Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Desdichado" data-source="post: 5716977" data-attributes="member: 2205">I've given this some thought, and I'm not sure where to map my preferences vis a vis your categories.  I like a lot of detail and granularity around character definition.  I prefer a lot of detail and a lot or rules and a lot of options on how to build my characters, and describe them mechanically.When it actually comes to playing the game, though, I prefer a much more hand-wavey, abstracted approach.  I like having the tools of a robust skill system, or something like that, but I don't want to feel straight-jacketed by too much detail on how to interpret it.  Tell me what you want the characters to do, and I'll tell you what skill to roll against and what DC to hit--using a handwavey judgement call as GM. Roleplay out social interaction, and I'll have you roll a skill check to introduce an element of randomness and risk to the interaction--after you've already roleplaying enough of it for my liking.Combat in particular I think suffers from becoming a game within a game with all kinds of tactical details, which I don't particularly enjoy.In general, I'd say that I strongly prefer a very rules-lite, improvisational, ruling vs. rules approach--except that, like I said, I love having a very robust toolset for character generation and definition, and consider such to be a make or break lithmus test for any roleplaying system I'd potentially want to adopt.</blockquote>