![]() But it seems to override the need to have both archers and peltasts unless maybe because of the ammo vs damage choice - and this far he hasn´t said anything about ammo. His argument is that archers shoot, while javelin throwers run up to the enemy, shoot at point blank range and then quickly retreat back to where they were. For example, he says that, in order to simplify rules in ancient warfare, javelin throwers and archers have the same shooting range. I don´t have the money, time and/or space for a big game and this manual sounds quite interesting, but I see some things that make absolutely no sense to me. Like you don't play Monopoly to pretend that you're capitalist shit, gamist RPGs don't care about 'getting in character' or playing in a 'believable world' and so on. They are closer to wargaming and boardgaming in the sense that the rules or mechanics themselves take the spotlight. GNS as a whole has been recently dismissed as bullshit however, its individual categories can still be useful for explaining some concepts. GNS A similar distribution has been proposed by the GNS (Gamist, Narrativist, Simulationist) Theory which is not applied to gamers but the games themselves. ![]() Neither side is able to see eye-to-eye with the other because they operate under different mindsets and arguments and they will never strike the right chords as they're hearing different frequencies. ![]() ![]() Hardcore examples of both sides can often ruin the fun for the rest of the people at the table either by propagation of their fantasies, that nobody is interested in, or by creating characters that. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |