Quote from: S'mon on April 19, 2023, 01:30:15 PM
It doesn't work with BRP d% because of confusion which % die goes with which. It ought to work fine in Pendragon and other BRP d20 systems though. And other roll under systems like the old GDW house system; which instead have a very clunky 'double/halve your skill' approach.

...

Quote from: Persimmon on April 19, 2023, 06:58:35 PM
Okay; that makes a bit more sense, but again, I probably have 10 sets of color matched dice where one is the tens and the other is the ones.  These aren't exactly hard to find these days.

Yeah. As a Call of Cthulhu GM, I'd have several color-matched d00/d10 pairs so I could make multiple rolls at a time. So I wouldn't say it doesn't work, but it does make the dice requirements harder.

You guys clearly have better dice discipline than me. 

I've found the system doesn't impact role-playing as much as the players.  In my experience having a detailed "crunchy" system has helped players really get into the character's skills and visualize it.  But if the players aren't role-players to begin with the system won't make a difference.  We're embarking on a BRP campaign, they came from 5E.  I've got games ready for Harn and Chivalry & Sorcery and both games were helpful for the pc's to understand how something is different and how their pc figured in.  Never played Pathfinder or the 3.5-4 DnD.

Quote from: Chris24601 on April 18, 2023, 09:19:26 AM
After a string of bad GMs I have a very low tolerance for "GM May I?" as the core mechanics of a class and like to have my non-"I hit it with my sword" options to have at least some mechanical support, even if it's just a bare-bones skill system.

The common denominator in all of your problems is always... you.

Quote from: Chris24601 on April 18, 2023, 09:19:26 AM
My current PCs are an Ex-Sith crashed on a D&D world (because the SW5e fan supplement has done as much to reinforce the spine of core of 5e as is reasonably possible), a dhampir vampire hunter (in an urban fantasy setting), a "warlord" in a 3.5e campaign (built off the 3.5e Bard with a generous helping of official splats for skill tricks and very subtle spells that could just be luck or inspiration), a paladin-type with a divinely granted exoskeleton and flame whip, and an alien superhero whose battles against his dark counterpart in prehistory were the inspiration for the myths of Horus and Set.

I don't think many of those lend themselves to a rules light expression.

While not a fan of "rules light" games myself, those characters are a thousand times easier to create in a rules light system than in a crunchier system.  Unless there is direct mechanical support within the crunch for a character in a crunchy system, the actuality of the character conflicts with the mental image of the capabilities of the character.  I.e., if I want a character who can drain opponents' mental resolve while using that to power an ability to grow techno-magical constructs on my body based on the results of the drain, a high crunch system would require me to pick a set of mechanics that simulate mental resolve and that had specific rules designed to replicate point-based constructs with varying abilities hard-coded into the rules.  A rules-light game will be far more amenable to just winging it, with abilities and results added on the fly.
0)
So, if you define "roleplaying" a character as the results of a character's task resolution (which I don't), crunchier systems tend to get in the way of widely varied character concepts, not support them...

My answer to the question is this:

I like rules that really serve the game/setting.

I only have a problem with rules that are too crunchy/complicated if the rules cause me to have to stop and look something up.  The stops the game, slows momentum and really does damage to the game.

A game cause be crunchy as long as it doesn't interfere in game play (My 2 cents at least)

Quote from: Eirikrautha on April 21, 2023, 02:21:35 PM

Quote from: Chris24601 on April 18, 2023, 09:19:26 AM
After a string of bad GMs I have a very low tolerance for "GM May I?" as the core mechanics of a class and like to have my non-"I hit it with my sword" options to have at least some mechanical support, even if it's just a bare-bones skill system.

The common denominator in all of your problems is always... you.

And?

No. Seriously.

I like and dislike certain things due to my past experiences. This isn't a discussion where there is a right and wrong answer. It's all about personal preferences based on our past experiences.

You enjoy rules-lite systems due to your personal preferences and past experiences with it. Your preference for playing lets pretend where all the load of decision making is on the GM is just that, your preference.

Others may share that preference. Others may share mine.

So what exactly is your point?

Quote from: Chris24601 on April 21, 2023, 03:22:17 PM

Quote from: Eirikrautha on April 21, 2023, 02:21:35 PM

Quote from: Chris24601 on April 18, 2023, 09:19:26 AM
After a string of bad GMs I have a very low tolerance for "GM May I?" as the core mechanics of a class and like to have my non-"I hit it with my sword" options to have at least some mechanical support, even if it's just a bare-bones skill system.

The common denominator in all of your problems is always... you.

And?

No. Seriously.

I like and dislike certain things due to my past experiences. This isn't a discussion where there is a right and wrong answer. It's all about personal preferences based on our past experiences.

You enjoy rules-lite systems due to your personal preferences and past experiences with it. Your preference for playing lets pretend where all the load of decision making is on the GM is just that, your preference.

Others may share that preference. Others may share mine.

So what exactly is your point?

My point is that your bias is so great, that you can't even read correctly anymore.  My literal next sentence was that I wasn't a fan of rules light games.  Also, that your stated preference for crunch as a method of insuring build possibilities is not only flawed conceptually, but probably directly counterproductive.  So, perhaps you are actually exacerbating the problem you are professing to solve.  You know, the whole rest of the post you apparently didn't read...

I think you need a system with enough crunch you can bite into it, but not so much you you can choke on it.

Many systems are so crunchy you're left wondering what the fuck were they thinking when the came up with this shit because with a crunchy system when the rule isn't good you feel it.

Others are so soft you might as well freeform.

There's a reason I hate Powered by the Apocalypse

Quote from: Eirikrautha on April 21, 2023, 10:49:07 PMMy point is that your bias is so great, that you can't even read correctly anymore.

Chris is biased (which isn't even a neutral and fair description, opinionated is more like it), but if you start off with:
"Look man, have you considered your an asshole?", then don't be surprised when somebody doesn't really want to engage with the rest.

Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on April 22, 2023, 12:27:20 PM

Quote from: Eirikrautha on April 21, 2023, 10:49:07 PMMy point is that your bias is so great, that you can't even read correctly anymore.

Chris is biased (which isn't even a neutral and fair description, opinionated is more like it), but if you start off with:
"Look man, have you considered your an asshole?", then don't be surprised when somebody doesn't really want to engage with the rest.

This is actually disconnected from either poster, but a LOT of problems in the modern West come from people being protected from being called an asshole. I mean there are a metric ton of assholes running around, shielded by laws and social media censorship.

I know, "more flies with honey," but sometimes asking an asshole if they've considered they may be an asshole, is doing the Lord's work.

Quote from: Grognard GM on April 22, 2023, 12:58:31 PMAsking an asshole if they've considered they may be an asshole, is doing the Lord's work.

Unless its a thing you in specific feel protective towards. Then it's not the time or place. Then the people belittling you or your beliefs are just unenlightened morons.

Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on April 22, 2023, 01:49:11 PM

Quote from: Grognard GM on April 22, 2023, 12:58:31 PMAsking an asshole if they've considered they may be an asshole, is doing the Lord's work.

Unless its a thing you in specific feel protective towards. Then it's not the time or place. Then the people belittling you or your beliefs are just unenlightened morons.

I can be upset at being called an asshole, and feel it's unfair, but how does that disprove some people needing to be called out?

Feels over free speech has wrecked the West.

Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on April 22, 2023, 12:27:20 PM

Quote from: Eirikrautha on April 21, 2023, 10:49:07 PMMy point is that your bias is so great, that you can't even read correctly anymore.

Chris is biased (which isn't even a neutral and fair description, opinionated is more like it), but if you start off with:
"Look man, have you considered your an asshole?", then don't be surprised when somebody doesn't really want to engage with the rest.

The irony of you, of all posters, posting this is palpable.  Pot meet kettle...

QuoteYup. Rolling two or three d00 and two or three d10 you can easily mix up which d00 goes with which d10. Not a problem with two or three d20s.

As someone who was once deliberating upon systems with pool of D100/D20s (although in more success level than advantage/disadvantage fashion) I'd say that simplest solution I've got for D100 is - simply roll adequate number of D10. And then only for those that fall on perfect number on edge, check unity numbers. That can even add some edge, as it shows very very close roll.

One additional thought on crunch.  I generally requires a GM who is organized to work well.  Like, with Rolemaster, you want the stats of the monsters on your GM control sheet and the necessary attack and critical tables set out rather than flipping through the book.