Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="kenada" data-source="post: 9276167" data-attributes="member: 70468">It’s also not great for lengthy effect blocks. Look at spells like disguise self or powers like Divine Challenge. They have a couple of keywords followed by a wall of text.In spite of its origin in OSR systems, 4e and (and PF2 to a lesser extent) are influences on my homebrew system. Carefully defining the rules, so you can invoke them in a systematic way helps reduce the game’s complexity and make it easier to understand. I’m not a fan of excessively flowery language or flavor for the sake of flavor. What are the game effects of all the extra stuff in AD&amp;D? If I were converting that stuff, it’d just end up left as flavor. One could say it should be left to DM adjudication, but since it makes no physical sense, you risk getting different results depending on how the DM (mis)understood the physics, which is potentially bad for verisimilitude and sim priorities.I’d want to write up things like I were describing them in the game world with the mechanics highlighted for easy scanning. You can use evocative language as long as it is kept short (like Shadowdark) and doesn’t impede understanding. One musn’t forget that those playing the game may need to invoke the effect many times in play, so it should be both memorable and easy to scan and use.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="kenada, post: 9276167, member: 70468"] It’s also not great for lengthy effect blocks. Look at spells like [I]disguise self[/I] or powers like Divine Challenge. They have a couple of keywords followed by a wall of text. In spite of its origin in OSR systems, 4e and (and PF2 to a lesser extent) are influences on my homebrew system. Carefully defining the rules, so you can invoke them in a systematic way helps reduce the game’s complexity and make it easier to understand. I’m not a fan of excessively flowery language or flavor for the sake of flavor. What are the game effects of all the extra stuff in AD&D? If I were converting that stuff, it’d just end up left as flavor. One could say it should be left to DM adjudication, but since it makes no physical sense, you risk getting different results depending on how the DM (mis)understood the physics, which is potentially bad for verisimilitude and sim priorities. I’d want to write up things like I were describing them in the game world with the mechanics highlighted for easy scanning. You can use evocative language as long as it is kept short (like Shadowdark) and doesn’t impede understanding. One musn’t forget that those playing the game may need to invoke the effect many times in play, so it should be both memorable and easy to scan and use. [/QUOTE]

Verification