Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="rounser" data-source="post: 5402637" data-attributes="member: 1106">I think that this bit of design home truism (leave it all to the players) is very, very questionable indeed.For starters, I don't think this matters as much as you make out here.&nbsp; You can trip over your scabbard in totally different contexts, use an item in totally different ways, and if you don't build it into the system you're guaranteed it's going to come up in play a lot less.&nbsp; And you can always add more tables (e.g. Wand of Wonder including Dragon magazines has about 6, I think), or solve the problem the Hackmaster way, which is to use d10000 rolls.&nbsp; (It's worth playing at least once purely to be able to roll d10000s for that matter.)&nbsp; Certain sets of game rules naturally lead to certain types of play, which is why Diplomacy differs from Risk in terms of player attitude.&nbsp; Arguing that players could be as conniving in Risk as they are in Diplomacy if they choose to be is a bit of a cop-out, because Diplomacy is always going to be less random than Risk, and therefore involve less &quot;aw, what bad die rolls&quot; moments.&nbsp; Diplomacy is also more likely to be going to lead to relationship harm than Risk, because in Risk you can always blame misfortune related to dice as being the reason why you're having to backstab someone.&nbsp; In Diplomacy, there's nothing random, it's just plain old betrayal.Players view the game through the filter of the rules and the world, and if you don't aid them in a certain direction then they'll tend towards what those rules suggest by default.&nbsp; One complaint about 4E's rules is that players begin to interpret the game world in terms of their powers.&nbsp; That happens in less serious games too, where the rules actually support whimsy, and generates results in terms of gameplay accordingly.They're also inspired by random results, and whimsical rules elements, and can build on that colour.&nbsp; If there's no colour to begin with you've given them no tools to do their thing, so they'll tend towards the dominant themes of the game which you do bother to support with the rules.&nbsp; If the Spear +2 Backbiter didn't exist, we wouldn't be imagining amusing uses for it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="rounser, post: 5402637, member: 1106"] I think that this bit of design home truism (leave it all to the players) is very, very questionable indeed. For starters, I don't think this matters as much as you make out here. You can trip over your scabbard in totally different contexts, use an item in totally different ways, and if you don't build it into the system you're guaranteed it's going to come up in play a lot less. And you can always add more tables (e.g. Wand of Wonder including Dragon magazines has about 6, I think), or solve the problem the Hackmaster way, which is to use d10000 rolls. (It's worth playing at least once purely to be able to roll d10000s for that matter.) Certain sets of game rules naturally lead to certain types of play, which is why Diplomacy differs from Risk in terms of player attitude. Arguing that players could be as conniving in Risk as they are in Diplomacy if they choose to be is a bit of a cop-out, because Diplomacy is always going to be less random than Risk, and therefore involve less "aw, what bad die rolls" moments. Diplomacy is also more likely to be going to lead to relationship harm than Risk, because in Risk you can always blame misfortune related to dice as being the reason why you're having to backstab someone. In Diplomacy, there's nothing random, it's just plain old betrayal. Players view the game through the filter of the rules and the world, and if you don't aid them in a certain direction then they'll tend towards what those rules suggest by default. One complaint about 4E's rules is that players begin to interpret the game world in terms of their powers. That happens in less serious games too, where the rules actually support whimsy, and generates results in terms of gameplay accordingly. They're also inspired by random results, and whimsical rules elements, and can build on that colour. If there's no colour to begin with you've given them no tools to do their thing, so they'll tend towards the dominant themes of the game which you do bother to support with the rules. If the Spear +2 Backbiter didn't exist, we wouldn't be imagining amusing uses for it. [/QUOTE]

Verification