NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Snarf Zagyg" data-source="post: 9481006" data-attributes="member: 7023840">This is something I've commented on before-One of the main advantages that often goes unremarked about other games (from PbTA/FiTD games to FKR/Rules Lite games) is that they benefit from the limited scope of the genre and system.That's not a backhanded compliment. Instead, it's a statement that the limiting of genre and rules beforehand allows for consistent understanding and buy-in. If you're playing BiTD (for example) and the players decide that the characters don't want to do scores, don't want to be in Duskvol, and think heists are lame, you're going to run into problems. But because of the narrow(er) focus, we often overlook the necessary buy-in that has already occurred. If the table has agreed to limit the play/narrative experience, either through agreed table buy-in or through the table agreeing to limit it due to the adoption of a limited play experience provided by those rules, then that consistency happens.But that's not a function of the rules qua rules. That's a function of the a priori limiting.It's a subtle distinction that I think people often overlook, and it's why indie games (like FiTD and Rule Lite/FKR variants) achieve that consistency, although people argue about the differences because one is more rules-defined, and one relies on the setting; but both benefit from the a prior limiting.D&D, on the other hand, has the gift and the curse of not having that specificity.</blockquote>

Verification