Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 2584080" data-attributes="member: 177">That may be possible, but let's take a look...&quot;I like the idea&quot; and &quot;The idea is simpler&quot; are clearly not the same <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />&nbsp; The first on this list I can grant you, the latter two, not at all.&nbsp; From the user's point of view - in D&amp;D he's told straight up what spell list he can use.&nbsp; He can completely ignore the others.&nbsp; In AU, the user is given the entire list, and then told he has to go subdivide it himself and make his own lists to figure out what he can use.&nbsp; That is not simpler in action. &nbsp;Simpler in theoretical concept is not the goal.&nbsp; New gamers don't care about design theory.&nbsp; They care about how many fiddly-bits they need to work with in order to play.I think it is a whole lot more complicated.&nbsp; You have to remember the levels of things, and weaving up and weaving down are not the same.&nbsp; My players who don't like having to remember rules details looked at it and said, &quot;That's *waaaay* too complicated.&nbsp; Too many steps to figure out what I can do.&nbsp; Just give me the list of spells I can cast, and how many per day&quot;.I think the whole weaving concept was a way to try to trick vancian-philes into using a spell point system.&nbsp; It would have been far simpler just to give each spell level a number of points, give a caster some number of points to spend each day, and be done with it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Umbran, post: 2584080, member: 177"] That may be possible, but let's take a look... "I like the idea" and "The idea is simpler" are clearly not the same :) The first on this list I can grant you, the latter two, not at all. From the user's point of view - in D&D he's told straight up what spell list he can use. He can completely ignore the others. In AU, the user is given the entire list, and then told he has to go subdivide it himself and make his own lists to figure out what he can use. That is not simpler in action. Simpler in theoretical concept is not the goal. New gamers don't care about design theory. They care about how many fiddly-bits they need to work with in order to play. I think it is a whole lot more complicated. You have to remember the levels of things, and weaving up and weaving down are not the same. My players who don't like having to remember rules details looked at it and said, "That's *waaaay* too complicated. Too many steps to figure out what I can do. Just give me the list of spells I can cast, and how many per day". I think the whole weaving concept was a way to try to trick vancian-philes into using a spell point system. It would have been far simpler just to give each spell level a number of points, give a caster some number of points to spend each day, and be done with it. [/QUOTE]

Verification