Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6891646" data-attributes="member: 42582">RM character gen is less complex than Skills &amp; Powers, 3E or 4e. I don't know that I'd say it's less complex than 5e, but it's more transparent.In RM, basically each skill does what it says on the box, and the higher your number the better. In that sense, it is closer to a free-descriptor game. There is nothing analogous to trying to make sense of action economy, rest cycles and the like (at least until you introduce complex options from later supplements). So there is no danger (say) of setting out to make Legolas and failing. If your numbers in Bow skill and Acrobatic skill are high, you will be able to play Legolas.Again, this is not a criticism of D&amp;D. But I don't see the point of denying that D&amp;D has complex PC build rules, complex rest rules, complex action economy. If I want to build a character who will be powerful in melee (say, Gimli or Boromir rather than Legolas) I have to think about to hit numbers, damage numbers, action economy, AC, etc. If I've built my character with a high bonus to hit and damage but don't know about action economy, and then someone else comes along who has a good suite of off-turn or bonus action attacks, suddenly my melee hero can end up looking pretty feeble.The game has a lot of moving parts.I don't see why complexity is undesirable. A lot of people enjoy manipulating rules.Maybe another way to put it: whether or not complexity is desirable, it's clearly desired by a good number of players.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 6891646, member: 42582"] RM character gen is less complex than Skills & Powers, 3E or 4e. I don't know that I'd say it's less [I]complex[/I] than 5e, but it's more transparent. In RM, basically each skill does what it says on the box, and the higher your number the better. In that sense, it is closer to a free-descriptor game. There is nothing analogous to trying to make sense of action economy, rest cycles and the like (at least until you introduce complex options from later supplements). So there is no danger (say) of setting out to make Legolas and failing. If your numbers in Bow skill and Acrobatic skill are high, you will be able to play Legolas. Again, this is not a criticism of D&D. But I don't see the point of [I]denying[/I] that D&D has complex PC build rules, complex rest rules, complex action economy. If I want to build a character who will be powerful in melee (say, Gimli or Boromir rather than Legolas) I have to think about to hit numbers, damage numbers, action economy, AC, etc. If I've built my character with a high bonus to hit and damage but don't know about action economy, and then someone else comes along who has a good suite of off-turn or bonus action attacks, suddenly my melee hero can end up looking pretty feeble. The game has a lot of moving parts. I don't see why complexity is undesirable. A lot of people enjoy manipulating rules. Maybe another way to put it: whether or not complexity is [I]desirable[/I], it's clearly [I]desired[/I] by a good number of players. [/QUOTE]

Verification