Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 6361716" data-attributes="member: 18">Strengthening/weakening factions is not what was being discussed. Relationship of PCs to factions was.You seriously do not need mechanics for the latter. MMORPGs use them because it's a cheap way to create a big fat grind, and there's no DM to assess the actual relationship. They use them less now than they did because they're lame grinds in MMORPGs. Skyrim actually tracks a bunch of factions which have a strong effect, and the OP seems unaware of this. Some matter less because it's an insanely complex game as is and making it more complex costs millions upon millions (literally), it's nothing to do with anything but that. Anyway...For the former, I think there is a niche for what you're describing, but only a niche, and further, I agree that it would be difficult to come up with rules that weren't more a burden than they were an asset.Can you name some of the pre-Savage Tide CRPGs which feature mechanics involving you strengthening/weakening factions, btw? I didn't see much of that in pre-2006 CRPGs - indeed, it's still rare, being more common in open-world games and the like (GTA San Andreas, etc.).Certainly? No, certainly not. Having played CRPGs since the 1980s, I very much disagree, unless your definition of "dumbing down" is removing extremely complex combat mechanics which render a game niche, and I think that's a ridiculous definition.The RP in RPGs has actually increased massively in complexity. There's far more you can say/do and the NPCs have a much wider range of reactions in, say, Witcher 2 or ME2 or Fallout: NV than BG2 or Fallout 2. Revolutionizing is irrelevant to the discussion.All we are discussing is whether they are being "dumbed down". DW certainly isn't "dumbed down" compared to any RPG I've ever played. It's actually a hell of a lot smarter than most RPGs, particularly overwrought '80s mechanic-fests.Fake-o surprise makes your whole post seem disingenuous, just FYI."Die no save" is pure DM fiat, so not sure that has anything to do with anything. Again you bring up an irrelevance - whether failure "matters more", and seem to think that "failure = great danger" is a state that exists as the norm in D&D, which it is not. You constantly fail attack rolls and skill checks and even saves in D&D, and in the vast majority of cases it's expected and pretty meaningless (most failed saves mean more damage or the like) - those where it isn't are a rare exception, not the norm. Simple analysis of a D&D game will show this very clearly. DW is not that way - failure matters more because it leads to change and the situation getting worse - often dramatically worse - and yes, that can mean "die no save", it's just that you'd have to be doing something where that was a logical consequence and so on.Wait? What??? <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=":)" /> You claimed you didn't like Dungeon World's mechanics and so on, but apparently have no idea how Dungeon World works?Dude, go read your copy of DW.Wow, seriously? You really don't know how DW's world, with Fronts and so on, works? Yeah, it certainly is much more likely to involve any of the things you describe than any mainstream RPGs from, say, 15-20 years ago. Old RPGs did sometimes explore these things, but not routinely. It is routine with DW.I am very skeptical that you know anything about DMing DW at this point. Have you even played it as a player? It is free, you know, you can just go DL it.</blockquote>

Verification