RE: Re: stretches and credibility checks - anyone else having difficulty?

From: DreadDomain <dreaddomain_at_...>
Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2010 20:19:10 -0500

Let me jump in to this interesting discussion and...

>A depressing large number - and they end up with "Basic Rules" the size of
>The Sartar Book. GURPS, I'm looking at you. And the Hero System don't
>pretend you can't break a man's wrist by taking you off the shelf.



... just state that the examples chosen are by themselves interesting for two reasons. First, Ash is right, both GURPS and HERO do bring a lot of crunch and details to the table. Second, both systems are quite excellent in my opinion.

Why is this relevant to this discussion? Well maybe it is not but I like Hal, I do find it useful when stuff are stated out but not because I like to over simulate things (I am not a pure simulationist). I actually like to set out difficulties according to how interesting/important tasks are to the story but because I am not a pure narrativist either, I then choose rule elements (range, weapons, slipperiness of slope, weather, whatever) to FIT the chosen difficulty. Having all these useful stats in a book just help me to bring verisimilitude to my games.

I guess I am just saying it is not all black or white, simulationist or narrativist. Shades of gray do exist and every once in a while someone pops up saying "I'd like to play grey with HQ because I like the premises of HQ but I prefer grey as a style. Please help me out". Most of the time a lot of helpful people answer with genuinely interesting answers that might be summed up as "Ah, there is your problem, you should play white!".

That being said, I do find this discussion helpful and interesting.

FF from the DD

Powered by hypermail