Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Skill Tricks; good or bad?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Nonlethal Force" data-source="post: 3684410" data-attributes="member: 35788"><p>When a game becomes too complex that the bookkeeping no longer makes it fun for the DM, that is a valid reason to no longer add.I can't speak for Twowolves, but that is how I feel about most of the late WotC publishings. If they were making already used aspects of the game larger (simply adding more feats, spells, etc) I would probably be buying up products right and left. </p><p></p><p>But, their latest span of books have really been more like "We're leaving the core game alone and producing several expansion packs that make the game bigger." Now, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that approach. It lets people pick and choose which "expansion pack" they want. They can add Incarnum, or maneuvers, or skill tricks, or reserve feats, or alternate class abilities, etc. [For the record, many of those and more I have allowed into the game!]</p><p></p><p>But I have reached my saturation point as a DM. Between my 40+ hour per week job, my marriage, and my duties around the house I only have enough time and space for a certain complexity of a game. I don't have much extra time to sit around and remember the rules. And I hate as a DM not being familiar with a mechanic that a player is using. I hate forgetting what something does when someone has written it on their character sheet. As a DM, I try to minimize the number of times I say, "Wait, I need to look that up.' [Trust me, our group doesn't grapple/turn undead much at all because we all hate having to look up those rules every time!]</p><p></p><p>So, as a group we've decided the group has gotten complex enough. Not that there is anything bad with the systems of skill tricks, Incarnum, or skill tricks - Just that we don't have time to know all the rules for an additional system and the enjoyment of the game would tank because of all the page flipping required. </p><p></p><p>Besides. Now that we have become static in our game and aren't going to be purchasing any products that have a considerable stock in adding a subsystem (like Incarnum or Skill Tricks) it means that our game is much more stable. And, it means I can focus my monetary resources in another direction! And, [This is not meant to be a hijack] it means I could care less about 4e because we have reached a stable game that everyone at my table is happy with. We have enough complexity to make it interesting for a long time!</p><p></p><p>Having said that, you are certainy welcome to enjoy the added complexity. And, stuff like reserve feats and skill tricks are not really broken (except a few loopholes, but every system has a few loopholes. Pun-pun anyone? <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=":)" /> ) Enjoy your complexity, by all means!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Nonlethal Force, post: 3684410, member: 35788"] When a game becomes too complex that the bookkeeping no longer makes it fun for the DM, that is a valid reason to no longer add.I can't speak for Twowolves, but that is how I feel about most of the late WotC publishings. If they were making already used aspects of the game larger (simply adding more feats, spells, etc) I would probably be buying up products right and left. But, their latest span of books have really been more like "We're leaving the core game alone and producing several expansion packs that make the game bigger." Now, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that approach. It lets people pick and choose which "expansion pack" they want. They can add Incarnum, or maneuvers, or skill tricks, or reserve feats, or alternate class abilities, etc. [For the record, many of those and more I have allowed into the game!] But I have reached my saturation point as a DM. Between my 40+ hour per week job, my marriage, and my duties around the house I only have enough time and space for a certain complexity of a game. I don't have much extra time to sit around and remember the rules. And I hate as a DM not being familiar with a mechanic that a player is using. I hate forgetting what something does when someone has written it on their character sheet. As a DM, I try to minimize the number of times I say, "Wait, I need to look that up.' [Trust me, our group doesn't grapple/turn undead much at all because we all hate having to look up those rules every time!] So, as a group we've decided the group has gotten complex enough. Not that there is anything bad with the systems of skill tricks, Incarnum, or skill tricks - Just that we don't have time to know all the rules for an additional system and the enjoyment of the game would tank because of all the page flipping required. Besides. Now that we have become static in our game and aren't going to be purchasing any products that have a considerable stock in adding a subsystem (like Incarnum or Skill Tricks) it means that our game is much more stable. And, it means I can focus my monetary resources in another direction! And, [This is not meant to be a hijack] it means I could care less about 4e because we have reached a stable game that everyone at my table is happy with. We have enough complexity to make it interesting for a long time! Having said that, you are certainy welcome to enjoy the added complexity. And, stuff like reserve feats and skill tricks are not really broken (except a few loopholes, but every system has a few loopholes. Pun-pun anyone? :) ) Enjoy your complexity, by all means! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Skill Tricks; good or bad?
Top