|
Nihnoz posted:Well it DOES live up to 13th age's design goals, which are a series of level appropriate encounters and some treasure so you can feel like you did something important where you play pretend between the fights. So it's an RPG then?
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 19:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 14:24 |
|
|
Design Goals:
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 19:56
|
|
|
Nihnoz posted:Well it DOES live up to 13th age's design goals, which are a series of level appropriate encounters and some treasure so you can feel like you did something important where you play pretend between the fights. Designing a game to be a fun rollercoaster ends up entertaining, rail like. DnDNext designers cry foul, saying designing towards goals is counter to the spirit of Gary
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 20:05
|
|
|
fatherdog posted:Design Goals:
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 20:23
|
|
|
fatherdog posted:Design Goals: lol
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 20:35
|
|
|
don't forget -grappling simulator
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 20:43
|
|
|
is there any game that has reasonable grappling rules? and not just due to lack of support I mean, is there a game where "I want to grab and wrestle with him" is a different choice from "I attack him" and the whole table doesn't just groan when you say it. Fate maybe? is it just a "block" action and/or an aspect in that system??? a million question marks trailing off forever??
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 20:58
|
|
|
My kickstarter for a grappling specific game firemages and floormats has ok grappling rules. You can rollplay a dragon born trained in Brazilian jujitsu. WITH NO ABILITY SCORES.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 21:06
|
|
|
I am wise and brave and strong and in a headlock
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 21:09
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Deadlands Discussion Mystic Mongol posted:More Deadlands Discussion Oh well, at least I have a new PbP Deadlands game to read - quote:Deadlands: The Towering Flame 
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 21:16
|
|
|
Ralp posted:is there any game that has reasonable grappling rules? and not just due to lack of support I mean, is there a game where "I want to grab and wrestle with him" is a different choice from "I attack him" and the whole table doesn't just groan when you say it. Grappling in squad-scale combat in an initiative-turn system results in the same awkwardness as hand-to-hand combat creates in an army-scale combat where you end up arbitrating rules w/r/t shooting, retreats, and charges in the midst of the separate hell-dimension of close quarters assaults. Wargames were firstly inspired by teaching tools used with regard for naval combat, resulting in progeny of my-turn-your-turn broadsides that break when presented concepts unique to dry land.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 21:37
|
|
|
LSTB posted:It's easier to define when "Acrobatics" can't be used and "Arcana" can, than it is to define where "Bird" doesn't apply and "Batman" does. It is easy to make systems where skill rolls have equal mechanical effect, and are not judged by the flavor of their text. Fixed-list-of-abilities is a valid design choice, but it's not a necessary one.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 21:39
|
|
|
Doc Hawkins posted:??? it affects rolls, which happen when two or more interesting alternatives are being considered, which affects ~the shared imagination space~ the bonus is meaningless. insofar as success versus failure is important there's no reason no to just put +5 in your favorite trait and use that for everything, but to add insult to injury success versus failure is not itself important because a roll ends up determining the emotional character of some flavor text but not the actual accomplishment or loss of any concrete goal. what's the difference between bird +5 and bird +4? nothing. i actually really like skills as individual mana pools/health bars - it's the same solution i've come up with (but not actually bothered to implement since i haven't been working on houseruling d&dlikes) for "why wouldn't i just use my +5 constantly" - because athletics 3 lore 1 means you can use athletics thrice and lore once, rather than that your athletics is forever better than your lore
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 21:46
|
|
|
4e has good grappling rules, although the numbers of "untrained" grapples are wonky my group's wod/mage houserules also have good grappling rules, in the sense that they have none at all, and you're just free to describe yourself wrestling rather than punching if you deal some damage with a brawl attack or w/e
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 21:48
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:the bonus is meaningless. insofar as success versus failure is important there's no reason no to just put +5 in your favorite trait and use that for everything, but to add insult to injury success versus failure is not itself important because a roll ends up determining the emotional character of some flavor text but not the actual accomplishment or loss of any concrete goal. what's the difference between bird +5 and bird +4? nothing. one thing i like about chuubo's btw is an effort to clearly define the differences between skill ratings and give examples of a skill at various levels, like the difference between long necked person 1 and long necked person 2 i still think it's a mistake that dr. moran is going with "miracle level equals your stat, highest miracle level wins" w/r/t magic powers though
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 21:49
|
|
|
what like "here are your X d12s for former bird, X d10s for batman, X d8s for the lucky hat" etc, and then refill the pools during the downtime? cuz that reminds me of fiasco
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 21:53
|
|
|
something like that. i don't know if i would even give the skills different "base" or "at will" values... it's more like each skill would have at-will, per encounter, and per-day uses, and the more invested you are in the skill the more encounter/per-day uses you have available this is hopping off an idea i had for making 3e-style multiclassing relevant in d&d. if you're a fighter 3/wizard 1, you effectively have a 3/3 Fighter pool and a 1/1 Wizard pool. doing dramatic stuff within a class costs 1 point, and you maybe regain 1 spent point after every encounter but all your points after a long rest
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 21:57
|
|
|
all grappling rules designed before affliction shirts are uniformly poo poo tho
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 21:58
|
|
|
Any news on NEXT? They've been quiet recently.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 22:14
|
|
|
fatherdog posted:Design Goals:
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 22:21
|
|
|
i debuted some rules for the duel arcane in last night's mage game based loosely on pokemon battles, time to write 'em up all formal like
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 22:29
|
|
|
I have come to the conclusion that, unless you are playing a storygame were players can declare poo poo that exists, there is no point to select your skills at character creation. Someone picks "climbing" because he expects that there are things to climb, and then he adventures in the Endlessly Flat Plains of Aathor. Or someone builds the most suave motherfucker and is thrown into the Tomb of Ugdar The Sort Tempered Who Is Also An Actual Bear. Skills, along with all other situational poo poo (damage vs. flumphs, affinity to avocados, etc) should be packaged with whatever constitutes an "adventure" for that system, and players can pick and choose what they like when they start it. That way you know what whatever is written on your character sheet will eventually be relevant, and you won't have to jump through hoops to convince the DM that Profession(wheelwright) can basically be used in any situation.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 23:30
|
|
|
Rexides posted:I have come to the conclusion that, unless you are playing a storygame were players can declare poo poo that exists, there is no point to select your skills at character creation. Someone picks "climbing" because he expects that there are things to climb, and then he adventures in the Endlessly Flat Plains of Aathor. Or someone builds the most suave motherfucker and is thrown into the Tomb of Ugdar The Sort Tempered Who Is Also An Actual Bear. Personally, I've always seen skill choices (whether write-ins or list form) as a way for the player to tell the GM what kind of adventure they want to experience. Then I try to adjust the adventure to match their expectations since, through proxy, I now know what kind of games they like. Then again, I'm the type who only makes very light plans because I'm lazy (they're more like outlines) and is quick to just make encounters on the spot (because I forget to prebuild them) so it fits with my (lazy) style. For those who plan more, I guess that doesn't work as well.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 23:39
|
|
|
Wow, "sperg" and "den" as pejoratives. I thought this thread was above that grognards.txt bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 23:50
|
|
|
there's two kinds of gms in this world: lazy people, and fascists
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 23:52
|
|
|
Attorney at Funk posted:there's two kinds of gms in this world: lazy people, and fascists That's true. It's never a good thing when the GM actually cares about the fluff on your sheet, if you wrote down "has a pretty girlfriend" expect to get her fridged.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 23:54
|
|
|
LSTB posted:That's true. It's never a good thing when the GM actually cares about the fluff on your sheet, if you wrote down "has a pretty girlfriend" expect to get her fridged. my favorite thing to do when I'm playing a game is to leave some aspect of my character totally blank and make the gm make something up for it
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 23:57
|
|
|
I'm a magic robot who killed my creator. who created me? good loving question. maybe it was almighty god. maybe it was urza planeswalker. maybe nobody will ever know. the important thing is it's not my loving problem anymore, mate
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 23:59
|
|
|
LSTB posted:That's true. It's never a good thing when the GM actually cares about the fluff on your sheet, if you wrote down "has a pretty girlfriend" expect to get her fridged. I know you're not talking about me, but just a concept and style I brought up. That said, I do want to say I probably wouldn't just have some npc important to someone's character randomly killed off to fill "dead air." Instead... Attorney at Funk posted:I'm a magic robot who killed my creator. who created me? good loving question. maybe it was almighty god. maybe it was urza planeswalker. maybe nobody will ever know. the important thing is it's not my loving problem anymore, mate I know you guys probably don't care, but I just felt like explaining that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 00:09
|
|
|
Covok posted:I know you're not talking about me, but just a concept and style I brought up. That said, I do want to say I probably wouldn't just have some npc important to someone's character randomly killed off to fill "dead air." Instead... I don't mean any one style, either. I mean, that's actually directly what stuff like Apocalypse World tells you to do, get people to name poo poo that's important to them, then wreck it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 00:33
|
|
|
LSTB posted:I don't mean any one style, either. I mean, that's actually directly what stuff like Apocalypse World tells you to do, get people to name poo poo that's important to them, then wreck it. You wreck it so they can protect it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 00:44
|
|
|
That's the thing that makes ars magica so compelling to me, you don't have to go on a goddamn adventure for the sake of it, you're doing it to avenge a slight or get some kind of advantage. Wrecking poo poo that belongs to the players is cool as hell.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 00:46
|
|
|
Attorney at Funk posted:my favorite thing to do when I'm playing a game is to leave some aspect of my character totally blank and make the gm make something up for it Attorney at Funk posted:I'm a magic robot who killed my creator. who created me? good loving question. maybe it was almighty god. maybe it was urza planeswalker. maybe nobody will ever know. the important thing is it's not my loving problem anymore, mate fuckin love it when players do this kinda thing, i always have fun with it
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 00:57
|
|
|
Rexides posted:I have come to the conclusion that, unless you are playing a storygame were players can declare poo poo that exists, there is no point to select your skills at character creation. Someone picks "climbing" because he expects that there are things to climb, and then he adventures in the Endlessly Flat Plains of Aathor. Or someone builds the most suave motherfucker and is thrown into the Tomb of Ugdar The Sort Tempered Who Is Also An Actual Bear. I have kind of a problem with skill systems in general because of this. Skills, especially in systems with one-roll resolution, and especially-especially in systems with binary resolution, and even worse in systems where the difference between trained and untrained characters are too large, really easily strip the choices the players get to make away from play and connect it to character creation instead. I think this can kind of work in a system where what you choose in character creation is more about telling the GM what kind of game you want and less about what you want to contribute to the team, but even for that I think there must be better systems than skills. That said, I don't really mind the idea that some of my abilities might only be relevant in some sessions, but I think that's largely because I prefer big campaigns where each player has a few different characters, so that just makes intel-gathering so you know who to bring into a part of the game.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 01:24
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:what's the difference between bird +5 and bird +4? nothing. That does seem like a significant problem, but one orthogonal to closed-or-open skill selection! Just remembered, Skills in The Mountain Witch are interesting: they're just things which you can always roll to attempt, instead of the GM being able to say "that's not something a average ronin would be able to productively attempt." (actual success and failure are dependent on player cooperation/betrayal, because that's the point of the game)
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 01:30
|
|
|
I think if you're gonna make a skill-less 4e, you should give everyone a seperate suite of powers for non-combat. Like the bard could have "Smooth Talk" and "Impromptu Performance", each would be a reasonable challenge to use against a creature of his tier's Will save. Give people powers that relate to their stats, so you don't have people who can't do poo poo because their class doesn't use Charisma. If you have Constitution, you can "Carouse", which is an important social skill and one that Conan is going to be good at. I mean, that's just what I'd do for something trying to be D&Dlike. Write-in skills are cool for something like Fate Accelerated Edition, which I'd run in that case to save me the trouble of long combats.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 01:38
|
|
|
Doc Hawkins posted:That does seem like a significant problem, but one orthogonal to closed-or-open skill selection! i wasn't complaining about the open-ended naming, i was complaining about the associated mechanics. now that you mention it, though, if they hadn't been so smitten with open-ended skill selection maybe they would've felt compelled to get off their asses and actually write rules for what a successful persuasion or lore roll or whatever actually goddamn does in nobilis, the difference between having Domain (Birds) 3 and Domain (Batman) 3 is eminently clear, as is the difference between having Domain (Birds) 3 and Domain (Birds) 4. there are cases in which the two traits are interchangeable, but they're logical cases in which you'd expect them to be. 13A just fails entirely at everything i've listed here
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 01:42
|
|
|
I really wanna play a diceless game. I bought the one RPGpundit wrote, its actually kinda cool.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 02:38
|
|
|
Ratpick posted:That's the first anything I've seen from Project Eternity and those Reputations on the sheet look like a pretty sweet idea and I want to put something like that in my elfgames. Project Eternity/Pillars of Eternity threatened to be a real letdown mechanically during the Kickstarter because pretty much every revealed class and feature was presented as being Like That One Thing From 3e You Remember, right down to that one class that's literally a psion and then everything they've shown since the KS ended is all "yeah so combat and classes are basically 4e, because it's a great fuckin system for tactical combat in a CRPG" if playing up the game's 3e influence during the Kickstarter let them take more money from grognards and then turn around and sell them a heavily 4e-influenced game, I'm all for that
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 02:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 14:24 |
|
|
LSTB posted:I really wanna play a diceless game. I bought the one RPGpundit wrote, its actually kinda cool. it's basically amber diceless so try that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 03:13
|
|