Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 9114377" data-attributes="member: 29398">No to &quot;social combat&quot; or social interaction rules, with very rare exceptions.No to rules that don't pass the common-sense smell test (falling damage, front and center please; ban on magic item buying-selling, you too).No to rules that tell me how to play my character with no good in-fiction support (e.g. being made to play a Cleric to its alignment is fine as in the fiction that's how the Cleric would be expected to act, but being made to play a Good&nbsp; or heroic character &quot;just because&quot; is a no-go).No to rules that add complexity seemingly for the sake of adding complexity (1e initiative, step forward), and even more so if there's a clearly simpler way to achieve the same thing.&nbsp; That said, if a complex rule has a purpose and no simpler method has yet suggested itself (e.g. encumbrance) then I'm generally fine with it.No to overly-tight or overly-unified systems that can't be kitbashed.BUT:Yes to random tables.&nbsp; Yes to pregnancy and childbirth rules.&nbsp; Yes to lingering injury or wound rules.&nbsp; Yes to discrete modular subsystems.&nbsp; And above all yes to rules that ground the game in some form of reality, and thus make it relatable to us puny humans. <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&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lanefan, post: 9114377, member: 29398"] No to "social combat" or social interaction rules, with very rare exceptions. No to rules that don't pass the common-sense smell test (falling damage, front and center please; ban on magic item buying-selling, you too). No to rules that tell me how to play my character with no good in-fiction support (e.g. being made to play a Cleric to its alignment is fine as in the fiction that's how the Cleric would be expected to act, but being made to play a Good or heroic character "just because" is a no-go). No to rules that add complexity seemingly for the sake of adding complexity (1e initiative, step forward), and even more so if there's a clearly simpler way to achieve the same thing. That said, if a complex rule has a purpose and no simpler method has yet suggested itself (e.g. encumbrance) then I'm generally fine with it. No to overly-tight or overly-unified systems that can't be kitbashed. BUT: Yes to random tables. Yes to pregnancy and childbirth rules. Yes to lingering injury or wound rules. Yes to discrete modular subsystems. And above all yes to rules that ground the game in some form of reality, and thus make it relatable to us puny humans. :) [/QUOTE]

Verification