What happened to 2nd edition?

[ThenDoctor 862]

What i expect is a systtem that doesnt devolve the game into an eercise of weights and measures. Encumbrance systems like this are tedious. I don't play 40k games for tedium, there's plenty of that in real life. All you need is a simple soluution or the apllication of common sense: you can carry a couple of pistols, or a rifle, but you can' carry rifles, pistols, carbines, and a massive cannon. It's not really rocket science!

 

Well seeing as it only devolves into that if you bother with worrying about those rules then you'll be fine there.

[cps 686]

 

What i expect is a systtem that doesnt devolve the game into an eercise of weights and measures. Encumbrance systems like this are tedious. I don't play 40k games for tedium, there's plenty of that in real life. All you need is a simple soluution or the apllication of common sense: you can carry a couple of pistols, or a rifle, but you can' carry rifles, pistols, carbines, and a massive cannon. It's not really rocket science!

 

Well seeing as it only devolves into that if you bother with worrying about those rules then you'll be fine there.

 

 

Yeah, serpent! Using the rules as written is only onerous if you use them as written and don't use your judgement to ignore the rules that are written onerously. Duh.

[ThenDoctor 862]

 

Yeah, serpent! Using the rules as written is only onerous if you use them as written and don't use your judgement to ignore the rules that are written onerously. Duh.

 

Using rules as written to the point where it impacts your enjoyment of the game because it becomes bogged down in number crunching indicates that the rules aren't for them in that instance. They should be ignored, modified, or replaced at that point.

[Gridash 353]

 

 

 

What i expect is a systtem that doesnt devolve the game into an eercise of weights and measures. Encumbrance systems like this are tedious. I don't play 40k games for tedium, there's plenty of that in real life. All you need is a simple soluution or the apllication of common sense: you can carry a couple of pistols, or a rifle, but you can' carry rifles, pistols, carbines, and a massive cannon. It's not really rocket science!

 

Well seeing as it only devolves into that if you bother with worrying about those rules then you'll be fine there.

 

 

Yeah, serpent! Using the rules as written is only onerous if you use them as written and don't use your judgement to ignore the rules that are written onerously. Duh.

 

 

I don't see the problem with the rules as they are written. You don't need to apply the actual measurements 95% of the time, and the 5% where you do need them, you can do it using an exact measurement. You don't ignore any rules if it's written in this manner.

 

The only viable criticism imho is the fact that the weight of some items referenced in the book aren't always as realistic as we'd like them to be. 

Edited November 12, 2014 by Gridash

[Morangias 465]

 

 

What i expect is a systtem that doesnt devolve the game into an eercise of weights and measures. Encumbrance systems like this are tedious. I don't play 40k games for tedium, there's plenty of that in real life. All you need is a simple soluution or the apllication of common sense: you can carry a couple of pistols, or a rifle, but you can' carry rifles, pistols, carbines, and a massive cannon. It's not really rocket science!

 

Well seeing as it only devolves into that if you bother with worrying about those rules then you'll be fine there.

 

 

Yeah, serpent! Using the rules as written is only onerous if you use them as written and don't use your judgement to ignore the rules that are written onerously. Duh.

Applying structuralism to the critique of RPG mechanics can only end in tears and rage.

[Nimsim 671]

What i expect is a systtem that doesnt devolve the game into an eercise of weights and measures. Encumbrance systems like this are tedious. I don't play 40k games for tedium, there's plenty of that in real life. All you need is a simple soluution or the apllication of common sense: you can carry a couple of pistols, or a rifle, but you can' carry rifles, pistols, carbines, and a massive cannon. It's not really rocket science!

 

Well seeing as it only devolves into that if you bother with worrying about those rules then you'll be fine there.

 

Yeah, serpent! Using the rules as written is only onerous if you use them as written and don't use your judgement to ignore the rules that are written onerously. Duh.

Applying structuralism to the critique of RPG mechanics can only end in tears and rage.

So you're saying that judging rpg mechanics by criteria used for most other media will expose some of the flaws of the medium that have persisted for 40 years? Yeah, I'd say 40 years of entrenchment will take some rage to clear out.

[Morangias 465]

Roleplaying games are unlike any other medium there is. Not accepting that will make you remain frustrated as you try to fit a square peg in a round hole.

[Myrion 542]

It combines games with improv theater. I'm pretty sure that doesn't make them so utterly unique that you cannot apply cultural theories to RPGs. You'd have to tweak stuff, but I'm pretty sure that the results would mostly be very interesting.

[Morangias 465]

I'm not saying it's impossible to dissect roleplaying games. I'm saying it's important that we recognize how they differ from other forms of entertainment and adjust the methodology accordingly.

 

I'm also saying the methodology Nimsim keeps trying to apply doesn't take into account the peculiar way in which every RPG player is the creator as well as the consumer of the content, and the way the rules of the game are subject to constant reinterpretation by the players that has more impact on the play experience than the authorial intent or the strict logical parsing of said rules. And I'm saying it makes his conclusions erroneous and largely unhelpful.

[Nimsim 671]

I'm not saying it's impossible to dissect roleplaying games. I'm saying it's important that we recognize how they differ from other forms of entertainment and adjust the methodology accordingly.

 

I'm also saying the methodology Nimsim keeps trying to apply doesn't take into account the peculiar way in which every RPG player is the creator as well as the consumer of the content, and the way the rules of the game are subject to constant reinterpretation by the players that has more impact on the play experience than the authorial intent or the strict logical parsing of said rules. And I'm saying it makes his conclusions erroneous and largely unhelpful.

It's actually really easy to take this into account. What do all RPGs have in common? Players and the GM can make stuff up that happens. They can make up literally anything they want. Okay, great! Since that applies to literally every rpg, we don't have to include that fact in our analysis of the game. We are left with the part of the game that is written down to judge, not the things that players and GMs make up. People are free to reinterpret the rules of a board game or to hack/mod a video game or write fanfiction for a novel. It is not a unique property of RPGs.

Movies and novels can be interpreted in a lot of ways, but for many critics, their job is I say how THEY interpreted and felt about the movie. The best reviews are those that are entertaining in their own right or which make the most cogent points.

Seriously, trying to claim that a format that takes most of its inspiration from re-enacting naval battles is above criticism due to its uniqueness is incredibly pretentious.

[signoftheserpent 92]

What i expect is a systtem that doesnt devolve the game into an eercise of weights and measures. Encumbrance systems like this are tedious. I don't play 40k games for tedium, there's plenty of that in real life. All you need is a simple soluution or the apllication of common sense: you can carry a couple of pistols, or a rifle, but you can' carry rifles, pistols, carbines, and a massive cannon. It's not really rocket science!

 

Well seeing as it only devolves into that if you bother with worrying about those rules then you'll be fine there.

then why include them?

Why bother buying rules if you intend to ignore them.

[ThenDoctor 862]

 

then why include them?

Why bother buying rules if you intend to ignore them.

 

Because oddly enough you aren't the only person playing this game. Some people will include them, some won't.

[Fgdsfg 1,017]

What i expect is a systtem that doesnt devolve the game into an eercise of weights and measures. Encumbrance systems like this are tedious. I don't play 40k games for tedium, there's plenty of that in real life. All you need is a simple soluution or the apllication of common sense: you can carry a couple of pistols, or a rifle, but you can' carry rifles, pistols, carbines, and a massive cannon. It's not really rocket science!

 

Well seeing as it only devolves into that if you bother with worrying about those rules then you'll be fine there.

then why include them?

Why bother buying rules if you intend to ignore them.

Because they are important when relevant. Seriously, this has been explained to you repeatedly.

[ThenDoctor 862]

Because they are important when relevant. Seriously, this has been explained to you repeatedly.

 

I know, right?

[LordBlades 2,403]

What i expect is a systtem that doesnt devolve the game into an eercise of weights and measures. Encumbrance systems like this are tedious. I don't play 40k games for tedium, there's plenty of that in real life. All you need is a simple soluution or the apllication of common sense: you can carry a couple of pistols, or a rifle, but you can' carry rifles, pistols, carbines, and a massive cannon. It's not really rocket science!

 Well seeing as it only devolves into that if you bother with worrying about those rules then you'll be fine there.

then why include them?Why bother buying rules if you intend to ignore them.

Because they are important when relevant. Seriously, this has been explained to you repeatedly.

This is a double edged sword though. If a rule is in the book there's no guarantee people will ignore it most of the time. By default when reading the RULES of a game one would assume they should be in effect at all times unless clearly stated otherwise. Knowing when to step outside the rules is an acquired skill.

[Morangias 465]

Rules in a roleplaying game are like a box of Legos: they're all supposed to fit together, but ultimately it's up to you which elements you use.

 

For as long as I'm in the hobby, I'm certain I've never met one GM who used all the rules of the game in their campaigns. I know a few "rules nazis", but even they tend to houserule, either explicitly or by omission.

[Gridash 353]

And having the option to ignore them doesn't mean you HAVE to ignore them.

[ThenDoctor 862]

This is a double edged sword though. If a rule is in the book there's no guarantee people will ignore it most of the time. By default when reading the RULES of a game one would assume they should be in effect at all times unless clearly stated otherwise. Knowing when to step outside the rules is an acquired skill.

 

There's no guarantee, but if people actively play with a rule that causes their  own enjoyment of the game to diminish without even considering just forgoing the rule, or actively ignoring in this systems case where you can ignore encumbrance most of the time until it matters. Gridash cited that multiple times.

[Gridash 353]

In case of the encumbrance rules, according to the rulebook it is not meant to be used all the time either.

 

Otherwise it would be similiar to forcing people to roll skillchecks for every breath their character draws.

[LordBlades 2,403]

This is a double edged sword though. If a rule is in the book there's no guarantee people will ignore it most of the time. By default when reading the RULES of a game one would assume they should be in effect at all times unless clearly stated otherwise. Knowing when to step outside the rules is an acquired skill.

 

There's no guarantee, but if people actively play with a rule that causes their  own enjoyment of the game to diminish without even considering just forgoing the rule, or actively ignoring in this systems case where you can ignore encumbrance most of the time until it matters. Gridash cited that multiple times.

So by the same measure would you also advocate disregarding let's say Perils of the Warp if that rule causes the psyker player's enjoyment of the game ti diminish?

[ThenDoctor 862]

So by the same measure would you also advocate disregarding let's say Perils of the Warp if that rule causes the psyker player's enjoyment of the game ti diminish?

 

I only ever advocate ignoring a rule if the entire group is ok with the ignoring of the rule. The GM also needs to understand the implications of ignoring a rule or system in the game.

 

There's a lot less impact ignoring and just using some sense for encumbrance than getting rid of the mechanic that is supposed to (and in my opinion does) keep psykers in check.

 

Needs of the many over the few. In the case of psykers, if a player doesn't enjoy perils then he/she should talk with the gm and invest in some talents that can help. Also understand the risk management of the system itself.

[AtoMaki 1,431]

 

 

This is a double edged sword though. If a rule is in the book there's no guarantee people will ignore it most of the time. By default when reading the RULES of a game one would assume they should be in effect at all times unless clearly stated otherwise. Knowing when to step outside the rules is an acquired skill.

 

There's no guarantee, but if people actively play with a rule that causes their  own enjoyment of the game to diminish without even considering just forgoing the rule, or actively ignoring in this systems case where you can ignore encumbrance most of the time until it matters. Gridash cited that multiple times.

So by the same measure would you also advocate disregarding let's say Perils of the Warp if that rule causes the psyker player's enjoyment of the game ti diminish?

 

Heh, good example. Over here, we had a psyker who ignored Psychic Phenomena/Perils of the Warp altogether because it fitted his character. Like, literally, the first time he rolled a double on the psychic test, the GM just shook his head and the game went on like nothing had happened. 

 

Another example from out gaming group is the whole 01-autosuccess/00-autofail rule that we completely ignore. Or Fate Points. We don't use those things either. 

[ThenDoctor 862]

Heh, good example. Over here, we had a psyker who ignored Psychic Phenomena/Perils of the Warp altogether because it fitted his character. Like, literally, the first time he rolled a double on the psychic test, the GM just shook his head and the game went on like nothing had happened. 

 

Another example from out gaming group is the whole 01-autosuccess/00-autofail rule that we completely ignore. Or Fate Points. We don't use those things either. 

 

You know, with all your house rules and particular special things you've mentioned about your game. What exactly is left from the book that you actually use. Not that you have to use a thing, but at a certain point you're ignoring a majority of the book.

[AtoMaki 1,431]

 

Heh, good example. Over here, we had a psyker who ignored Psychic Phenomena/Perils of the Warp altogether because it fitted his character. Like, literally, the first time he rolled a double on the psychic test, the GM just shook his head and the game went on like nothing had happened. 

 

Another example from out gaming group is the whole 01-autosuccess/00-autofail rule that we completely ignore. Or Fate Points. We don't use those things either. 

 

You know, with all your house rules and particular special things you've mentioned about your game. What exactly is left from the book that you actually use. Not that you have to use a thing, but at a certain point you're ignoring a majority of the book.

 

Now, here comes the point where I tell you that we actually only use the basic narrative rules (as: roll D100 to pass a Skill/Characteristic test) plus the Subtlety/Influence mechanic. Yeah, we often skip the whole Combat section too because simply rolling Tactics is less exhausting than peeling through ninebazillion hours of structured time combat. 

 

by the way, most of our GMs go with the "your stats say that you are awesome, so you succeed without rolling!" mentality  .

Edited November 13, 2014 by AtoMaki

[cps 686]

There's absolutely nothing wrong with that playstyle, but man are you playing with the wrong ruleset if that's how you want to play. There are much better games out there for rules-light, narrative play.