*** JUNK MAIL ***Re: re-[Rq-rules] Introduction

[Wayne Shaw]

>because it was such a pain. (Apologies to C&S fans out there).  What 
>I've always likes about RQ is that it strikes a very good balance 
>between playability and simulation.  The rules are logical and do a 
>good job of simulating human combat, but without being so realistic 
>as to seriously bog down play.  Many of the proposed discussions 
>about how to improve the rules system often seem to emphasize 
>simulation at the expense of playability.  Yes, adding a nuance like 
>Fatigue does make the system more realistic, but it adds an extra 
>layer of bookkeeping that detracts of playability.  My rule about 
>modifying the rules has always been that any modification needs to keep

The question ends up being whether the extra layer adds enough to 
game play to be worth it.  That can't be anything _but_ a subjective call.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.thinbits.net/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20070702/ca0483dd/attachment.html