[Skarg]

Originally Posted by ecz

... For example I think we need less jobs, ...

What does it help to list fewer jobs?

Originally Posted by ecz

...But the most important thing is that jobs during a RPG like TFT should never take the place of the adventures and nobody should say: "well, I'll work for six months and then I'll buy that nice warhorse!"
Jobs are mostly for substistance in a hard fantasy world, as an excuse to find a plot for an adventure, and as filler during adventures when a PC is temporarily unavailable.

Originally Posted by JLV

And I also agree that the jobs/downtime rolls should never be a substitute for actual roleplaying. We used them to set up situations, and to cover time spent waiting for other party members to heal. The players had a blast with them, and "fun" is, after all the main point. If some character is going to insist on sitting in a job for six months to buy a warhorse, instead of going out adventuring for that same goal, I submit to you that the character has actually said "I'm retiring to a nice safe place," and should be replaced with a new character...

Isn't that up to the GM and players to decide whether they want to allow PCs to spend months on a job, or not? Why would it be something to prohibit in general? A GM who doesn't want to pass six months can certainly start prompting more detailed play, or run adventures for other PCs, etc. My players in TFT really enjoyed the job rules for a while, trying out different ones and using them both to make money and as a way to learn about the game world. One of them was very excited about his career goal of being in a position to take bribes (inspired by the bribery rules in ITL). What does it hurt to have such things described?

Originally Posted by ecz

I understand who says that players like complex worlds and a pre-created rule for any situation, but TFT is not exactly a simulation of a Fantasy world and (IMHO) all we need is a solid set uf basic rules allowing everyone to move from it if someone wants to shape the universe in detail.

Hmm. That may be all that we (experienced GMs who read In The Labyrinth decades ago - or GURPS) need, but new players and players coming from other RPGs may have no concept that the world has jobs and that characters doing their jobs could have specifics laid out for them, and that PCs could spend some downtime doing such jobs, or that the GM might easily know how much NPCs make at their jobs, etc. To me, the economics rules are a valuable part of ITL's overall presentation of how to run a logical game world where things make some sense and have some answers and ways to game out situations other than "the GM makes something up or tells you you can't do that". I also don't see the value in removing it, since you can also ignore it.

The main issues I see are having someone (not named Steve, heh) review the numbers and odds, and fixing the "you get enough experience to grain an attribute, no matter how much that is" problem, and the generic damage consequence - which could just be one or two sentences saying to give 100 EP, and/or have the GM invent an appropriate challenging job situation, and play it out at whatever level of detail seems fun to the GM.