Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 5998694" data-attributes="member: 87792">I find there's a third option and one 4e does well.&nbsp; Odd plans of the sort PCs like to come up with.&nbsp; And it is this where a flexible scene framing tool as opposed to a linear narrative game excels.&nbsp;&nbsp;No it didn't.&nbsp; But that's not modern tinkering.&nbsp; It's the big change in the period from oD&amp;D played round a table with people you all vaguely know to AD&amp;D with tournament rules and settings when you need to ensure that different DMs will come up with the same answer.&nbsp;&nbsp;Indeed.&nbsp; Which is why IME the trend in games is to the simpler.&nbsp; I find 4e significantly simpler than AD&amp;D.&nbsp; No lookup tables or rules most people ignore like weapon vs armour type - and for another the 4e character sheet might be a monster but you don't need separate books to look spells up in.&nbsp; And no D&amp;D version can touch e.g. Dread for simplicity - whereas if I want a complex game I look back to the 1970s and games like <a href="http://mrlizard.com/characters/chivalry-sorcery-eyestrain/" target="_blank">Chivalry and Sorcery</a> (it's notable that of all the variants of D&amp;D in the 70s I know of with the exception of Tunnels and Trolls make it more complex).&nbsp; Or I look at any <a href="http://www.indie-rpgs.com/articles/9/" target="_blank">Fantasy Heartbreaker</a>.&nbsp;Oh ffs.&nbsp;&nbsp;It depends what you want from a game.&nbsp; Games in the 1970s were grappling with this - see <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traveller_(role-playing_game)" target="_blank">Classic Traveller</a> - not everyone wants the same thing.&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;A model, no.&nbsp; A source of ideas and new players, assuredly yes.&nbsp; More time, thought, and effort has gone into work on MMOs than ever will on tabletop RPGs.&nbsp; And some although not all of the problems are simmilar.&nbsp; If we can't drift ideas out of their intended settings, we'd never have drifted into D&amp;D.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Neonchameleon, post: 5998694, member: 87792"] I find there's a third option and one 4e does well. Odd plans of the sort PCs like to come up with. And it is this where a flexible scene framing tool as opposed to a linear narrative game excels. No it didn't. But that's not modern tinkering. It's the big change in the period from oD&D played round a table with people you all vaguely know to AD&D with tournament rules and settings when you need to ensure that different DMs will come up with the same answer. Indeed. Which is why IME the trend in games is to the [I]simpler[/I]. I find 4e significantly simpler than AD&D. No lookup tables or rules most people ignore like weapon vs armour type - and for another the 4e character sheet might be a monster but you don't need separate books to look spells up in. And no D&D version can touch e.g. Dread for simplicity - whereas if I want a complex game I look back to the 1970s and games like [URL="http://mrlizard.com/characters/chivalry-sorcery-eyestrain/"]Chivalry and Sorcery[/URL] (it's notable that of all the variants of D&D in the 70s I know of with the exception of Tunnels and Trolls make it more complex). Or I look at any [URL="http://www.indie-rpgs.com/articles/9/"]Fantasy Heartbreaker[/URL]. Oh ffs. It depends what you want from a game. Games in the 1970s were grappling with this - see [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traveller_(role-playing_game)"]Classic Traveller[/URL] - not everyone wants the same thing. A model, no. A source of ideas and new players, assuredly yes. More time, thought, and effort has gone into work on MMOs than ever will on tabletop RPGs. And some although not all of the problems are simmilar. If we can't drift ideas out of their intended settings, we'd never have drifted into D&D. [/QUOTE]

Verification