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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 5631812" data-attributes="member: 2067">This is a perfect example of the "good DMing trumps all" thing I was talking about. You fix the problems inherent in the system. Which is GREAT DMing, but it's not good rules design (the mantra of "Monte Cook can probably run a pretty good game of FATAL").Rather than tell us to work harder and be better at playing the game, I'd prefer them to design a better ruleset. If I have to put in a lot of effort to make the game fun, then that's not fun for me. Clearly, not everyone needs to put in that work for SCs and rituals and the like, but equally as clearly, some do, and for those that do, it's a problem. Do you know how insanely complicated swinging a sword is? How many subtle and overt variations on angle, power, stamina, strength, skill, willpower, hope, fear, and confidence go into every single stroke? How could a system cover that vast range of possibilities?Easy: The Attack Roll. Point being: D&D has always been abstract to some degree. It's no harder to do this for a sword swing than it is to do it for a skilled manipulation of a conversation. Now, go the other way. Imagine if combat was just "The party must make 5 successful attack rolls vs. AC of 14+level before you miss 3 times." In fact, try that. Replace all your combats for a session with the above rule.Now imagine that this is what people who aren't into combat-heavy D&D games have to sit through. A good DM can still make it interesting. You might use the above rule and have a great time! In which case, you can give ME the $120 you would've spent on a PHB/DMG/MM, because I've given you all you ever need to play a good game of D&D with. A good DM can make anything interesting. The rules don't make it interesting, though, and that's why I don't think they're very good rules when what you WANT, every time, is an interesting challenge. Compared with the combat rules, which do succeed in giving an interesting challenge each time (though at a level of complexity that I'm not personally a fan of all the time), those are not good rules at all! Replace skills with something more akin to powers, where instead of a raw check, you get to say, "This Happens." Make skill checks more like attack rolls. Use defenses. Use economies. Have attrition. Have the challenge fight back. Have victories cost. Allow retreat. It's all very possible. It's been done well before. It's been done pretty well in 4e combat, even.</blockquote>

Verification