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: 7327738" data-attributes="member: 29398">Interesting ideas in theory but I'm not sure they could be hard-coded into any game system mostly because there will be such wild variation in interest in different things at each table - never mind that said interest might not even remain consistent at the same table from week to week depending on the mood of the players (and maybe DM) when they arrive at the session.I've seen this many times - one week there'll be no getting away from minutiae, and every little thing will be resolved down to the last detail (e.g. haggling over mundane equipment prices); and then the next week it's "oh, let's just rubber-time all that and get on with it" (e.g. what most of the party gets up to in town for three weeks while waiting for one or two characters to train a new level).And on a larger scale, some tables love sweating the details of what you classify as "lowest" and "minimal" level things while others just want to skip all that and get to the "dangerous" and "lethal" level action; and there's game systems that cater to both types.To answer your final question, I don't think it's an either-or but more of a 4-way:Low risk-low interest = little or no system involvement, or just handwaveHigh risk-low interest = the least amount of system involvement required to resolve, but no lessLow risk-high interest = probably far more system involvement than it really needs, depending how the players approach a given situationHigh risk-high interest = as much system involvement as the players and-or DM deem necessaryHope that helps! <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=":)" />Lanefan</blockquote>

Verification