Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Edwidget" data-source="post: 8587759" data-attributes="member: 6795996">There are already systems that do this. I wish those systems got more love so I wasn't stuck looking for games in a system everyone is trying to change. If we want a better system, why bother with WotC at all? The hobby is so much bigger than D&D. The system dosn't matter, the person running it does.That said, I would love trying something like this with a competent GM. One of the best games I ever played was roughly Theatrix with no flowcharts, only the GM had dice (a small handful of d6), and it was entirely due to the quality GM. It was RP and "plot points" that players could spend. Combat was basically "go around the table and state strat/tactics." GM decides from there based on how we've characterized ourselves during play through RP. Important moments/battles would have more interaction or discussion. Maybe a couple back-and-forths simulating rounds. That's it. Good ol' fashioned backyard Cops and Robbers fun with a quality ref. (for the record, the same GM ran the best crunchy ass GURPS games too. He had a talent.) One of the most influential decisions I've ever seen happened in that game. We were playing teens in the '90s. Blah blah blah we were stuck out on our own and a player spent a plot point to say "I stole my dad's credit card before I left." It was totally in character, the timing was on point, and it changed the course of the game entirely. I remember it more than 20 years later. It's a different experience than today's D&D, and I guess if you get it you get it.Real life games are practically impossible for me now that we've all grown up, and most GMs I find online are honestly just bad (but hey, at least they are trying, and I have had some exceptions. Two new GMs in particular if you are reading this- I hope you know I mean you. Delebean and Ribbles love you. I like gnomes, fight me.) I don't want the job these days; complaining is kind of asinine, I know. I'm not really as dickish as I sound.Before I get nailed- I know my own limitations too, so don't think I'm being elitist or something. Active roleplay (as opposed to descriptive) takes me outside my comfort zone. It's something I wish I was better at. I'm self conscious as all hell and I love it when a GM, and at least as importantly other players, draw me out of my shell. Running a game is a tough job, but you might be great. If not now, maybe after a few tries- PLEASE don't let my dumb ass discourage you. I feel like I do a crap job, but my players always disagreed heartily. Which of the two matters more? You might be The Guy if you give it a few shots. Heck, it might even take a few more. Don't give it up.I know this is half support, half rant. I'm a little bit of mess, but who isn't? After all that if anyone still wants to give me shot for something like this, hit me up. I'm not going to judge harshly, even if it seems otherwise. The creativity in these ideas runs for miles; I hope, and would love, to be inspired by it. (jeez, is that an essay? My teachers would be like WTF?)</blockquote>

Verification