Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 7769142" data-attributes="member: 6785785">What’s relevant about it? How is pacing different in OS games conpared to NS games? His insistence that there’s no danger and everyhing’s a success is flat out wrong, so his insistence that this reaulta in no peaks and valleys of rising and falling action is also wrong. Not exactly. Just as 1E could be played a variety of ways, so can 5E. Yes, I agree that generally in D&D, the older the edition the deadlier it is. But that does not mean that nothing bad happens. To take a difference like that and then insist that they are polar opposites is quite the leap.Plus, he’s not limiting this to comparisons of editions of D&D. Thia is part of the problem. The category of games he’s attempting to compare to Old School D&D is so broad that some may be less deadly and others may be more so. My familiarity with 4E is limited, but as for 5E, I don’t agree at all. Many encounters are meant to be pretty bog standard. Dude....Treasure Type was a monster stat in 1E. Every monster entry in the monster manual told you the standard treasure found on the monster or in its lair. I don’t think you’re right. I think some games want the story to move forward, but that doesn’t mean they want you to succeed. So they do have mechanics in place that instead of allowing the game to come to a geinding halt, change things ul and allow them to proceed.You’re mistaking this for “always succeed”, but that’s not really the point. It’s boring and it’s a waste of time and it was often arbitrary. I do acknowledge this is the one valid point that Lew made...this is a difference in OS games and many NS games. I don’t think that it means what he says it does ir that you say it does.Failure is fine. I don't mind when I have my character try something and it doesn’t work out. That’s part of the game. But when the game...something we’re doing for fun...grinds to a halt becausethe thief didn’t roll a success to find the secret door, and now we’re all just wandering the dungeon to see if we missed anything....yeah, that sucks. My time to play is limited and I prefer a game that doesn’t waste time with long stretches of boring play. I much prefer the NS approach to this type of game element. And that doesn’t mean you simply allow the PCs to succeed at finding the door, it means you don’t rely on arbitrary crap like that to challenge the players.So it seems like you would agree this is more about GM ability than about the system?Sure, people tend to stick to what they were introduced to. I think that’s one thing that Lew makes abundantly clear. But that doesn’t mean that’s necessarily what’s best. I think it depends on what the desired goal is in the game. For instance, Tales From the Loop would be very strange with combat as war...orat least significantly different in tone. Again, looking beyond D&D and there actually are reasons for different approaches.</blockquote>

Verification