Dice

joined 1 year ago
[–] Dice@ttrpg.network 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I am specificly referring to things like the battledome and retained retraining rules. The creators don't seem to understand what an RPG is and are treating it like video game mini-games are an ideal play pattern. Like are you going to want to reference some poorly designed minigame rule for Negg management?

Neopets seems like an ideal IP for something rules light, not something that is trying to be GTA on paper. I also sense that some of these designs might make the game feel unfaithful to Neopets.

Note that it's making a lot of promises for more rules, but not describing what those rules are. Which is likely a sign of the rules being very rough and needing a lot of work. Which is why I say it looks like a mess.

[–] Dice@ttrpg.network 1 points 2 months ago (3 children)

This looks like a trainwreck of video game mechanics that don't translate into RPG mechanics.

[–] Dice@ttrpg.network 2 points 9 months ago

With Hackmaster 5. The balance point of play is on health and equipment. This creates a long term dynamic instead of an encounter or "adventuring day" balancing act. Added with penetrating (exploding) dice and thresholds of pain (ToP) this makes even easy combats dangerous. So there is very little pressure on balancing a fight to make a challenge, every fight is dangerous. This is honestly the biggest flaw with GMing D&D 5e and PF2e, because there isn't really a longterm balance point. And giving players a little extra healing (bonus action healing potions) or a night of sleep makes it much harder to challenge them without a TPK. Which is a consequence of the mechanics fighting logic in the game.

Thanks to Hackmaster's longterm framework equipment can be very impactful on play encouraging exploration. And giving a powerful item doesn't create a future problem for me. I can just roll for items and it's fine. I also don't worry about mixed level parties, weak characters or broken abilities.

Hackmaster Monsters are well designed with lots of supporting information that help inform my choices and provide easy answers. Stuff like sleep cycles and spell components are clearly listed.

For WFRP and CoC, the d100 universal resolution system and simplicity of rules makes it very easy to arbitrate. Effectively there are few rules questions.

Cthulhu also follows a particular flow of dread, terror, gore/horror that push the game forward. But it does typically work best with one shots.

[–] Dice@ttrpg.network 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What you described is barely a timer system, reset on combat end doesn't really ever matter to a game. I'm addressing longer time frame resource drain benefiting the game by creating risk and promoting choice. There isn't really a point if arrows aren't lost and broken.

[–] Dice@ttrpg.network -1 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Timer systems like arrow counting, rations and encumbrance are good for game flow. Removing them tends to diminish the level of emotional investment and roleplaying in the game.

 
 
[–] Dice@ttrpg.network -3 points 1 year ago

It's a jab at players for being overly attached to the system. Basically that pf2 players are wearing rose colored glasses.

[–] Dice@ttrpg.network 1 points 1 year ago

Understanding the market is not understanding the medium. Why is everyone putting words in my mouth. I am not advocating for some crazy free form improv without rolls or some other ruleless non-sense.

I'm saying that 5e and PF2 are not well-defined systems. You can have a different opinion, of course you will. And specifically that GMs burn out in these systems because they are not fun for GMs longterm.

 

And Hannah Montana is the lie of it being accessible to new players.

[–] Dice@ttrpg.network 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Why is everyone here so bad at reading? I specifically am calling out PF2 for being designed as if it was a video game. I am saying Paizo doesn't understand the medium of RPGs, because they don't.

[–] Dice@ttrpg.network 0 points 1 year ago

It really is crazy how hard new players defend 5e and pf2 when so many other games make GMing actually fun and easy.

[–] Dice@ttrpg.network 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well they could stop gamifying RP and exploration so players actually get into character instead of just rolling dice. But that's a pretty fundamental shift, so they won't do it.

[–] Dice@ttrpg.network -1 points 1 year ago

Nope, I know both. They both suck because of the required over optimization. But pf1 at least didn't have characters constantly at full hp, which is one of the biggest balance issues.

[–] Dice@ttrpg.network 0 points 1 year ago (7 children)

PF2 is certainly easier to run. But tell me when it becomes a RPG, it's basically a video game system ported to tabletop. Everything is about the builds, not the characters.

view more: next ›