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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="rounser" data-source="post: 4318607" data-attributes="member: 1106">Okay...but again, why would you want to?Nethack offers less immersion than D&D because it's so random and there's no brains behind it.  A DM aided by random tables, perhaps with power of veto and extrapolation is most of the time likely to be far superior to just random tables, because...well...all sorts of reasons that I don't need to sell you on, surely?I'm not familiar with Warhammer Quest, though.  I can still see how it could be hugely fun to game without a DM given the right ruleset, but I don't really get why you'd go to the trouble of removing such an obvious advantage from the game.Unless....unless you were game designer worried about deviations in quality of play based on who was running it, in which case removing the DM would be an excellent idea.  DM fiat not just controlled, it's now a non-issue.  Goodbye narcissistic control freaks and frustrated wannabe fantasy novelists, ciao!  The downside is that I don't see how you could maintain the game's depth without one.  It would require a billion tables, and might still have no thread.A DM aided by a billion tables (or equivalent to that but less cumbersome - an elegant "d20 system of generation") to flesh out his maps, on the other hand, that's a different story, and tops my wishlist for 5E.  Not sure if it's feasible, though.  How do you roll up a magic fountain which turns people's hair green?  How do you table-format a riddle or a puzzle?  How do you codify on three tables the ability to roll up a greengrocer who sells dragon eggs?On the other hand, it would give the DMG something to do, and an excuse to be really thick and arcane, and infinitely expandable ($$$).</blockquote>

Verification