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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Xini" data-source="post: 3372892" data-attributes="member: 50271">I think you mistake my intention and the intention of the discussion which myself and Urban Knight have been having for a while. We don't intend to convert people to our thinking or establish some universal objective truth in regard to role-play games, I can imagine few more fruitless tasks.My intention, as it seems to be important to people, was simply to have a discussion based around these perceived weaknesses regardless of outcome. As for reworking the rules etc, yes the rules are organised to the point where the grey areas aren't as prevalent as in many (if not all) other systems but that does not mean that the rules are as good as they can be. If you went to an orchard and picked the best most succulent looking apple would that be the best apple in all the world? Of course not. The point being that gamers have a choice, you can play be these rules or go make your own up which is a lot of work (this I think applies double in D&D because they produce too many "splat" books and trying to incorporate them or tell people that their new purchase was a waste of money is just extra hassle you don't really want). I'm not saying that custom projects don't exist or that people are sheep following the marketing but popular acclaim doesn't equate to it being any good necessarily.Now there are strengths within these weaknesses which Urban Knight and myself have discussed. However we have made more headway in the analysis and improvements (or potential improvements) by going over the weaknesses and trying to see how to alter them without ruining the strengths or having to rewrite the whole thing. (As you can see I'm more thinking about the suggestion of "house ruling the heck out of it" at the moment and yes I will be checking through the house rules section later.)So far I've found this to be a good discussion, I'm actually used to far more flaming and abuse than this so you guys are really welcoming <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=":)" />Oh and I have deeper points based on some of the points in the first post (can I call them flaws? please? I can't think of a more accurate word right now) but it'll take a while to produce them.</blockquote>

Verification