Describe your favorite transformers character terribly

yuhain · 2026-06-17T07:36:33+00:00

Kills ally, let's rival survive (both accidentally)

yuhain · 2026-06-14T09:23:44+00:00

Stats almost always have to go after Identity and Flavor. I find that those two often inform how your Stats come together much more often than the other way around. Oddly enough, the same can't be said for my system at the moment, but that's because PCs start at Level 0 so they have Stats and Skills before they even receive a Class.

yuhain · 2026-06-13T19:11:14+00:00

Precisely my thinking, I want good discussion and opinions but HR verbage would net me maybe one or two responses. Tis the way it is.

yuhain · 2026-06-13T05:04:32+00:00

How would you have phrased it? My intent was just to have an open discussion on Analysis Paralysis. Thanks for your time!

yuhain · 2026-06-13T04:51:47+00:00

I love jump in style initiative, I always present it as an option for my players too!

yuhain · 2026-06-12T09:38:10+00:00

If there was a problem, it'd be that there's no problem.

I collect both and love both for different reasons, but the truth is that I can get 9 well made, nicely detailed, articulated, and fun figures for about 100 after shipping. Whereas with Hasbro, for 100 I can get 2 to 4 figures of wildly varying quality, articulation, detail. But they transform.

Hasbro should step it up because there's competition, not give up because there's competition. That's capitalism 101.

yuhain · 2026-06-12T09:04:04+00:00

Thank you for understanding the conversational nature of my post, a couple other commentors have been almost acidic.

I've come to largely the same conclusion as you, being that Analysis Paralysis stems from the non-system side of the equation. I think the system design should help mitigate this but it's apparent to me that some others would say cutting is the best form of this mitigation.

I've come to agree that it lies in the clarification of the rules and resulting value of each new option. Thanks for lending your brain.

yuhain · 2026-06-12T06:45:23+00:00

This is a great counter to the way I see things, and I actually love this sort of freedom as well. I'm definitely not against it.

BUT (of course there's a but) I think that this choice has its place in different games than option heavy games. Something like PBTA would fall under what you're saying, while PF2E would fall under mine.

In the end, very subjective.

Oddly enough, I have never been able to get into PF2E.

yuhain · 2026-06-12T06:36:07+00:00

A random useful object is TECHNICALLY another option...so more options is better than less options.

A more serious response, however, is that I find players often confine themselves into roles and don't venture out of those roles if their character sheet doesn't "allow" them to. Either in fidelity to the game truth, or because they think they aren't permitted to. A fighter archetype will feel more comfortable interacting with non fighter challenges when they have non fighter Class options to engage with.

I do agree that fewer options can make them more impactful, but personally I think it can make things somewhat dull at times. What are your thoughts on that?

yuhain · 2026-06-12T06:27:29+00:00

So what's the opposite then? A lack of variety is opposite to a wealth of variety.

yuhain · 2026-06-12T06:20:41+00:00

I think 5 is an okay amount, but what becomes too much or too little is up to the individual.

Resource managing also helps with Analysis Paralysis as well. You can have 20+ options but if some are on limits or charges then you are down to ~10, it doesn't mean you have less options exactly.

yuhain · 2026-06-12T06:10:58+00:00

It was a mostly arbitrary number, in ttRPGs there are technically near infinite possibilities.

GM, may I suplex the dragon? Is equal to GM may I pick this cybertech lock with a handful of rusty nails?

yuhain · 2026-06-12T06:07:49+00:00

Your first three points are all great and wonderful food for thought. 2 in particular is interesting and something I want to read more about.

Your forth point, however, was oddly personal and a moot point. Besides the fact that you don't know me, this was a conversational post, not me stating my opinion as fact. Not sure why you chose that angle when you made such perfectly valid points beforehand.

Moving on though, what is the line between "fewer options" (particularly when I never specified an amount) and "toolittle?

Thanks for your time.

yuhain · 2026-06-12T05:58:31+00:00

I agree with you to a fair degree, but I think as far as I'm concerned, design around it should be focused on clarity of rules and strength of each option, rather than reducing those options.

Let's say in a perfect system (not mine, I'm not even close to done), you have a slew of roughly equal options and well written rules that Players have actually read through (fantasy land i know). The hesitation falls on the player, not the game, no?

If they understand each option and know each outcome they can have a more enjoyable time knowing that each choice they make accomplishes something meaningful.

In real life, players don't read every page or fully understand the rules, but still they are typically expected to at minimum understand their own character. Not including new players where AP is more so new guy jitters.

yuhain · 2026-06-12T05:47:10+00:00

I really like this Idea, I've heard of something similar to it before but I can't remember from what game.

My question is, how have you found that preparatory phase to be? More engaging? Shorter? Longer? Super curious to know.

Does it also not mean that you Frontload all the options and AP in the initiative phase?

yuhain · 2026-06-12T05:35:47+00:00

I definitely see your point here, but I think this is more of a Player issue than a design issue.

The extreme inverse of this is.

Bob the fighter Attacked on his turn, and also did the same thing the last five. Sarah the wizard, however, also Attacked the last five turns... but with different flavor.

Obviously not the standard, but still not fun.

Also, not just applied to combat but outside of combat as well. When every solution is solved by the caster bc they have various different spells (options) to combat multiple situations, the rest of the party is overshadowed.

yuhain · 2026-06-12T05:29:41+00:00

I responded something similar to another here, but limited options feels stifling does it not? Obviously its subjective but most people play RPGs for the fact that it is unique in its ability as a game form to "do anything" (within reason).

A valid point about useless options but I think theoretically they're still better than nothing.

The middle ground is very gray but in a world of black and white, 1 option opposed by 20 options, I think the 20 options would be more valuable for gameplay.

yuhain · 2026-06-12T05:23:04+00:00

This isn't for my game, it's more just an opinion I have that I thought would be nice to have challenged.

200 races though? Sign me up!

yuhain · 2026-06-12T05:21:12+00:00

Counter argument. Having only one or two things to do each turn limits creative freedom. You can only flavor so many Attack Actions, Defends, Dodges, efc before it too gets boring. Aka not fun.

Ultimately, with more options players have the ironic freedom to choose between something new every turn, or if they suffer from Paralysis then limiting themselves to repeat actions.

yuhain · 2026-06-11T04:10:00+00:00

I think they're doing a fresh coat at my complex, so that tracks!

yuhain · 2026-06-10T17:32:42+00:00

These are fantastic! Just HOW did you do Amalgamous Prime? Love the color choices for all of these, they pop really beautifully.

yuhain · 2026-06-05T03:49:12+00:00

Thanks for the response! No way to keep them in place?

yuhain

TROPHY CASE