8 Comments

Seems applicable to more than just games. Or rather, to more than games in the tabletop space and including games in the arenas of parenting, policing, economics, etc. Design rules toward good behavior rather than punitive towards bad. Anyway, nit to derail the conversation.

Expand full comment

100% agree, and so do most psychologists. Positive reinforcement.

Expand full comment

Did this approach influence how you handled cleric weapon proficiency as well? The old prohibition against clerics using bladed weapons always struck me as a bit eccentric, and it seems arbitrarily derived from the example of one person — Adhemar Le Puy, the papal legate who joined the First Crusade and wielded a mace instead of a sword. I liked how you handled that more subtly, using weapon proficiency to influence what weapon a cleric would likely use.

Expand full comment

Yeah, that was absolutely part of it. It always struck me as weird that the evil priest performing human sacrifice was apparently doing it with a mace(?)

Expand full comment

"Let the dark god behold our sacrifice! I know there's no blood... but I gave him a really nasty bruise...." True, that doesn't quite work. :D

Expand full comment

I like the idea of looking for ways to say "yes" in your design. When a game system says "no", it's worth it to look at the design and try to figure out why it's saying no. Saying yes can be the path to a much more player-centric design.

Expand full comment

Do you know why many people didn't want to play clerics?

Expand full comment

In theory, because you spent all your time and power healing others rather than doing cool stuff yourself. You were more of a party resource than a character. I don't personally identify with that outlook, but that's the feedback we got back then.

Expand full comment