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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Willie the Duck" data-source="post: 9009979" data-attributes="member: 6799660">Okay, working off the assumption that this is mostly correct, I will build some points off of it. Firstly, this seems like a perfectly reasonable game to desire to have exist. There's good reason (beyond historical ones) why there's a lot of crossover between TTRPGs and computer games. If there's something that people enjoy in a computer game, at least some of those people will also like doing the same basic thing*, but where a living GM can curate the scenarios and such. I myself enjoy a nice survivalism game, although my group has built one with a different set of assumptions/preferences.*Computers have the advantage of being able to easily track lots of changing details, so  there are some computer games will simply be too fiddly or crunchy or tedious to hand-track. That said, there are people who really like GURPS 3e Vehicles, so that 'too' fiddly is pretty variable. I can see tracking multiple components to make individual potions or the like, but if your computer game also tracks how fresh each unit of each component is, and that influences final-result-efficacy, I think you've found a computer game not meant for pen  & paper.Second, this seems like a change significant enough that I don't know why one would want to choose D&D as a base for it. D&D is resilient to modification, inasmuch as you can do things like switch to the Gritty recharge rules in 5e and most things still work with some winners and losers around the edges (mage armor stops being a worthwhile spell, for example), but not necessarily when you change fundamental building blocks like putting all expendable (non-HP) resources into the same pool. The closest I can think of is 3e Psionics, which used a psionic-point system (having all the different 'spells' of different levels draw from the same pool), it worked within the self-set-limits within which it constrained itself, but even there it worked significantly because it limited what it tried to tackle (and where it didn't, such as utilizing 3e shapeshifting rules, is where it was closest to 'broken'). Trying to pull in Druid/Bard/martial/other special powers into a framework like that (and then having even D&D's existing level of inter-role balance) would be tantamount to building a new game. Hero System, or the like, at least starts with 'everything from the same resources pool' premise (even if the natural recharge defaults to minutes instead of 'so long you build potions to quicken things'), and might be a better starting point. Rest gives back physical energy and attention (and some level of physical resilience*). What gives back any other kind of non-magical resources is already a little bit of a problem for verisimilitude because I (and I think others) don't have a good answer for (ex.) how a barbarian can't rage again today without also being too tired to <lots of other things they still get to do before resting>. What gives back Spell Resource** is entirely dependent upon the metaphysics of the game world (if living creatures are some kind of magic accumulator or the like, it could be pure time with no consideration to rest).  I think the instant we start talking about verisimilitude, we run roughshod into the problem that no two of us are going to have the same picture of what magic 'should' be like, what those barbarian rages represent, or anything like that. *noting the 'what portion of HP is wounds?' factor, but moving on without comment.**Tired of calling it Mana</blockquote>

Verification