game closer to its more complex cousins.)</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 7759062, member: 42582"] I don't think that this is true in general. Like most things about mechanical design, it depends on the details. Moldvay Basic is a reasonably simple game. It can be made more complex by eg bringing in bits and pieces of AD&D, like the separation of race and class, or differential weapon damage for size S-M and size L, or more and more complicated spells, etc. Prince Valiant is a reasonably simple game. I have no idea how you woud go about making it more complex. The advice in the rulebook (at least my version, which is from the recent Kickstarter; I don't know if this was in the original book) is "If you want a more complex Arthurian game, try Pendragon". Which seems the right suggestion to me. Burning Wheel in its full glory is a complex game, but it can be pretty easily simplified (by dropping the detailed combat and magic systems) to be a game of simply "GM sets the DC, player makes a check on the appropriate attribute on his/her sheet" - which is fairly simple in mechanical terms at least (not necessarily in its demands on the GM's ability to adjudicate). Classic Traveller is a moderately complex game (though simpler, I think, than any post-Moldvay edition of D&D) and I can't see how any of that complexity could be stripped out without narrowing the range of play the game allows for (ie unlike Burning Wheel, dropping subsystems equates to dropping that aspect of play, be it starship travel or planetary exploration or whatever). 5e could fairly easily be made more complex by eg introducing more intricate rules for setting DCs out of combat, by lengthening the spell lists, by introducing more feats that are more mechanically intricate, etc. But it couldn't be made more complex by eg introducing 4e-style PC gen (ie power-based) - you might write up new classes based on the warlock, but if you look at eg the Champion fighter there's simply not the design space to reconstruct that as a power-based fighter. (Which contrasts, say, with Moldvay Basic which makes it pretty easy to separate race and class and thus take the game closer to its more complex cousins.) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Mearls On D&D's Design Premises/Goals
Top