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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="kaomera" data-source="post: 5520342" data-attributes="member: 38357">I'm with you right up until "take a step back in time". Fewer combats, with more story significance is a possible solution that appeals to me. Too often filling in the "alloted number of fights" leads me to far more of a feeling of "random encounters" than a well-made wandering monster table ever did. And I'd personally be happy to focus more on non-combat stuff; my current edition of choice makes tactical combat fun for me, but it doesn't make it the only or even main reason I come to the table.But there's a lot of room for various likes & dislikes. A lot of people don't play D&D because it's their perfect system, but because it's popular and it's good enough or even as good as they expect to see. So there are always going to be complaints.I've seen a lot of comments lately to the effect that if you're complaining (or if you're not complaining, in some cases) then it's because you somehow don't actually know what game you want to be playing. And that does happen - there are moments when you have to scratch your head and ask "why the heck did I keep playing that game for so long?" But that's a really tricky subject to deal with face-to-face, especially because for a specific enough value of "the right players" you can get nearly any results out of any system.But that value can easily become completely unrealistic to actually achieve. Sure, you can play an RPG any way you want, but most players want (at least on some level) to play by the rules - and there are "rules" under the written rules, buried in the expectations of the players and in the social structures that we produce around them... It's complex stuff IME (and IMO, I guess) and that makes it hard to communicate effectively under the best of circumstances, which I'd argue the internet is not.</blockquote>

Verification