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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 7263620" data-attributes="member: 29398">Well, yes; even a completely static game still needs rules of some sort in order to be playable.We could, I suppose, but it wouldn't be nearly as much fun. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Not sure what you're getting at here.  My take is that having feats in the game at all still represent more complexity than I'd like to see, and ASI's as 5e has them are far too generous.Yeah, that's always been one of those game aspects that makes less and less sense the closer it's looked at.When all the overlying gype is peeled off, it comes down to why each person plays the game.  Do they play primarily for the story and at-the-time events with levelling-up and ability improvements both infrequent and seen as a side-effect of play, or do they play primarily for the frequent level-ups and to watch their powers increase while the story goes by as no more than a distraction.  The first type need a good creative DM and whatever system, while the second type need a good solid system and whatever as a DM.I've seen (and played with, and DMed) both these types of players.  I far prefer the story-first type, and am mostly such myself.Lan-"and a slow- or no-advancement game also means you can have an open-ended story and-or campaign without having to worry about getting to levels higher than the system was designed to handle"-efan</blockquote>

Verification