Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Emerikol" data-source="post: 8204516" data-attributes="member: 6698278">Should implies ought and in that sense there is no right answer.&nbsp; Play the games that suit you and your group.Now having said that, and reading between the lines, I will answer how I would like the rules to be for my games.1.&nbsp; I like simple mechanics like d20 roll high against a DC.&nbsp;&nbsp; I'm okay if there are two or three options just not twenty five.&nbsp;&nbsp; So having a special table for everything is probably bad if it is used during play time.&nbsp; It's fine as a GM aid during prep time when there is not pressure to give an answer.&nbsp;&nbsp; 2.&nbsp; I'd like to have some guidance and examples on how things should be adjudicated.&nbsp; I'm fine with the GM making judgment calls beyond that point for a very specific situation.&nbsp; If the situation though comes up a lot then I think there probably should have been an example in the rules.3.&nbsp; I want a game designed to let the dice fall where they will.&nbsp; So if the GM is fudging all the time that is a failure of the game system.&nbsp; In fact personally, I never want to fudge when the die roll matters.&nbsp; 4.&nbsp; I like a good amount of what I call details.&nbsp; So I want a spell list and not just make up something and roll for it.&nbsp;&nbsp; I want players to feel confident they know what they can do with what they have most of the time.&nbsp; Same for skills, feats, whatever.So 3e/PF may be a bit too crunchy for me.&nbsp; Fate is probably not enough.&nbsp; I'm an OSR guy.&nbsp; I'm specifically liking ACKS right now.&nbsp;&nbsp; C&amp;C is another solid option.&nbsp;&nbsp; I want modern game design but I want somewhat streamlined mechanics.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Emerikol, post: 8204516, member: 6698278"] Should implies ought and in that sense there is no right answer. Play the games that suit you and your group. Now having said that, and reading between the lines, I will answer how I would like the rules to be for my games. 1. I like simple mechanics like d20 roll high against a DC. I'm okay if there are two or three options just not twenty five. So having a special table for everything is probably bad if it is used during play time. It's fine as a GM aid during prep time when there is not pressure to give an answer. 2. I'd like to have some guidance and examples on how things should be adjudicated. I'm fine with the GM making judgment calls beyond that point for a very specific situation. If the situation though comes up a lot then I think there probably should have been an example in the rules. 3. I want a game designed to let the dice fall where they will. So if the GM is fudging all the time that is a failure of the game system. In fact personally, I never want to fudge when the die roll matters. 4. I like a good amount of what I call details. So I want a spell list and not just make up something and roll for it. I want players to feel confident they know what they can do with what they have most of the time. Same for skills, feats, whatever. So 3e/PF may be a bit too crunchy for me. Fate is probably not enough. I'm an OSR guy. I'm specifically liking ACKS right now. C&C is another solid option. I want modern game design but I want somewhat streamlined mechanics. [/QUOTE]

Verification