Subject:
|
Re: d20 BrikWars
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.gaming
|
Date:
|
Fri, 31 May 2002 22:34:44 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2099 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.fun.gaming, Frank Filz writes:
> I'm not sure more complex combat systems are really the way to go. While
> I feel a combat system needs enough detail to make combat interesting,
> too much detail makes combats take too long.
I would actually have to say that, to me, the d20 combat system seems to
have about the right amount of detail. There are enough rules that make
tactics seem worthwhile, without too many minor details to necessitate
having to consult the rulebook every action. Once you've learned the
basics, it's pretty easy to deal with. While my group has had some pretty
long battles (it took us three (real-world) hours to fight a dragon), as
long as all the players stay focused it can go pretty quickly.
> > P.S. No one in my gaming group is actually so gauche as to change clothes
> > with the sorcerer for reasons of pure game mechanics, but we do joke about
> > it all the time.
>
> Why shouldn't you? Something's broken in the rules if players feel
> artificial constraints like this. While I understand it's hard to make
> rules perfect, and sometimes players should take on artificial
> constraints, the need for them should be minimized. I know if there was
> a real life situation which was comparable, and my compatriot didn't
> lend me the cloak, I'd feel a little miffed (and part of the comparable
> situation is something which creates the situation where my well being
> is comparably crucial to my compatriot's well being).
It just seems like too much meta-game thinking. All our characters
understand is the cloak's effect on the sorcerer; the notion that a
paladin's healing is tied to their "charisma" isn't the sort of logic leap
one would really make.
i could see it working differently in another campaign, though. This is
just how our group deals with suspension of disbelief. And even within our
group, concessions of what constitutes logic and "realism" have had to be
made. Personally, I don't think that Law/Chaos should be as important as
Good/Evil. But our GM said we should take advantage of this part of the
game, and my character ended up so that chaotic opponents have a harder time
resisting his spells. I suppose game balance is in the eye of the beholder.
All that being said, my eventual point is that I think the d20 rules are a
good framework for high-fantasy rpgs, and while not perfect, they are
certainly adaptable enough to fit into most settings with a minimum of
tinkering.
And there's just something undeniably charming about facing down your most
dreaded enemy and seeing the DM put a miniature on the board with a cute
little basic smiley head.
--William
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: d20 BrikWars
|
| (...) I'm not sure more complex combat systems are really the way to go. While I feel a combat system needs enough detail to make combat interesting, too much detail makes combats take too long. (...) with the core rules. Well, I will have to spend (...) (22 years ago, 31-May-02, to lugnet.gaming)
|
5 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
