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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="SableWyvern" data-source="post: 9770450" data-attributes="member: 1008">I can't really speak to Palladium, as I have little experience with it. TMNT seemed reasonably coherent to me, but I'm not going to rely on my teenage memories to make any kind of hard statement.I'll take pre-3e saving throws over anything that came later, but this isn't the place for the argument, so I'll concede the fact that the original saving throw system clearly does feel arbitrary and nonsensical to many people.That said, I don't believe they were the result of random and arbitrary decisions -- the underlying system makes sense, even if you don't like the categories, and I see plenty of clear intentionality there (eg: high level characters, especially fighters, should be highly resistant to magical and potentially lethal effects, such that those effects are not reliable means of defeating them). The categories cover the gamut of lethal and near-lethal effects one might expect to encounter, with slipping/falling being the one that appears to have been left out.In any event, you're welcome to continue to disagree with me on that, as it seems that even if we might quibble on some details that have been controversial for a long time, we do both agree there is still plenty of intent to be found.I'll mostly stay out of this one as well, as my understanding of 5e is extremely shallow. I will say, though, that this position does seem to fit will with my general impression of 5e, which is that I would probably find it adequate for some sorts of games but, for any type I've game I might think of using it, there will absolutely be something else far more than merely adequate.Edit to add: Both the AD&D and Palladium comments seem to imply discrete subsystems are a sign of a lack of intent. I think I've seen others imply this as well. While these types of subsystems may signify a lack of intent to utilise a unified resolution system, that is not at all the same as a lack of intent in general. It doesn't matter how two subsystems "interact" unless they are meant to interact. While I would certainly agree with anyone claiming unified resolution systems should be part of the paradigm of Modern RPG Design as it's being defined in this thread, that tells us nothing about whether someone is designing with intent.</blockquote>

Verification