Quote from: Aglondir on July 27, 2023, 01:40:39 PM

You should do a thread that explains what's great about PF2E.  I played it a few times, and nothing really grabbed me. I recall there was a three-action economy (?) that didn't feel right.

This is really going to be personal taste here is the thing... The majority of the forum leans towards OSR (And nothing wrong with that, I love the OSR too!) but I'm only 41... and my first games were WoD games rather than D&D. I played earlier editions, but only a session or two before 3rd edition came out...

So my whole 'feelings' on what I like about D&D is sort of influenced very heavily by that. When I want to play a "D&D" like game... I was some level of complexity and really tight math, and rules laid out.

For me, if I want to go to something that's a little more rules lite but still has crunch I desire, I'll run Savage Worlds.

At the end of the day, what I "Like" about Pathfinder (Tight Math, rules on how to do everything, Lots of player options) could be seen as a downside to other players who prefer (simpler, easier to grok rules, not everything spelled out so DMs have more wiggle room, less character options so players aren't overwhelmed, ect)

WhiteHack. I've pimped that game so many times.

Then I purchased the latest version and it was like the last two minutes of the Usual Suspects. My entire impression of the system changed.

Quote from: FingerRod on July 27, 2023, 02:12:42 PM
WhiteHack. I've pimped that game so many times.

Then I purchased the latest version and it was like the last two minutes of the Usual Suspects. My entire impression of the system changed.

What changed?

Quote from: tenbones on July 19, 2023, 06:36:24 PM
I find it very telling that the same games keep coming up... and yet we hold those games in such high-esteem.

IMO - It is because those games were very formative for many people.

Those games set a certain standard in game design, and usually were the leaders within their genre niche at their time of release.

Quote from: tenbones on July 19, 2023, 06:36:24 PM
But when conversations about "updating" those editions/systems come up - or other systems which represent those settings come to pass - people will go gung-ho to defend those older systems. I encountered this a lot when FFG dropped Star Wars, and everyone came out with the d6 pitchforks and torches. I was one of them.

Generally because those games got the job done.

In my opinion; FFG SW is wayy over complicated for what it does. FFG's funky dice system was an answer in search of a problem. Hence the push back.

That being said: Game design does not live in a vacuum.

SWd6 would only benefit from adopting some of the streamlined design aspects in mini-six, and even mythic d6.

SWd6 is a game that suffered from complication bloat in its editions, when what it really needed was system refinement.

But the underlying design was sound. As such it is very much a game that could be released today with some refinements, and be very well received.

GURPS. What a steaming pile of unnecessarily complicated inelegant mechanics. Yet we played the heck out of it in the 90's during the 2nd edition AD&D era. I don't think I could tolerate it now without a heaping dose of Rule 0.

I will say though, GURPS had some useful supplements pre-internet. I still refer to them when writing and designing games.

D&D 5e.

Started running and playing it first and enjoyed doing so for a couple of years. Slowly realized how much unnecessary time I spent on session preparation. Moved to ItDR and OSR since.

Quote from: Vladar on July 30, 2023, 03:20:28 AM
D&D 5e.

Started running and playing it first and enjoyed doing so for a couple of years. Slowly realized how much unnecessary time I spent on session preparation. Moved to ItDR and OSR since.

ItDR = ?