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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mercurius" data-source="post: 5348870" data-attributes="member: 59082">Celebrim, you make some great points. In particular I think you make an  excellent point that the actual system has less to do with player  enjoyment as the quality of the DM. Personally speaking, I run a 4E game  and overall prefer 4E to 3.5 and Pathfinder, but I would much rather  play in a Pathfinder game run by an excellent GM than a 4E run by even  an OK DM. In other words, DM/GM matters (much, much) more than system.That said, there are a few things I don't (entirely) agree with in your  post. I do think complexity matters, although it is probably not the  number one deterrent for attracting new players. There probably isn't a  number one factor but a combination of factors that make getting into  D&D a daunting task, which maybe deserves its own thread. But I do  think complexity is a factor and I think everyone in this thread that  says it is not is perhaps overly identified with their own perspective;  in other words, everyone reading this thread is a serious, experience  RPGer for whom complexity is not a deterrent. But what about that spouse  of a friend who might find their spouse's hundreds of rules book  overwhelming? Or, very simply, what about just anyone who might want to play D&D but doesn't want to read through 800+ pages just to get started?Perhaps an even more important, and related, factor is the confusion  with where to begin. Essentials is an attempt to clear this up and may  be an improvement, but I think WotC could improve this more with the  next edition, or even a revised edition, by having a clearer "product  tree" that correlates with the order of publication. In other words, the  starter kit should be published first, then the core rulebooks, etc,  and it would be made clear that you start with the kit and then, and  only then, do you buy the core books.Secondly, I don't think running a rules lite game means that one needs  to invent rules. DM Fiat isn't as much inventing rules as making  judgment calls. Guidelines are certainly useful, but it really comes  down to a kind of spontaneous,  imaginative thinking, and one that is  not dependent upon a rulebook. I work in a private high school which has  a handbook with rules and policies, but we have to make judgment calls  all the time that don't follow the written policies exactly and it  drives some people (usually administrators) crazy.Finally, I will say again that it doesn't have to be either/or, either  you have a complex or a simple game. It can be both: A simple core,  primary game, with more complex secondary and tertiary layers. This is  why I advocate a two or three layered game, with at least Basic and  Advanced, but maybe also more wild optional variants like Magic of Incarnum. But  the key would be making all variants interchangeable and modular and  not require one to move beyond the Basic game if they are happy with it.  I mean, in some ways this is how most people learn the game. You start  playing with what you understand and then as you encounter something  new, or look a rule up, you add that knowledge or rule to your game (or  not). This is how I've learned every edition of D&D, from 4E all the  way back to 1E and Basic. In the end, D&D is a toolbox game - you use what you want to use and  every DM is slightly different. Many DMs--especially with 4E and the  (unfortunate, imo) homogenizing effect of Character Builder play the  RAW, but even then there will be slight variances in judgment, minor  house rules, etc. Might as well implement this more clearly and  consciously from the beginning!</blockquote>

Verification