>rules-light is always the best! >let's just make

>>51111164
I'm sorry that good games aren't casual enough for you.

>>51111164
But all that is true anon.

>>51111199
>>51111210
Found the faggots

>>51111164
>>just fluff it!
>bad

Okay, you're a fag too OP

File: e90203e6-52ca-41f9-9db0-a9f5678bd26e-750348835.jpg (13KB, 128x128px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 128x128px

>good question, why don't YOU tell me what you found in the safe you cracked!

Op is a faggot

I can appreciate rules light games from a design perspective, even if they aren't to my tastes. I prefer a little more mechanical weight than things like PbtA. Then again, some rules light games are awesome, things like Maid RPG or Don't Rest Your Head.

Communal setting creation can be cool but very much depends on the style of game. In general I prefer declarative skill rolls to inquisitive ones though. The GM can always veto it if a player declares something stupid, but as long as people understand what's going on it can really add to the game.

Social-fu is fucking awesome. The Courtier archetype in Legends of the Wulin is crazy powerful, although it's possibly worth mentioning that they also have a full suite of out of combat utility stuff alongside in combat social-fu.

Refluffing is of variable usefulness. While it can be great at times, I do want a degree of mechanical distinction between options in order to help different characters feel unique. If a systems only real distinction between two characters is the fluff, it's going to feel really unsatisfying to play for me.

>>51111164
>greentext

>>51111164
>>rules-light is always the best!
>>social skills should use the same rules as fights!
Make up your mind.

>>51111164

>opinions
>if everyone is happy with this approach, why not?
>would you rather they not have any rules at all?
>I want my Samurai to have special snowflake rules to be better than a Fighter.

File: beach.jpg (497KB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

497KB, 1920x1200px

>>51111164
So, beaches for Doom?

>>51111164

You do realize that these are totally different (and in a case self-contradictory) ideas, right?

>>51111237
Needing everything spelled out for you = casual, anon.

>>51111554
Old meme is old

>>51111882
What do you mean old?

>>51111882

Thulsa Doom isn't old, he's ageless.

>>51111164
>rules-light is always the best!
If the rules are concise, clear, rigid, and cover the necessities, that's great.

>let's just make the world up together as we go!
Collaborative world-building with your group is actually fantastic and I prefer it as a DM since then not even I will know everything that will happen, and that's the main draw for me in the game.

>social skills should use the same rules as fights!
A more extensive set of social rules could work, provided it's again clear, concise, and rigid.

>just fluff it!
Applying fluff to rigid mechanics is the easiest way to make something unique for your players. Taking a monster's stats, but not the monster, and your players won't know what the fuck is going on and you're not pissing around with mechanics, potentially unbalancing the game in the interest of variety.

When the fuck did good DM behaviour become so reviled on /tg/?

>>51115200
>When the fuck did good DM behaviour become so reviled on /tg/?
Erm...I think you know the answer to that, anon: trolls be trollin'...shitters gotta shit.....

>>51111164
>>let's just make the world up together as we go!
Hey, if you have the basics of the world down, and you're not playing with shitters, this is a great way to keep from having too much to do as the GM and lets players get more invested in the world.

The rest is pretty shit though.

Stop playing rules lite games.

File: 930265b43d23e1959d3a70ded008d3d8.png (118KB, 324x355px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 324x355px

>>51111247
Stop opening safes in the dungeon.