Recent content by Reynard

I'm just saying that integration might not be desirable beyond making it easy for folks to learn/remember. There is certainly value in a strong core mechanic that includes most aspects of play, but that's different than it being necessary.

Lol. Ok.

One benefit is that it is easy to replace or remove isolated subsystems, without upsetting the whole system balance. Found a better secret door system in the depth of GM Binder? Great! Use it.

Players' ability to intuitively judge probability, at least roughly, is definitely important for player agency. And I agree that linear distributions make that easier. I can't remember what game it was off the top of my head, but I swear I saw a character sheet with the dice pool probabilities...

I like it. In general, I think you could use the Warlock structure as a foundation for a bunch of classes, especially if you allow for ritual casting to cover out of combat utility stuff. A very vancian (as in, Jack Vance's Dying Earth) wizard, for example, is probably better modelled after the...

The original druid's shape changing was a "magical thing they can do" -- turn into a snake to get away, turn into a sparrow to fly away, maybe turn into a bear to scare some goblins. But somewhere between 3.0 and World of Warcraft, they became battle focused shape changers. Ugh. Similarly...

One thing we haven't really talked about is games WITHOUT a strong core mechanic. This is less common today, but for example AD&D lacks a core mechanic. Although it uses a d20 in a lot of its mechanics, it uses it differently in each: roll high on a table for attacks, roll low on a table for...

Sure. The Shadowdark Torch Timer is a procedure of play, and not a mechanic. The shadowdark random encounter system is a procedure of play with a bunch of asociated mechanics.

There were 2, I believe. The first from Sword & Sorcery, and the second one in house (maybe?).

As I thought I made clear in the OP: this thread isn't about "my game's" core mechanic. It is about core mechanics in general. It isn't goal oriented, other than as a venue to drink in some other perspectives. I am not hiding anything -- I am process exploring in the form of online discussion...

I don't mean to say such a book would be better GM advice than stuff we have seen, like Robin's Laws of Good Gamemastering or The Lazy GM's guides or anything else. i think it would have value, though, in the same way that reprinting and expounding upon Aaron Allston's Strike Force had real value.

To be clear, I don't intend to pick a core mechanic and THEN decide what the game is about. The purpose here is to talk about system in an organized way, which means starting with core mechanic. I am interested in what people find compelling about different forms of core mechanics, for the very...

I actually wish they would do a "Gygaxian Sourcebook" that was a collection of edition neutral game mastering writing by EGG, including stuff from the 1E DMG. It would not only honor his legacy, but remind folks of what the original intent of the game was (even if we aren't required to stick to...

I am still holding out hope that they are going to announce something new, something innovative. But they won't.

Others are likely to disagree, but I don't think emulation of reality is a worthy design goal at all. I think the primary, maybe only, design goal is to achieve what you intend in play. That probably reads as wishy-washy, but it is true. If you want your system to feel like gritty fiction, you...