|
Yeah that sounds cool but it's not really what I was looking for but it's still worth a look.
|
# ? Jul 31, 2015 19:11 |
|
|
# ? May 25, 2024 15:12 |
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:You are coming across as incredibly insecure. If you haven't read the whole book - so that you see how this passage slots into the work as a whole - you are doing yourself a disservice. Get some context. Do you like hurting people?
|
# ? Jul 31, 2015 19:53 |
|
mycot posted:Do you like hurting people? Sorry, this isn't the Voight-Kampff testing thread, that's in another forum.
|
# ? Jul 31, 2015 20:03 |
|
TheLovablePlutonis posted:Ohhh that does sound pretty cool and I might try it... Although what I really want is a TRPG that is on the same "Real Robot" genre and related mechanics as Armored Core, Front Mission or hell, even Mechwarrior, although ever since Mekton (which was better played for Super Robot genre games any way) there weren't many of those. This might still be a little far afield but look up Lunar Reckoning 69. It's not complete as far as I know but it's been in a relatively playable form for a good while.
|
# ? Jul 31, 2015 20:23 |
|
Are there any traditional fantasy/D&D-type games that are specifically designed for or would work well with just 2 players+a DM? I know pretty much every edition of D&D ever has assumed 4 to 5 players, and I'd like something with a bit more crunch than Dungeon World.
|
# ? Jul 31, 2015 21:05 |
|
Wasn't sure if this belonged in Chat or Grogstxt. https://medium.com/kickstarter/total-party-kill-3898fb82b5fb
|
# ? Jul 31, 2015 21:14 |
|
Siivola posted:Racing is just as simple to gamify as violence, and I'd argue it also lends itself to better models of both reality and fiction. Tradgame violence hardly ever resembles the action movie spectacle, and many video games struggle as well. True about racing, though I would say that it shares about as much commonality with reality as game violence does. I spend most racing games doing escalating bits of cars violence to my opponents as I run them into divides and use their cars to help get me around corners. I really like the idea of gaming things other than violence. Where it hits the snag as I said was in being fun first of all, and second in not trivializing it. I have seen long screeds written about gaming companies doing it the wrong way, with Pathfinder and its numbers based romance in their adventure paths sticking out in my mind. People find non violent activities to be important, and so modeling it requires at least as much care as does modeling violence, but what is the right way to do that? Bioware style dialog trees are a new fun way to play a choose your own adventure, limited by needing to funnel you through the same set pieces regardless of your choices. Free-form is what people have been doing for forever when it comes to social interaction, and it works except when it doesn't, but it really isn't part of the game, it relies on the player and the game-master to be on the same page to get any results worth getting, and also necessitates player skill over all else. Skill rules tend toward a dry treatment of such things, the most mechanically consistent and by far most boring approach. Finally there are games like Fate where everything is combat, or more specifically, combat is the same as everything else, and here we hit the problem of whether everything should be modeled in the same way as combat. Does that trivialize violence or does it de-emphasize it as the only solution? I don't have answers, but violence, while a fun part of gaming, shouldn't be the end all of what it consists. Drama. Have we stripped all the drama from violence? I cant remember the last time an action movie had me tense about the fate of the hero or his or her loved one. Death in video games means a short bit of backtracking and in an RPG it generally means a resurection or a new character being rolled. I don't mean games should be all about PKing, but are we averse to drama as a society? Is that why we stick to no consequences violence and avoid political drama or relationship drama, is it all too awkward for us to engage with? Alternatively, is this just a symptom of escapist entertainment, not to engaged with beyond how it makes us feel in the moment and discarded at a whim as we get back to our lives? remusclaw fucked around with this message at 21:46 on Jul 31, 2015 |
# ? Jul 31, 2015 21:28 |
|
The idea that ALL MEDIA FOREVER involves a lot of violence because of crazy ol' Gygax and his wargames is pretty silly at best. Violence in a fictional setting can be and is pretty exciting - as the entire history of human beings telling stories goes. Before video games there were TV shows which were fine with using violence or the threat thereof to raise the stakes. Before that there were movies - hell, in 1903 The Great Train Robbery, grainy black and white with no sound, had an evil outlaw draw his gun up to shoot the audience. Are we going to claim books never had violence? That war has never been glorified in stories? How many mythological characters don't kill a dude? How many stories of heroism don't involve violence? This isn't to say all games forever need to be about peoples' lives in danger, but to rail that it happens at all is kinda out there. The problem with violence in tabletop games is that it's so often boring. But that's because for plenty of tabletop games everything is. It's all cold, passionless, and clinical. That's a hard one to fix when the only real conflict resolution that seems to exist is rolling some dice, but the neverending push for "immersive" games that abandon emotion for trying to be as "realistic" as possible sure as hell doesn't help. What sucks out the fun of throwing a fireball faster then using that space to explain the exact dimensions of it and telling players to bring out a ruler?
|
# ? Jul 31, 2015 21:51 |
|
remusclaw posted:True about racing, though I would say that it shares about as much commonality with reality as game violence does. I spend most racing games doing escalating bits of cars violence to my opponents as I run them into divides and use their cars to help get me around corners. Nah, we just like blowing poo poo up sometimes and like engaging works other times. poo poo don't always have to be one way or the other. If you want a thought engaging thing, seek an indie title. Why? Because big titles seek the lowest common denominator since that maximizes profit. That and the average person is just looking for a diversion.
|
# ? Jul 31, 2015 21:52 |
|
ProfessorCirno posted:The idea that ALL MEDIA FOREVER involves a lot of violence because of crazy ol' Gygax and his wargames is pretty silly at best. Violence in a fictional setting can be and is pretty exciting - as the entire history of human beings telling stories goes. Before video games there were TV shows which were fine with using violence or the threat thereof to raise the stakes. Before that there were movies - hell, in 1903 The Great Train Robbery, grainy black and white with no sound, had an evil outlaw draw his gun up to shoot the audience. Are we going to claim books never had violence? That war has never been glorified in stories? How many mythological characters don't kill a dude? How many stories of heroism don't involve violence? I honestly don't blame anything on Gygax, he just published a game before other people did. His big win was in being first. That game, OD&D is neither good in its rules, writing, or presentation, but it gets a pass because it is first. Violence is the history of human kind, it is inherently dramatic because it is, by the traditional view of history, the reason for why things change. Escapism takes violence and removes its impact, making it all sound and fury signifying nothing. But gently caress, escapism is fun and we all need it sometimes, I just want to see some non violent escapism gamed in a fun way. Where is His Girl Friday the rpg, or The West Wing? remusclaw fucked around with this message at 22:10 on Jul 31, 2015 |
# ? Jul 31, 2015 22:05 |
|
ProfessorCirno posted:The idea that ALL MEDIA FOREVER involves a lot of violence because of crazy ol' Gygax and his wargames is pretty silly at best. Violence in a fictional setting can be and is pretty exciting - as the entire history of human beings telling stories goes. Before video games there were TV shows which were fine with using violence or the threat thereof to raise the stakes. Before that there were movies - hell, in 1903 The Great Train Robbery, grainy black and white with no sound, had an evil outlaw draw his gun up to shoot the audience. Are we going to claim books never had violence? That war has never been glorified in stories? How many mythological characters don't kill a dude? How many stories of heroism don't involve violence? If nothing else these violent board games are probably a nicer alternative to public hangings and gladiator matches.
|
# ? Jul 31, 2015 22:16 |
|
dwarf74 posted:Wasn't sure if this belonged in Chat or Grogstxt. quote:“But if the game’s not hard, it’s not fun, and the rewards are cheapened.”
|
# ? Jul 31, 2015 22:17 |
|
mycot posted:If nothing else these violent board games are probably a nicer alternative to public hangings Agreed. quote:gladiator matches loving no.
|
# ? Jul 31, 2015 22:17 |
|
Gonna write an Aaron Sorkin based TTRPG, except everyone is dragon people and robots and poo poo. Nice roll with your witty remark. +2 power bonus to diplomacy with your ex-girlfriend/producer until the end of the encounter. Ooh, scathing take down. You have advantage against millenials and kobolds.
|
# ? Jul 31, 2015 22:17 |
|
Guilty Spork posted:Nah, games don't have to be "hard" to be fun, least of all games that can tell a good story. Especially because the average gamer's definition of hard tends to be "didn't look around the room 50 times? You die! No Save. gently caress you, Tom!"
|
# ? Jul 31, 2015 22:20 |
|
Mecha Gojira posted:Gonna write an Aaron Sorkin based TTRPG, except everyone is dragon people and robots and poo poo. I know you're joking, but applying D20 language kills it for me. This of course hits the problem, not insurmountable I hope, of how do you make it fun.
|
# ? Jul 31, 2015 22:21 |
|
For a clever little take on violence in society, read The Seventh Victim by Robert Sheckley. You won't be disappointed.
|
# ? Jul 31, 2015 22:21 |
|
Edit: Oh poo poo you guys posted a whole page when I was writing this thing.paradoxGentleman posted:That being said, that is not exactly true. Off the top of my head, I can think of no less than three games that don't necessarily expect your character to lose life and limb, and I am not the most knowledgeable person on the subject here. It's nice to have these things, yes. And I'm a big dumb for not actually playing any of these games. (Especially since I even own a bunch.) Maybe the real windmill that I'm trying to tilt at is how few things characters really have that make an actual game difference, aside from their hit points. To manage, y'know? Used to be a fighter had a whole drat castle to run, and his cleric buddy had a congregation, and that meant something because if you didn't take care of them when the GM sent the orcs into town, you'd have to hire people to go into that dungeon you found. Even money meant something because you'd have to spend it on people to get poo poo done. Or something, I don't actually have a clue how old-rear end D&D worked. But you get what I'm getting at, right?
|
# ? Jul 31, 2015 22:22 |
|
mycot posted:If nothing else these violent board games are probably a nicer alternative to public hangings and gladiator matches. Little Wars, by H.G. Wells, pacifist and wargamer posted:And if I might for a moment trumpet! How much better is this amiable miniature than the Real Thing! Here is a homeopathic remedy for the imaginative strategist. Here is the premeditation, the thrill, the strain of accumulating victory or disaster—and no smashed nor sanguinary bodies, no shattered fine buildings nor devastated country sides, no petty cruelties, none of that awful universal boredom and embitterment, that tiresome delay or stoppage or embarrassment of every gracious, bold, sweet, and charming thing, that we who are old enough to remember a real modern war know to be the reality of belligerence...My game is just as good as their game, and saner by reason of its size. So...to what extent can we say that applies to TTRPGs along the D&D line, and what aspects make it not apply, and would those problematic aspects be exclusive to D&D patterned games or are they endemic to other genres and forms? I expect a 500 word theme on this by the end of next Davin Valkri fucked around with this message at 22:25 on Jul 31, 2015 |
# ? Jul 31, 2015 22:23 |
|
TheLovablePlutonis posted:Agreed. Okay you're right, gladiators own.
|
# ? Jul 31, 2015 22:23 |
|
mycot posted:Okay you're right, gladiators own. And they too were playing a game of violence that only rarely truly resembled the real thing. They were athletes who endorsed products, made stacks of money, fought mostly to first blood, and got better medical care than the masses. Death matches being the rare and heavily promoted exception to the rule.
|
# ? Jul 31, 2015 22:27 |
|
remusclaw posted:And they too were playing a game of violence that only rarely truly resembled the real thing. They were athletes who endorsed products, made stacks of money, fought mostly to first blood, and got better medical care than the masses. Death matches being the rare and heavily promoted exception to the rule. I knew all of that, but hitting each other with swords man. That's kinda violent. Confrontational, even.
|
# ? Jul 31, 2015 22:29 |
|
Siivola posted:Edit: Oh poo poo you guys posted a whole page when I was writing this thing. Old rear end D&D worked however your local group played it. Only Gygax and friends ever played like Gygax and friends because the game was poorly written to the point where everyone pretty much built their own game out of the cool ideas the text seemed to imply. This kind of thing ultimately resulted in things like Arduin and Runequest.
|
# ? Jul 31, 2015 22:30 |
|
ProfessorCirno posted:The idea that ALL MEDIA FOREVER involves a lot of violence because of crazy ol' Gygax and his wargames is pretty silly at best.
|
# ? Jul 31, 2015 22:31 |
|
remusclaw posted:And they too were playing a game of violence that only rarely truly resembled the real thing. They were athletes who endorsed products, made stacks of money, fought mostly to first blood, and got better medical care than the masses. Death matches being the rare and heavily promoted exception to the rule. MMA with swords.
|
# ? Jul 31, 2015 22:31 |
|
I don't want to say Miyamoto ruined ALL MEDIA FOREVER (although man I could use a little less platform jumping in my ALL MEDIA FOREVER too) but considering how the next big Nintendo game going Statesways seems to be Mario: Maker Edition and nobody bats an eye, his ghost kinda haunts the hobby pretty bad.
|
# ? Jul 31, 2015 22:33 |
Was gladiatorial combat a work or shoot?
|
|
# ? Jul 31, 2015 22:34 |
|
TheLovablePlutonis posted:I don't want to say Miyamoto ruined ALL MEDIA FOREVER (although man I could use a little less platform jumping in my ALL MEDIA FOREVER too) but considering how the next big Nintendo game going Statesways seems to be Mario: Maker Edition and nobody bats an eye, his ghost kinda haunts the hobby pretty bad.
|
# ? Jul 31, 2015 22:35 |
|
PublicOpinion posted:Was gladiatorial combat a work or shoot? Probably both at various times. Story was Pro Wrestling was a shoot once upon a time, but money talks and drama sells more than hour long headlocks. E: Sports are still drama and not escapism, you can tell because of how seriously people take it, and how often it leads to real life violence. remusclaw fucked around with this message at 22:38 on Jul 31, 2015 |
# ? Jul 31, 2015 22:36 |
|
PublicOpinion posted:Was gladiatorial combat a work or shoot? Worked Shoot, obviously.
|
# ? Jul 31, 2015 22:37 |
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Are there any traditional fantasy/D&D-type games that are specifically designed for or would work well with just 2 players+a DM? I know pretty much every edition of D&D ever has assumed 4 to 5 players, and I'd like something with a bit more crunch than Dungeon World. Kevin Crawford's Scarlet Heroes is an OSR hack specifically designed to run a trad fantasy RPG with only 1 player and 1 GM, and it prob wouldn't be difficult to run it 2-player with some modification.
|
# ? Jul 31, 2015 22:48 |
|
Simian_Prime posted:Kevin Crawford's Scarlet Heroes is an OSR hack specifically designed to run a trad fantasy RPG with only 1 player and 1 GM, and it prob wouldn't be difficult to run it 2-player with some modification. IIRC, he even has rules for including more players in the book.
|
# ? Jul 31, 2015 23:13 |
|
A bit belatedly to the E.Y.E Divine Cybermancy chat, a friend of mine really, really loved that game--loved the way it played, loved the world and story, all of it. He found out it was based on an RPG (of sorts) and contacted the company to offer to translate it, for free. (He's Quebecois and fluent in French) They refused--it's apparently their own personal homebrew project that's been ongoing forever and they just occasionally make games for it, but don't want the full thing out there for people (especially foreigners) to get their dirty fingers all over and go making demands on how their world would develop. So it's...a thing. It's a little bit like STALKER in being a weird gaming artifact from a company that works outside the usual game development cultures we encounter but STALKER is dear to my heart and EYE was something I could never finish.
|
# ? Aug 1, 2015 00:51 |
|
STALKER is legit great (and the tabletop rpg based on Roadside Picnic is also great) Sorry EYE Divine Cybermancy fans, it's just an amazingly boring game
|
# ? Aug 1, 2015 01:18 |
|
PublicOpinion posted:Was gladiatorial combat a work or shoot? Historically? Both, more or less.
|
# ? Aug 4, 2015 05:36 |
|
|
# ? May 25, 2024 15:12 |
|
August here!
|
# ? Aug 4, 2015 05:44 |