Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="5ekyu" data-source="post: 7599523" data-attributes="member: 6919838">On the question about OtE to me, especially vs the 8 Int 5e case.I am intrigued by the latest OtE reboot myself. So, it's on my list of hopefulls.But let me maybe shed a bit of spotlight. First, I dont give most any weight in 5e to what an 8 int says about the character or how the player will play it. To me, my rough way of thinking (which draws on other games and lessons drawn from that) I see it as indicating a small gap or lack in the charzcter's knowledge compared to moat people. When I tun such, as GM of player, I try to include one minor adjective or aspect in background to show it and the scope of that lack. I would not expect that-1 to show in play frequently or in major way, just here and there, much like the 12 or 13 stat likely shows in play about as much.When I talk about the linkage between chargen complexity and place thst leads me to on the "you" vs "character" I am speaking of the total complexity of the process as it pertains to mechanical choices. The nature cleric with high Wis and strength and an 8 int with proficiencies in nature and survival and animal handling and the hermit background etc gives a strong difference than say the rogue mastermind with high dex and Int and a sage background. This is even before we add in rsce.There are a lot of different choices there with very defined impacts on play results For games like OtE and others, with fewer traits thst are much more "define your own" there are a lot of undefined bits that are much more dependent on ideas drawn from the player and GM, on the fly or in between, than on more defined mechanical aspects.If we look at 5e, there are options for far more generalized "make your own" play mechanics. The skill/tool proficiencies csn be scrapped entirely if you choose as GM (group) to go with either Ability score proficiencies or background proficiencies - both of which rely on the more OtE define on the fly style.But the more "define on the fly" as opposed to system defined traits, the more how the play proceeds shifts to "what the player comes up with" as opposed to the player playing the charsacter as they setup the mechanics. But each group will tend to find their own way. Some will use checks as more fiction defining that fiction revealing, for instance. An outstanding search might result in me as GM pulling from my list of "stuff I can throw in" as opposed to simply saying " great search, found diddly".But that all said, if we shift off the "build" aspects and into the character aspects, weighing say flaw, bond, I deal, inspiration vs OtE and the way their "gets me involved" style traits, I find that area you tend to get better indicators from the OtE. That's longer and rambling than I wanted but then I am trying to compress s btoad sense of results across a lot of games over a lot of years - with both different and some old players, so... its what it is.</blockquote>

Verification