[TORG] Is it worth maintaining the "Additional" state path cost?

[Phil Dack]

----- Original Message ----
> From: Jones Jasyn jasynj at gmail.com
>
> Most of the State Path rules are confusing, ill-defined, and contradictory. (Not 
> a singular trait among Torg rules.)  Additionally, the state path isn't crafted 
> with an eye towards balance. Spells with very minor effects can have high State 
> Path costs, spells which disintegrate castles a very low State cost. It is a 
> mess, IMHO.
> 
> I got rid of the State Path altogether. You can do as you wish of course, but it 
> is, at least, an option worth considering.

I have to agree with the simplicity. I happen to like state paths, but they need much stricter definition as to what each path can do and what it brings either as a Pattern, Mechanism or Result. But the trouble with any RPG system of that level of complexity is that imbalances can easily sneak in. Its no coincidence that most game systems have moved towards rules-lite in the past 10 years, it's just so much easier to balance a game when it's a GM issue not a Rules issue!