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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="kensanata" data-source="post: 3289322" data-attributes="member: 47845">Well, if you allow to substitute Experience for rules, then you can strip a lot. Personally, I'm using M20 in my current campaign. Core rules on a single page. <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=":)" /> They basically reflect the simplest d20 principles: Hit points, AC, to-hit rolls, damage rolls, attributes. I still like to use monsters from books, so a monster manual is mandatory. Inexperienced players trying to play M20 also seem to like the D&D spells. Those should therefore stay, too.M20 has convinced me that I can live without skills, feats, prestige classes, most of the combat rules, saving throws, etc.All I need is basic combat, four classes, four races, monsters, players, dice, and off we go.Oh and I disagree with previous posters basically saying that it's Ok for the rules to be there and optional: It takes energy to read it, understand it, and discard it. It also takes energy to convince your players to do the same. It also costs money to write it, test it, edit it, ship it, and so on. So the extra flexibility does come at a price. And I think it is a valid question to ask, whether there is not a different balance to be struck.Luckily we now have d20 allowing us to experiment with different elements without having to write everything from scratch. And D&D is an interesting point of departure for game designers, or dungeon masters still trying to find their own style.As I said, if you substitute Experience for rules, you can save maybe a third of the material...</blockquote>

Verification