[ SECRET POST #3582 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3582 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.
[Miss Fisher's Murder Mysteries]


__________________________________________________



03.
[Daredevil, Wilson Fisk/Vanessa Marianna]


__________________________________________________



04.
[Overwatch]


__________________________________________________



05.
[Mob Psycho 100]


__________________________________________________



06.
[Malcolm in the Middle]


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.













Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 39 secrets from Secret Submission Post #512.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[herpymcderp]

I disagree. I think any system can be cannibalized for whatever you want to use it for. D&D has a pretty comprehensive and easy to learn system for making combat fair and reasonably balanced, and it's got enough contingency and reworking that has gone into it over the years that it's very useful for those players who love to be rules lawyers.

Just because a rule is in a book doesn't mean you must use that rule when you play.

[(Anonymous)]

Of course you can have fun in any system, and there's a wide range of possibility in terms of what actually happens at the table compared to the book.

At the same time, I think in general you're going to enjoy yourself more and have an easier time with games that have mechanical support for the kind of experience you want to have. There are games that provide really strong, integral mechanics for character and narrative role playing. D&D isn't one of them - it doesn't have many mechanics for it and those it does aren't really great (in any edition). For example, you know, the alignment system.

I mean, come on, man! You're talking about groups that barely touch the dice in a session - if that's the case, how actually relevant are dice-based combat mechanics for a game like that? And is it really better to build a rickety structure of house rules to force a game to do what you want, or to play a game that's actually designed to support what you want to do?

I get that there's a ton of inertia and comfort with D&D and it's familiar. But I also am really strongly convinced that D&D as a family of games is not good at a lot of things, including character and narrative.

[herpymcderp]

I mean, come on, man! You're talking about groups that barely touch the dice in a session - if that's the case, how actually relevant are dice-based combat mechanics for a game like that?

Really useful for when you want something excessively simple that everyone is basically going to be familiar with for the times when you do need to pick up the dice? I mean, usually it's safe to assume that if someone has done any tabletop gaming they've played some D&D.

Unless they're a filthy Rifts player lol.

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, sorry, I realized I worded that specific sentence weirdly. The issue isn't the dice, the issue is that D&D's combat mechanics are generally pretty involved and complex, more than is necessary for a game that's not focused on hack n' slash. They're not actually excessively simple.

I stand by my point that I think there are games that are just as easy to actually pick up and play, that provide much better support for all the other things that aren't hack and slash.

[herpymcderp]

That might be true, but I'll still argue that D&D (at least some versions of it- 2nd ed in particular) are more or less suited to basically whatever one wants to make of it.

Feel free to like and use what you want to use, but you can easily finagle it to do what you want it to do regardless of play style. I think that really can't be said for some other systems (e.g. most things White Wolf related).

[(Anonymous)]

I kind of feel like - philosophically - the idea of trying to be good at everything leads to weaker games. I don't think a game can actually be everything to all people, and I think it's generally better to have games that focus in on trying to be really good at specific things. Maybe I'm underestimating the cost of switching rulesets, I don't know.

but yeah fair enough obviously

[(Anonymous)]

SA

Minor correction: instead of "dice-based combat mechanics" please substitute "complex, involved combat mechanics"

the dice aren't really the issue

apologies

[(Anonymous)]

Depends on the DM, tbh. I've been playing with the same DM for thirty years, and he has his own world, lots of concurrent stories running which adds to each party's narrative...it's a lot of fun, and I love all the stories that have come out of the role-playing.