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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Psion" data-source="post: 2936243" data-attributes="member: 172">[sidetrack...]Factually incorrect.Maybe if you are fairly new, it might take you 3 hours to make a character in MT. But for the sake of argument, I'll give you that it's possible. But then, it might take someone 3 hours to make a fudge character.But here's the factually incorrect part: you cannot die by the standard MT rules during chargen.[/sidetrack]Of course. It's common practice among the self-declared gaming elite to convince themselves that the only reason someone would persist with a game like D&D is because they have insufficient exposure to the other games out there. Evidence to the contrary notwithstanding.As the Colonel and I have stated, this is very often not the case. I used to be part of a group that tried new games monthly, if not faster. I was probably the first person in the gaming community in Bremerton to try rules light games. But eventually one learns where there tastes lie, and which games meet those tastes.Precisely.A game can only be said to be inelegant, IMO, if you can acheive the same result in a simpler manner. Acheiving a different result by cutting corners and banking on the GM to make up the difference, will not make your game elegant. Cutting out unecessary cruft, will.I can think of several instances of inelegancies in the D&D rules, but don't think that having a robust rules set makes it inelegant. But then, my judgements of what's inelegant is largely an outgrowth of my very personal cost/benefit analyisis. Frex, I think the time and hassle expended in tracking synergy bonus is not worth the hassle for the amount of realism it acheives, but some might find it a very important point.The bottom line is this: any analysis of the quality of an RPG is worthless if you don't factor in the values of those who aspire to play it.</blockquote>

Verification