I am specificly referring to things like the battledome and retained retraining rules. The creators don’t seem to understand what an RPG is and are treating it like video game mini-games are an ideal play pattern. Like are you going to want to reference some poorly designed minigame rule for Negg management?

Neopets seems like an ideal IP for something rules light, not something that is trying to be GTA on paper. I also sense that some of these designs might make the game feel unfaithful to Neopets.

Note that it’s making a lot of promises for more rules, but not describing what those rules are. Which is likely a sign of the rules being very rough and needing a lot of work. Which is why I say it looks like a mess.

This looks like a trainwreck of video game mechanics that don’t translate into RPG mechanics.

What you described is barely a timer system, reset on combat end doesn’t really ever matter to a game. I’m addressing longer time frame resource drain benefiting the game by creating risk and promoting choice. There isn’t really a point if arrows aren’t lost and broken.

Timer systems like arrow counting, rations and encumbrance are good for game flow. Removing them tends to diminish the level of emotional investment and roleplaying in the game.

In video game design there is the MDA framework. Where mechanics (rules) create dynamics (gameplay flow) that express aesthetics (genre and emotional expression). Thus in d&d the rules change the actions players take and these actions determine the tone and feel of the game. This is why Silvery Barbs is miserable, the dynamic it creates diminishes the roleplaying aesthetic by breaking suspension of disbelief.

When looking at 5e the fact most players don’t just homebrew a few rules, but gut large mechanics (light, encumbrance, gold, travel) of the game. This has completed removed WotC’s control of D&D’s dynamics. This breaks the aesthetics of the system. 5e in it’s current state is not a heroic fantasy game, but everyone thinks it is. Which is why so many tables fail and new DMs burn out.

Scarlet Heroes has some nice solo tables. The Tome of Adventure Design is also pretty nice for random tables.

“Finally, this rule absolutely eliminates the need for anyone, be he player or, so help me gods, GameMaster, to fudge a roll. Fudging, also known as CHEATING has no place in a game that already has a mechanic designed to eliminate freak occurrences.”

I guess you are right, DMs can fudge all they want. GMs keep their honor and don’t roll dice with Satan.

You mean like Jesus? That seems a little heretical, this isn’t Warhammer Fantasy RP.

Funny, my Hackmaster book p. 113 says fudging dice is cheating. But you are free to roll dice with the devil.

There is a wide range in how RPGs can be played. For TSR era D&D there it has a lot of in built mechanical flexibility. White Wolf games like WoD or Exalted adds a layer of dramatic flexibility at the expense of in-built heroics, which works well for a dark modern setting.

I really like a lot of games for different reasons. WW games, particularly Wraith, are some of the more interesting to run. Due to the higher reliance on player creativity and inter-character interactions. I really enjoy Wraith’s shadow system for creating interactions between players for character flaws.

Paranoia is perhaps one of the most interesting GM experiences because it encourages so many deviations from standard gamemastering; railroading, PvP, splitting the party, killing PCs, … . Still it works so well.

Yep, that one gets around whenever people discuss the satanic panic.

I didn’t make this one. But there have been a few adventures in things like Radiant Citadel that come close.

It’s a jab at players for being overly attached to the system. Basically that pf2 players are wearing rose colored glasses.

No. I use different ways to resolve social conflicts based on what the situation is. Sometimes that’s rolling dice, sometimes it’s talking in character and sometimes it’s in-between stuff. Stop trying to shove me into some stereotype. Are you going to stereotype me as a Hackmaster gm? A Keeper? An ultraviolet? A storyteller?

I don’t expect pf2 players to understand my point of view, especially non-gamemasters.

No, I dislike games like pf2 because the MDA framework they have designed is detrimental to the medium of roleplaying games. Because the mechanics encourage players to use PC in non-diegetic dynamics crippling the aesthetics of any setting or genre.

Can you read? I hate the bloat. I play games that are not bloated. I played these games for years and found that I dislike the game philosophies they have. Those game philosophies directly result in bloat.

It’s not the complexity. It’s the bloat, terrible interactions and game dynamics. 3.5 didn’t suffer from gm burn out, but 5e does. Because 5e is a bigger mess.

Have you ever played with new players? I’ve ran non-dnd with new players several times. Including systems like Call of Cthulhu. Objectively speaking Cthulhu (BRP) is pretty rules light and my players had no trouble learning it. They just said what they wanted to do and I told them what to roll. They start to find the freedom in the system and get more creative. And a similar situation happens when I run more complex systems. I honestly have no clue what you are worried about. Players can learn how to play these games, they aren’t that hard.

It really is crazy how hard new players defend 5e and pf2 when so many other games make GMing actually fun and easy.

Did I say I still run these games? I hate 5e, pf2, pf1 and wouldn’t touch 3/3.5 again. I ran all of these in the past, except pf2 but I’ve played pf2 plenty to know I hate and will never run it.

I run Hackmaster and other systems (oWoD, Cthulhu, WFRP, …) which aren’t bloated messes. I just think pf1 is slightly better than pf2 because that was my experience. But that seems ridiculous to you, because you feel insulted or something. I really don’t care.