Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Bedrockgames" data-source="post: 7449493" data-attributes="member: 85555">based on your posts, I would definitely say posters who share your preferences probably won't find much value in NWPs. On the other hand, if you found skills in 3E a bit frustrating, if skill challenges are not your thing, NWPs and Secondary Skills, might be worth checking out. What you regard as weak descriptors, I regard as non-intrusive. They are more flavoring than build. And they don't feel like buttons (which is probably why they don't pass for some as resolution mechanics). They can add color to the game. They are quite easy to use in practice, and you don't have the scaling issues of 3E skills or the mini-gameness of skill challenges. What I found they did well, was not disturb the sense of immersion I wanted in play. Now that just may be me. But I found it to be solidly the case. So just from my own experience, assuming others out there exists who share my way of playing and approaching the game, I would recommend trying NWPs, trying 2E or trying 1E. You might even find you don't need the NWPs. Much of what makes these editions work for me in this respect is the lack of clear mechanics for certain things. I find you tend to default more to just saying what you want your character to do, and the GM figuring out how or if that is going to happen. Definitely can see it isn't for everyone. But I also don't think any of this is one size fits all. I suspect there are plenty of folks who will have encountered the same frustrations I have. I found it very helpful to go back to the editions I had stopped playing to see if babies had been thrown out with the bathwater. Worst thing that happens to you, is you encounter mechanics you don't like. But I would definitely add, don't take my word for it. Don't take Pemerton's word for it. Try for yourself, Test it and see how you feel if you are curious about the rules.</blockquote>

Verification