Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Emerikol" data-source="post: 6345765" data-attributes="member: 6698278">There may be an overlap of players who want both but the concepts do not overlap necessarily.&nbsp; I'm sure I prefer a game that feels right to me but I'm definitely not overly concerned with realism.&nbsp; In any realistic game, no matter how good the fighter, he will likely be defeated by three or four trained swordsman.&nbsp; The fighter who could resist such an attack is so rare that it's not worth thinking about.&nbsp;&nbsp; I'm just fine with cinematic larger than life heroes that cut their enemies down right and left.I really do think that Bawylie's ideas about narrative mechanical unity resonate with me.&nbsp; The reason is that while I hated damage on a miss, I could not really claim it was dissociative.&nbsp; It's not.&nbsp; So I had this oddball mechanic that I really rejected but I kept asking myself what about it bothered me.&nbsp;&nbsp; NMU was the answer.Here are some things I think I want from a game system...1.&nbsp; I want the fluff to match the mechanical resolution.&nbsp; 2.&nbsp; I want things to flow from start to finish with any back tracking.&nbsp; No choosing to &quot;parry&quot; an attack after damage is rolled.3.&nbsp; I want the character making decisions as the character without any player metagaming.&nbsp; Turns and moves are fine because they translate into something real for the character.&nbsp; That is just meta-language not metagaming.&nbsp; Those are a few examples.&nbsp; I want those things because the game feels more real to me.&nbsp; But when I say real, I mean I can envision it in my mind like I'm watching a cinematic movie.&nbsp; I know D&amp;D is not strictly realistic and I've never wanted that.&nbsp; I don't like GURPS.&nbsp; I don't like wound systems.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Emerikol, post: 6345765, member: 6698278"] There may be an overlap of players who want both but the concepts do not overlap necessarily. I'm sure I prefer a game that feels right to me but I'm definitely not overly concerned with realism. In any realistic game, no matter how good the fighter, he will likely be defeated by three or four trained swordsman. The fighter who could resist such an attack is so rare that it's not worth thinking about. I'm just fine with cinematic larger than life heroes that cut their enemies down right and left. I really do think that Bawylie's ideas about narrative mechanical unity resonate with me. The reason is that while I hated damage on a miss, I could not really claim it was dissociative. It's not. So I had this oddball mechanic that I really rejected but I kept asking myself what about it bothered me. NMU was the answer. Here are some things I think I want from a game system... 1. I want the fluff to match the mechanical resolution. 2. I want things to flow from start to finish with any back tracking. No choosing to "parry" an attack after damage is rolled. 3. I want the character making decisions as the character without any player metagaming. Turns and moves are fine because they translate into something real for the character. That is just meta-language not metagaming. Those are a few examples. I want those things because the game feels more real to me. But when I say real, I mean I can envision it in my mind like I'm watching a cinematic movie. I know D&D is not strictly realistic and I've never wanted that. I don't like GURPS. I don't like wound systems. [/QUOTE]

Verification