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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Sorry - I think the point was missed...
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="Akrasia" data-source="post: 2429359" data-attributes="member: 23012"><p>Consistency is indeed a good thing. However – and I’ve already made this point many times in this thread, and will probably have to make it many times again in future threads – there is nothing in a ‘rules light’ game that precludes consistency. It's perfectly possible to have a consistent rules light game.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes, I know. Nobody is debating this point. I think TLG is entitled to call C&C ‘rules light’ relative to 3e D&D and AD&D. But with respect to other games, it is a ‘rules medium’ system (comparable to the D&D Rules Cyclopedia).</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I disagree. I think it is obvious that C&C RAW is ‘lighter’ than AD&D RAW, and find it strange that anyone would even try to argue this point. (Read the section on initiative in the 1e DMG – that alone should show you that I am right about this.) Not only does C&C get rid of all the various rules that you claim people rarely used, but it uses a single mechanic – that d20 ‘higher is always better’ thing – for everything. So it does not have all the various mechanically distinct ways of dealing with different abilities and situations. The SIEGE and Primes system are incredibly simple – far easier to understand and use than the AD&D saving throw system and NWPs.</p><p></p><p>But frankly, while I think it is painfully obvious that C&C is ‘lighter’ than AD&D, I don’t see what hangs on this point. It is certainly not ‘heavier’. </p><p></p><p>As for 3e, I think that you’re wrong about the complexity that skills, feats, and AoOs bring to 3e. While I don’t have anything against the idea of skills and feats, per se, the way in which they are implemented in 3e makes keeping track of them as a DM a real pain in the arse. For skills, you have to keep track of class skills versus nonclass skills, synergy bonuses, etc. And with respect to feats, there are lots of prerequisites that have to be met in order to take them (either ability scores, skills, or other feats). Plus most feats entitle the character who has them to ‘break’ the rules in certain respects – keeping track of that can be a real hassle. </p><p></p><p>In short, while I think keeping track of skills and feats from a player’s perspective is pretty easy, things are considerably different ‘behind the screen’. And as levels get higher, things get worse.</p><p></p><p>(Of course I could probably just ‘hand wave’ all this as a DM and hope that the players don’t notice – but that would apparently violate one of the main virtues of 3e, according to you, namely its detail and consistency.)</p><p></p><p>As for AoOs, while the concept is not that difficult to grasp, using them IME pretty much requires some kind of graphic representation (at least for me). And this, in turn, requires a battlemat and minis (or something similar). Setting that up takes time – and really slows a session down.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>You should really look at <em>True 20 Adventure</em>, John.</p><p></p><p>It uses feats as the main way to distinguish different characters. And most feats don’t have prerequisites – thus statting up higher level characters is much easier. The magic system is based on feats and is quite impressive – flexible and simple. Finally, the rules do not assume that magic items are common – the classes, feats, and combat system make sense (are ‘balanced’) without magic items.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Huh?</p><p></p><p>I am not sure what you mean by this, as I was referring to the <em>True 20</em> magic system, not the HERO magic system. As I mentioned above, the True 20 magic system is based on feats. Powers are not ‘built’ as in HERO. However, PCs can do different things with the ‘supernatural powers’ that they have. </p><p></p><p>(I should mention that I am not that familiar with the HERO system. But my point is that irrespective of the details of HERO, the magic system in True 20, at least, is not a 'point build' system.)</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Can you predict what I am going to say here? Yes you can. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></p><p></p><p>Really, John, you should look at <em>True 20</em>! Its magic system does what you want. Its list of ‘supernatural powers’ include things like: beast link, bliss, body control, calm, cold shaping, combat sense, cure, earth shaping, elemental strike, enhance senses, fire shaping, etc. Each ‘supernatural ability’ is gained by a feat, and has variable effects. It is a cool system.</p><p><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f60e.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":cool:" title="Cool :cool:" data-smilie="6"data-shortname=":cool:" /></p><p></p><p>(It doesn not include 'teleport' as an ability -- which I consider to be a good thing, since I loathe 'teleport' spells in FRPGs. But I'm sure one could easily come up with a 'teleport' supernatural ability if one wanted to.)</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Akrasia, post: 2429359, member: 23012"] Consistency is indeed a good thing. However – and I’ve already made this point many times in this thread, and will probably have to make it many times again in future threads – there is nothing in a ‘rules light’ game that precludes consistency. It's perfectly possible to have a consistent rules light game. Yes, I know. Nobody is debating this point. I think TLG is entitled to call C&C ‘rules light’ relative to 3e D&D and AD&D. But with respect to other games, it is a ‘rules medium’ system (comparable to the D&D Rules Cyclopedia). I disagree. I think it is obvious that C&C RAW is ‘lighter’ than AD&D RAW, and find it strange that anyone would even try to argue this point. (Read the section on initiative in the 1e DMG – that alone should show you that I am right about this.) Not only does C&C get rid of all the various rules that you claim people rarely used, but it uses a single mechanic – that d20 ‘higher is always better’ thing – for everything. So it does not have all the various mechanically distinct ways of dealing with different abilities and situations. The SIEGE and Primes system are incredibly simple – far easier to understand and use than the AD&D saving throw system and NWPs. But frankly, while I think it is painfully obvious that C&C is ‘lighter’ than AD&D, I don’t see what hangs on this point. It is certainly not ‘heavier’. As for 3e, I think that you’re wrong about the complexity that skills, feats, and AoOs bring to 3e. While I don’t have anything against the idea of skills and feats, per se, the way in which they are implemented in 3e makes keeping track of them as a DM a real pain in the arse. For skills, you have to keep track of class skills versus nonclass skills, synergy bonuses, etc. And with respect to feats, there are lots of prerequisites that have to be met in order to take them (either ability scores, skills, or other feats). Plus most feats entitle the character who has them to ‘break’ the rules in certain respects – keeping track of that can be a real hassle. In short, while I think keeping track of skills and feats from a player’s perspective is pretty easy, things are considerably different ‘behind the screen’. And as levels get higher, things get worse. (Of course I could probably just ‘hand wave’ all this as a DM and hope that the players don’t notice – but that would apparently violate one of the main virtues of 3e, according to you, namely its detail and consistency.) As for AoOs, while the concept is not that difficult to grasp, using them IME pretty much requires some kind of graphic representation (at least for me). And this, in turn, requires a battlemat and minis (or something similar). Setting that up takes time – and really slows a session down. You should really look at [i]True 20 Adventure[/i], John. It uses feats as the main way to distinguish different characters. And most feats don’t have prerequisites – thus statting up higher level characters is much easier. The magic system is based on feats and is quite impressive – flexible and simple. Finally, the rules do not assume that magic items are common – the classes, feats, and combat system make sense (are ‘balanced’) without magic items. Huh? I am not sure what you mean by this, as I was referring to the [i]True 20[/i] magic system, not the HERO magic system. As I mentioned above, the True 20 magic system is based on feats. Powers are not ‘built’ as in HERO. However, PCs can do different things with the ‘supernatural powers’ that they have. (I should mention that I am not that familiar with the HERO system. But my point is that irrespective of the details of HERO, the magic system in True 20, at least, is not a 'point build' system.) Can you predict what I am going to say here? Yes you can. ;) Really, John, you should look at [i]True 20[/i]! Its magic system does what you want. Its list of ‘supernatural powers’ include things like: beast link, bliss, body control, calm, cold shaping, combat sense, cure, earth shaping, elemental strike, enhance senses, fire shaping, etc. Each ‘supernatural ability’ is gained by a feat, and has variable effects. It is a cool system. :cool: (It doesn not include 'teleport' as an ability -- which I consider to be a good thing, since I loathe 'teleport' spells in FRPGs. But I'm sure one could easily come up with a 'teleport' supernatural ability if one wanted to.) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Sorry - I think the point was missed...
Top