View RSS Feed

Rodgin Kemph

Completeness vs Usefullness

Rate this Entry
I'm not normally one to try and make a system. I'd much rather use what is there and make it work for what I want. But when I look at full scale conquest and war, I've yet to find something I would call complete.

Now, the true balance, or so I'm finding from my thinking, is actually building a system that is useable. Yes, I want supply routes and behind enemy lines attacks available, but I, as a GM, don't particularly care to calculate what every single person in the economy can contribute to the war effort.

This line of thinking has led to the conclusion that there has to be a balance. A complete system is, by definition, useless to a tabletop gamer. In order to make it useful, completeness must be sacrificed.

Now, how do I find this balance.

Submit "Completeness vs Usefullness" to Digg Submit "Completeness vs Usefullness" to Submit "Completeness vs Usefullness" to StumbleUpon Submit "Completeness vs Usefullness" to Google

Tags: None Add / Edit Tags


  1. TheTallestDwarf's Avatar
    When you want full scale conquest and war, you play a Table Top War game, since thats what it was made for. D&D, on the other hand, was made to get away from being a war game.

    Yeah, its a fun cycle.