Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="evildmguy" data-source="post: 1506279" data-attributes="member: 6092">Continuing the FWIW categorySomething I forgot to mention and a big influence on my &quot;new style&quot;, which was moving away from a more blind devotion to the rules, was introducing DND to my wife.&nbsp; As francisca says, I was blown away at seeing how complicated (at the time) ADND 2E was.&nbsp; I couldn't believe how complex it was.&nbsp; When 3E came out, it did help her enjoy the game more due to its simplicity.&nbsp; (And I think 3E cleaned up a lot of things of 2E that were needed.&nbsp; Again, imo.)&nbsp; However, there are still huge areas where it gets complex.&nbsp; Synergy bonuses, combat rules, spells, stacking, etc. are complicated to new players.&nbsp; What I found happening was players &quot;playing to the rules&quot; instead of role playing.&nbsp; Knowing they could get a bonus to hit if they flank, the player &quot;justifies&quot; flanking as the smart thing to do for their 18 INT character.&nbsp; This is a form of role playing and is valid as any other role playing.&nbsp; It isn't for me, though.&nbsp; I know that I don't always do the thing that gives me the best advantage in every situation.&nbsp; Therefore, I don't like it when the system allows for that kind of role playing.&nbsp; Again I say, it is a valid form of role playing; it isn't a from that I prefer, though.&nbsp; One of the reasons that Alternity is working out so well IS because it is out of print.&nbsp; There are not a lot of volumes of rules to refer.&nbsp; Again, this is because of the rules lawyer that I had in my group for so long.&nbsp; In fact, until my current group, I have always had a rules lawyer in my group.&nbsp; Rules lawyers aren't bad.&nbsp; They keep things &quot;fair&quot; within the context of the game.&nbsp; However, rules lawyers are generally min/maxers.&nbsp; What I have found is most of the time, once one person mix/maxes, all must do that or one person will dominate the group.&nbsp; YMMV.&nbsp; However, in my own groups, one min/maxed fighter was so good that the other players didn't like their own characters because of how effected the min/maxed character was.&nbsp; Because this ruined the fun of some of the players, I had an issue with min/maxing.&nbsp; And that's why I wanted a system that didn't allow that, or it wasn't as obvious that it was happening.&nbsp; Again, all of this is all my opinion and for my own games.&nbsp; Good discussion!&nbsp; Thanks!edg</blockquote>

[QUOTE="evildmguy, post: 1506279, member: 6092"] [b]Continuing the FWIW category[/b] Something I forgot to mention and a big influence on my "new style", which was moving away from a more blind devotion to the rules, was introducing DND to my wife. As francisca says, I was blown away at seeing how complicated (at the time) ADND 2E was. I couldn't believe how complex it was. When 3E came out, it did help her enjoy the game more due to its simplicity. (And I think 3E cleaned up a lot of things of 2E that were needed. Again, imo.) However, there are still huge areas where it gets complex. Synergy bonuses, combat rules, spells, stacking, etc. are complicated to new players. What I found happening was players "playing to the rules" instead of role playing. Knowing they could get a bonus to hit if they flank, the player "justifies" flanking as the smart thing to do for their 18 INT character. This is a form of role playing and is valid as any other role playing. It isn't for me, though. I know that I don't always do the thing that gives me the best advantage in every situation. Therefore, I don't like it when the system allows for that kind of role playing. Again I say, it is a valid form of role playing; it isn't a from that I prefer, though. One of the reasons that Alternity is working out so well IS because it is out of print. There are not a lot of volumes of rules to refer. Again, this is because of the rules lawyer that I had in my group for so long. In fact, until my current group, I have always had a rules lawyer in my group. Rules lawyers aren't bad. They keep things "fair" within the context of the game. However, rules lawyers are generally min/maxers. What I have found is most of the time, once one person mix/maxes, all must do that or one person will dominate the group. YMMV. However, in my own groups, one min/maxed fighter was so good that the other players didn't like their own characters because of how effected the min/maxed character was. Because this ruined the fun of some of the players, I had an issue with min/maxing. And that's why I wanted a system that didn't allow that, or it wasn't as obvious that it was happening. Again, all of this is all my opinion and for my own games. Good discussion! Thanks! edg [/QUOTE]

Verification