|
Quarex posted:I like RPGs Hello RPG buddy I too like RPGs. We should be friends. 
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 23:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 02:27 |
|
|
why isnt their a thread for dice master its good as hell and everyone loves it
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 23:21
|
|
Tulul posted:So I have been kicking around a game based on Southern Bastards and Justified; a game about small, hosed-up southern towns, sort of a new-Western thing. I live in the near-South and I've spent some time in the methier parts of Tennessee, so I'm not entirely bereft of personal inspiration, but I'm looking for more media to consume for ideas. Any good suggestions? I'd recommend taking a look at True Detective, it's a bit more Southern Gothic, but I think it'd be a useful source of inspiration. Plus, it's a fantastic show.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 23:26
|
|
|
Tulul posted:So I have been kicking around a game based on Southern Bastards and Justified; a game about small, hosed-up southern towns, sort of a new-Western thing. I live in the near-South and I've spent some time in the methier parts of Tennessee, so I'm not entirely bereft of personal inspiration, but I'm looking for more media to consume for ideas. Any good suggestions? Dogs in the Vineyard is probably the game you want. It's certainly worth looking at.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 23:32
|
|
|
I would make a dice master thread myself but the android app doesnt let you make new threads for some reason. I pulled gobby today though so I am very happy with my dice masters plans
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 23:35
|
|
|
fez_machine posted:Dude, I think you're being asked about Stonewall, but that's '69 so who knows. Stonewall's sorta out of frame but the aftermath should be considered since we're going with a timey-wimey 70s here. By the same token, Harvey Milk. He goes with the generic "disco is bad lol" that ignores that there's a pretty strong argument that the death of disco was a cover for the racist, sexist and homophobic right wing resurgence of the late 70s and early 80s (for reference ISTR when advertising its all-rock lineup in the early 80s MTV proudly proclaimed it was "taking music back for the white man"). And I'm not sure there's too much mention of the women's and gay liberation movements. Like, in a game that's oozing with sexuality you gotta at least pay lip service to the rougher time some people have had with it; even in an idealized cool-cat 70s I would probably not be able to hold hands with another guy (because any movie that showed that would be censored)  Seriously though, Bucnasti seems like he has his head screwed on so that's why I'm bringing this up, I'm trying really hard not to be an rear end in a top hat because I'm bad at being polite!!!!
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 23:39
|
|
|
SageNytell posted:The concept I'm working with in the 13th Age game I'm running (which has not yet been tested) is that players magical items are empowered because they belong to those people, they have no innate power. Any sword used by Annegret the Iron Lady is preternaturally sharp and thirsts for the heads of the Fey, but if you were to ask a random person in the world they would say that the sword itself has power. Because she once wielded a blade of Cold Iron, all swords she wields bite the flesh of the fey folk as though they were cold iron. I don't think anybody else responded to this, but it is a cool idea!
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 23:40
|
|
|
Meinberg posted:I'd recommend taking a look at True Detective, it's a bit more Southern Gothic, but I think it'd be a useful source of inspiration. Plus, it's a fantastic show. I keep meaning to watch True Detective, I'll have to do that. Arivia posted:Dogs in the Vineyard is probably the game you want. It's certainly worth looking at. DitV isn't bad (or, wasn't bad, at least), but it has a totally different feel than what I'm aiming for.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 00:19
|
|
|
TheLovablePlutonis posted:September contest: convince me on how D&D is bad with a 1000+ word post without using the following buzzwords: Design, Caster supremacy, math, dice, grog and its variations (nerd, dweeb), simulationism, magic, broken and issues. Whoever makes the first one to convince me gets either Plat or an Avatar certificate. It's a bad game because it is impossible to play unless you've played before. The sheer amount of rules one needs to know and understand to run a game of Dungeons and Dragons are difficult to learn from simply reading the book, and even if you can glean knowledge out of the naturalistic/Gygaxian language these books have, it's impossible to understand how the different rules interact without play experience. In any game of D&D, one player, the Dungeon Master or DM, must adjudicate every rule, that is, the whole rulebook. The responsibility of one player to learn hundreds of pages of complicated rule is a barrier to play, one that actively works against intended gameplay even once that barrier has been crossed. Let's take two examples of how this makes play unpleasant or impossible. First, how does a new DM create encounters for the PCs to fight? He can't, not really. The CR system of rating what monsters are appropriate at what level is inadequate, failing to reveal how many monsters are a match for particular party sizes, or what monsters are dangerous to what kind of character, among other problems. For instance, the new Monster Manual has a creature called an Intellect Devourer. This creature can instantly kill a character with low Intelligence in two turns. The creature has a CR of 2, which indicates that it's fit for level 2 characters, most of whom will have low Intelligence. A first time game runner could include this creature in an encounter and accidentally kill almost the entire party, simply by not understanding how the creature's brain eating rules interact with the ability save system. The DM role requires vast knowledge of the rules. Of course, for a first-time DM to actually have all these rules memorized is rare. Most first-time DMs will have very few rules memorized. Therefore, play will constantly be interrupted by the DM looking through his large textbook looking for the rules to a given situation. This actively harms the theme of the game, that is, high fantasy action. If you've seen the Regular Show episode "But I Have the Receipt", you'll probably understand what I'm talking about. Old D&D (I suppose up to AD&D second edition didn't used to be like this. The preponderance of modules allowed you to start out playing like a scenario in a boardgame. The module books tell the DM what to do and what to roll, and that's that. Once you learned the rules you could become more creative. However, good modules were few and far between, and are even more rare today. Even for 4e, there's really only one module that anyone regards with fondness. The main counterargument here would be that once you have learned the game, many of these problems go away. Well, sure. There'll still be a lot of rule references, but otherwise it's a coherent experience. However, there are many games that don't have these problems. Take nWoD. There's really only one rule: if a character wants to do something, it adds the relevant numbers on its character sheet together, takes that many probability determination units and rolls them. If an eight or higher comes up, it succeeds! The rest of the rules simply explain what numbers you might include and provides examples of different rolls. Once you understand the different numbers, you literally know all there is to the game, no expertise required. The Apocalypse World games take a similar approach. Boardgames avoid the D&D Problem by spreading the responsibility for rule knowledge around. People playing, say, Battlestar Galactica together can teach each other how to play the game, and they won't instantly lose for not immediately understanding the rules. However, the worst thing about D&D is that it's killing the hobby. D&D's weird, unintuitive rules have locked it into a didactic model of play. One player wields a textbook that he is already trained in using to teach other people how to play the game. As long as D&D is the main, introductory roleplaying game, nobody can start playing RPGs unless they know someone else who already understands Dungeons and Dragons. The roleplaying community, then, becomes more and more insular. Ever wonder why D&D is much less popular now than in the eighties, despite the greater financial investment in it? That's why. pospysyl fucked around with this message at 00:32 on Sep 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 00:27
|
|
|
Tulul posted:So I have been kicking around a game based on Southern Bastards and Justified; a game about small, hosed-up southern towns, sort of a new-Western thing. I live in the near-South and I've spent some time in the methier parts of Tennessee, so I'm not entirely bereft of personal inspiration, but I'm looking for more media to consume for ideas. Any good suggestions? True Detective is probably a good thing to look at. E: Late to this party.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 00:36
|
|
|
Tulul posted:So I have been kicking around a game based on Southern Bastards and Justified; a game about small, hosed-up southern towns, sort of a new-Western thing. I live in the near-South and I've spent some time in the methier parts of Tennessee, so I'm not entirely bereft of personal inspiration, but I'm looking for more media to consume for ideas. Any good suggestions? Not the same region, but the show Longmire might help.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 00:39
|
|
|
pospysyl posted:It's a bad game because it is impossible to play unless you've played before. The sheer amount of rules one needs to know and understand to run a game of Dungeons and Dragons are difficult to learn from simply reading the book, and even if you can glean knowledge out of the naturalistic/Gygaxian language these books have, it's impossible to understand how the different rules interact without play experience. In any game of D&D, one player, the Dungeon Master or DM, must adjudicate every rule, that is, the whole rulebook. The responsibility of one player to learn hundreds of pages of complicated rule is a barrier to play, one that actively works against intended gameplay even once that barrier has been crossed. ty
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 00:53
|
|
|
I already wrote over 100,000 words on Pathfinder, I think I already made a decent case for it that I can refer back to forever. And to anybody that might point out D&D is a different game: you're adorable. (Though these days I feel way more mellow about Pathfinder than when I wrote that. I was so cranky!)
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 00:59
|
|
|
Alien Rope Burn posted:I already wrote over 100,000 words on Pathfinder, I think I already made a decent case for it that I can refer back to forever. And to anybody that might point out D&D is a different game: you're adorable. You were but you weren't totally wrong. Like you had valid points even if a lot of them are ignorable/personally fine/whatever. And I say this as a person with a shelf and a half of Pathfinder stuff and running 3 Pathfinder games.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 01:01
|
|
|
Well it seems the contest is over. Despite the fact that I am not completely convinced, and found some minor flaws on pospysyl's argument, the fact that he actually bothered to write that many words and indeed had many fine points makes me feel obligated to at least compensate him for his time. Bolding and underscore is mine.pospysyl posted:It's a bad game because it is impossible to play unless you've played before Not true! 3.5 was my first system, and the many D&D systems were the first ones of many players around the world, and I am sure some goons can attest to that fact. The sheer amount of rules one needs to know and understand to run a game of Dungeons and Dragons are difficult to learn from simply reading the book Depends on the person reading., and even if you can glean knowledge out of the naturalistic/Gygaxian language these books have Ah, I knew I forgot to add Gygaxian Naturalism to the forbidden buzzwords. Well, it can't be helped., it's impossible to understand how the different rules interact without play experience Is it really? I do admit, though. The books lack examples of application of rules that appear on another games, so kudos to you.. In any game of D&D, one player, the Dungeon Master or DM, must adjudicate every rule, that is, the whole rulebook. True. The responsibility of one player to learn hundreds of pages of complicated rule is a barrier to play, one that actively works against intended gameplay even once that barrier has been crossed. True as well. Unfortunately it's true that GMing is the burden placed on experienced players. Still, it doesn't automatically make D&D completely newbie-unfriendly. In any case, thanks for those who participated instead of pebbling my poor personage with insults or low-effort trolling. pospysyl, if you have steam, add me here so I can present you with your av cert or plat, whichever you prefer. Alien Rope Burn posted:I already wrote over 100,000 words on Pathfinder, I think I already made a decent case for it that I can refer back to forever. And to anybody that might point out D&D is a different game: you're adorable. I don't particularly care, unfortunately.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 01:12
|
|
TheLovablePlutonis posted:Well it seems the contest is over. Despite the fact that I am not completely convinced, and found some minor flaws on pospysyl's argument, the fact that he actually bothered to write that many words and indeed had many fine points makes me feel obligated to at least compensate him for his time. Bolding and underscore is mine. Might as well post what I finished of Part II, then, and congratulations to pospysyl: Drearily we to the fourth matter come, Once again in classical realm abide, For there is the case of a missing kind Which we in the manner of monks Cadfael, Or noble William of Baskerville, Must at once apply Aristotle’s way, Euclid’s manners, Pythagoras’s charm. Before discussed we the matter of the Kinds. Brutish, bookish, and God-bothering. Among these can we see like to our own Classes of society, noble and not, Barring the artisanal class, except such As are crooked and wicked, roguish types. Are we to believe that serf and villein, Peon and freeman, all are knaves deep down? What vileness! What blasphemy! Alack! Such disgust as fills me would slay a horse, Crush an oliphaunt, bring angels to tears. Verily, I have lost the ability to be, And needs must append warnings for the frail. Fifthly, as the apex approaches closely, We come at last to lucre’s enduring hold. Must I cite the Holy Writ as though I Were back in university, raising hell Among Oxford’s assorted bars and loose folk? I am twenty years out from Art studies, And only slightly less Theology. Suffice it to say, dishonest wealth ne’er Serves better than for the purpose given By Our Lord Christ Jesus, for befriending. And yet consider the game’s ken of wealth. Assuredly it is gathered yes, But for what? For hoarding? E’en followers Of the schisms of Mohammed, Ali, Even they know better than the miserly Ends which this game presents as sanctity. “Give up all ye have, and ye shall have more In Heaven,” the Savior said to all we. Not for the players, content in wurmish Dreams and fantasies of pools of silver, Rivers of gold, oceans of diamonds. Ach!
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 01:16
|
|
|
Arivia posted:You were but you weren't totally wrong. Like you had valid points even if a lot of them are ignorable/personally fine/whatever. And I say this as a person with a shelf and a half of Pathfinder stuff and running 3 Pathfinder games. I'm sure if I did Rise of the Runelords the bile would come right back like it never went away, but I feel like I spent most of what I had to say. TheLovablePlutonis posted:I don't particularly care, unfortunately. It's not particularly unfortunate. I'm cool.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 01:19
|
|
|
Alien Rope Burn posted:I'm sure if I did Rise of the Runelords the bile would come right back like it never went away, but I feel like I spent most of what I had to say. Oh, no, there's plenty more in Runelords. Even if they cut out the part about one ogrekin loving the vestigial twin in his mentally disabled brother's side.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 01:28
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 01:45
|
|
|
Arivia posted:Oh, no, there's plenty more in Runelords. Even if they cut out the part about one ogrekin loving the vestigial twin in his mentally disabled brother's side. The aristocrats?
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 01:49
|
|
|
Arivia posted:Oh, no, there's plenty more in Runelords. Even if they cut out the part about one ogrekin loving the vestigial twin in his mentally disabled brother's side. Oh, I just meant Pathfinder in general, Runelords is another ball of knots. I remember posting some of that cut material to g.txt. I understand there's more nonsense like that but I've only read through the first two acts.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 01:57
|
|
|
Are there any Ravenloft enthusiasts here in TG? I'm interested in doing a huge effortpost in Traditional Games about Ravenloft, since I don't think there's a thread at present about it, but I want to gauge interest in such a thing before I write a whole lot.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 01:59
|
|
|
Alien Rope Burn posted:I'm sure if I did Rise of the Runelords the bile would come right back like it never went away, but I feel like I spent most of what I had to say. Rise of the Runelords scenario card "Brigandoom!" posted:The Sczarni, notorious thieving wanderers, have long run con games around Sandpoint, but under the leadership of Jubrayl Vhiski, they've become much more ambitions - and dangerous. Someone needs to put an end to their brigandry before more than coins and livestock are lost! One of the other players pointed out that this was pretty much an early scene from Schindler's List, with the players as sonderkommados.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 01:59
|
|
|
A list of RPGs that have handled the Roma in a way that isn't even vaguely racist: e: Laziest stereotype award has to go to Dragonmech, though quote:Hypsies: The hypsies are a tribe of halfling traders and performers. Each hypsy band is a noisy, colorful wagon train that brings excitement wherever it goes. Hypsies travel with all manner of exotic creatures, including tamed beasts and enslaved or charmed monstrous humanoids. Individual families specialize in unusual skills - acrobatics, fire-eating, animal handling, knife-throwing - and they put on shows wherever they go. Canny hypsy traders personify caveat emptor, for they barter endlessly for the best deal and are known to pass magic items as real ones. "hypsy" Tulul fucked around with this message at 02:11 on Sep 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 02:07
|
|
|
Arivia posted:Oh, no, there's plenty more in Runelords. Even if they cut out the part about one ogrekin loving the vestigial twin in his mentally disabled brother's side. Well now I'm actually glad the group I was in fell apart before we got a quarter of the way into this. Didn't expect that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 02:19
|
|
|
FMguru posted:I played the first scenario of the ROTR card game module, and the starting mission is an effort to fight and kill members of the band of ethnic not-gypsies because they were suspected of stealing livestock and (gasp!) coins. What's unfortunate is that the Pathfinder material has tried for a more nuanced view at times, but ends up short of the mark. The Sczarni are not actually the ethnicity (those are the Varisians), but an organization comprised of Varisians and the text in Pathfinder mentions that most Varisians are not thieving swindlers and get unfairly labeled so due to the actions of the former. Unfortunately from what I have seen, more than a few Pathfinder material focus quite a bit on the Sczarni when it comes to Varisian characters popping up in the RPG; so even if you take the whole "it's the fault of this one organization, not the ethnicity" thing, that's not always the impression the work shows. Libertad! fucked around with this message at 03:24 on Sep 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 03:15
|
|
|
Gao posted:Well now I'm actually glad the group I was in fell apart before we got a quarter of the way into this. Didn't expect that. It's not in the printed material, luckily. The final version saves the explicit incest for a succubi dominatrix and her half-fiend submissive daughters.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 03:16
|
|
|
Black Numenorean posted:Are there any Ravenloft enthusiasts here in TG? I'm interested in doing a huge effortpost in Traditional Games about Ravenloft, since I don't think there's a thread at present about it, but I want to gauge interest in such a thing before I write a whole lot. Yo i'm a big fan
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 03:22
|
|
|
Black Numenorean posted:Are there any Ravenloft enthusiasts here in TG? I'm interested in doing a huge effortpost in Traditional Games about Ravenloft, since I don't think there's a thread at present about it, but I want to gauge interest in such a thing before I write a whole lot.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 03:22
|
|
|
Evil Mastermind posted:Hello RPG buddy I too like RPGs. We should be friends. I have pretty much had fun at some point with every game or game system I have played. Except Villains & Vigilantes but we do not talk about that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 03:48
|
|
|
Good friends can make even the worst RPGs fun.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 03:50
|
|
|
NorgLyle posted:I was a huge Ravenloft fan back in the 2nd edition days. I even liked the Masque of the Red Death Gothic Earth campaign setting which apparently makes me some kind of gaming unicorn. I generally cut 90s era D&D a lot of slack whenever it tried to be less like D&D, though; my favorite campaign setting is Spelljammer, for Christ's sake. gently caress yeah, Spelljam erryday
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 03:54
|
|
|
Galaga Galaxian posted:Good friends can make even the worst RPGs fun. I still want to check out Hybrid or the World of Synnibarr. Unfortunately neither seem to be for sale as PDFs online, and in the latter case I'm not so keen to spend $25 used on a crappy RPG from Amazon.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 03:55
|
|
|
I don't think Hybrid counts. There's no game there, just madness.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 04:00
|
|
|
Quarex posted:
I enjoyed my time with V&V. Where fun has eluded me was Shadowrun, every one of the two Shadowrun games I've been in where absolute crap. Come to think of it, Mechwarrior wasn't much fun either. So I guess I'll just blame FASA.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 04:02
|
|
|
PublicOpinion posted:I don't think Hybrid counts. There's no game there, just madness.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 04:04
|
|
|
Davin Valkri posted:Actually, Gradenko, I think you're pretty uniquely suited to give him an answer (assuming he's asking in good faith, which he, well, might not be). You can draw comparisons to stuff like War in the Pacific and War in the East, which are also hypercomplex games whose subsystems can spectacularly self-destruct and whose fan base is pretty similar. Draw comparisons between things like WitP's ahistorically ineffective mines, WitE's non upgrading rifle squads, and D&D 5e's encounter design flaws, and the like. I actually find it somewhat different because while the wargame-grognard crowd often rejects abstraction as dumbing down the game, it seems that 4E was disliked because it spelled everything out in stark, gamified terms. NEXT is being given a pass because it's seen as a return to the long-winded, "natural language" abstraction of OD&D, but not so much that grogs like NEXT but more that they see it as a validation of their dislike of 4E's straightforwardness. The RPG-grogs like abstraction because it lets them gussy up the flaws of the game as tradition and obfuscates all of the systems that are destined to blow up.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 04:47
|
|
|
Libertad! posted:What's unfortunate is that the Pathfinder material has tried for a more nuanced view at times, but ends up short of the mark. Part of it comes from them farming out their stuff to freelancers who have very different ways of doing things. Jade Regent 
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 06:18
|
|
|
Forums Terrorist posted:even in an idealized cool-cat 70s I would probably not be able to hold hands with another guy (because any movie that showed that would be censored) Holy poo poo, whatever your other points are, this is straight up ignorant. I don't know how old you are but the 70s were one of the least censored times in American history. In the 80s Reagan/Bush brought the religious right together to start crying like bitches about how awfully free everyone was, and that survives today in our corporate fear to push the envelope. But the 70s? The birth of LGBT genres? I will educate a little. You might have heard of La Cage Aux Folles, aka The Birdcage - yes, that The Birdcage that was remade with Robin Williams and Nathan Lane. Two gay men, one with a son. That's the "way the gently caress out there/slice of life" gay comedy, which "Will and Grace" is a descendant of. Then there's Pink Flamingos and Female Trouble. Motherfucking John Waters. Gay camp. Less likely to be familiar to you is Rainer Fassbinder, whose movies were often about social misfits blowing up their own lives and were avant-garde and pornographic. Those are, broadly, the gay genres that were born in the 70s. They are about bizarre, larger-than-life people who are also sensitive and relatable and maybe just in a crazy situation. Just like Rolling Thunder or Dawn of the Dead. They push the envelope both in how unique they are and how human they are. If that's not the 70s to you, go home. Watch these movies. And also some Hal Ashby, everybody should watch Hal Ashby. (Especially Coming Home.) Learn how movies today are about silly sociopath "hardasses" by experiencing the difference instead of just saying so. As far as censorship, Sunday Bloody Sunday is about an upper middle class couple, man and woman, who are both loving the same dude. And Last Tango in Paris had Marlon Brando shoving a stick of butter up a teenage girl's rear end, Jesus Christ. It's NOW - today - that censorship is rearing it's ball-gagged, latex-masked face in the worst way in American history since the 1930 Hayes Code and Joseph McCarthy. Chew on that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 07:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 02:27 |
|
|
LightWarden posted:Part of it comes from them farming out their stuff to freelancers who have very different ways of doing things. Yeah, the inevitable consequence of the supplement train is that there's going to be regrettable things published. It'll always happen to a large game line. On the other hand, Jade Regent was a project dreamed up and led by James Jacobs, even if he didn't do all the scribing - and he's Pathfinder's Creative Director. Really, Jacobs has put out a lot of  quotes and material, so i doesn't seem likely to be that it's just problematic freelancers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 07:40
|
|