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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dethklok" data-source="post: 6143106" data-attributes="member: 6746469">Actually that sounds pretty cool - simple, but with some thought put in. I'll check that out sometime.You know Jhaelen I considered saying this, but I think some people have the reverse problem of "not listening to their game."One of the games I made is an ancient world rpg, with a basis in historical and geographic accuracy. But the Dark Ages part never seemed to shine - I think it's because I stayed too true to the source material rather than being a bit looser and putting in fantastic elements and fun stuff as I had with the other settings when the historical record (and my own knowledge) was spotty. One of these days I'll see if I can't improve it by loosening it up.In most cases, though, I do agree with you that it's better to stay true to the original design.Thank you. Jeez, I've had so many discussions with people about constructed languages, or novels, or rpgs, who insist that there's no such thing as bad design. When you get good at making these things, you find out that there are really some features you can put in that are just plain bad. Definitely my early games had no reason to exist at all.Still, I wouldn't worry too much about this as a game designer. Mostly the crap will surface when you listen to your playtesters - if you actually listen to them, rather than dismissing their appraisal of your game on the grounds that they just didn't grasp your artistic vision.(Yes, some playtesters really will look at gold and swear it's lead. But if you keep showing the same thing to different people and they all say they don't like it, chances are it really is bad.)You'd be surprised how little is necessary for a complete equipment table. Usually with equipment, less is more. Heck, send me a PM, meatboy; I'll design an equipment table for you.</blockquote>

Verification