Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 3827709" data-attributes="member: 4937">I don't see how.&nbsp; There is always something a DM can do to make things not fun.I've probably played more than a dozen game systems, and I can't think of one where you can't make bad choices that lead to weak or 'useless' characters.&nbsp; Nor have I ever played in a game system where DM and player expectation can't conflict and result in a party useless for an adventure even with (and maybe especially with) very good RPers.&nbsp; In particular, I remember showing up for one session where the adventure turned out to be 'infiltrate the KKK' and everyone had created a character that belonged to a non-white ethnic group - including a semetic jew, a korean, and a black rastafarian.&nbsp; Needless to say, the planned campaign never materialized even with a group of some of the best players I've ever been around.&nbsp; There is IMO no way to have a gamable system with a variaty of player creation options and insure that PC skills will match up well with challenges except good communication between the referee and the players during character creation and rock solid DMing.&nbsp; And even then, 'bad sessions' can happen if only do to insanely bad luck of the die.&nbsp; I've had first time players die within 15 minutes.&nbsp; That's uncomfortable.Certainly can.&nbsp; Which is why you need to design variaty into your game.&nbsp; This is true of every game system, and not anything particular to 3.X.&nbsp; The only system where it wouldn't be true is where all character options had no advantages or disadvantages compared to any other character option.&nbsp; That strikes me as somewhere between impossible or - if no real options are offered at all - boring.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 3827709, member: 4937"] I don't see how. There is always something a DM can do to make things not fun. I've probably played more than a dozen game systems, and I can't think of one where you can't make bad choices that lead to weak or 'useless' characters. Nor have I ever played in a game system where DM and player expectation can't conflict and result in a party useless for an adventure even with (and maybe especially with) very good RPers. In particular, I remember showing up for one session where the adventure turned out to be 'infiltrate the KKK' and everyone had created a character that belonged to a non-white ethnic group - including a semetic jew, a korean, and a black rastafarian. Needless to say, the planned campaign never materialized even with a group of some of the best players I've ever been around. There is IMO no way to have a gamable system with a variaty of player creation options and insure that PC skills will match up well with challenges except good communication between the referee and the players during character creation and rock solid DMing. And even then, 'bad sessions' can happen if only do to insanely bad luck of the die. I've had first time players die within 15 minutes. That's uncomfortable. Certainly can. Which is why you need to design variaty into your game. This is true of every game system, and not anything particular to 3.X. The only system where it wouldn't be true is where all character options had no advantages or disadvantages compared to any other character option. That strikes me as somewhere between impossible or - if no real options are offered at all - boring. [/QUOTE]

Verification