|
Plutonis posted:TL: "board games become bolder and become 'board games'" I'm kind of curious what the headline is actually trying to drive at since it's a pretty goofy statement otherwise.
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 00:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 08:30 |
|
|
hyphz posted:It took a while for my group playing Curse of the Crimson Throne to stop thinking about how to actually treat a disease or overthrow a corrupt monarch rather than just going with the flow and counting on finding the answers to everything at the bottom of a dungeon. That might be just refusal to accept genre but it’s also refusal to accept ludonarrative dissonance. As someone who went through CotCT this is 100% what me and half the party was doing and then gave up on trying. The problem you're encountering is that the adventure promises of a narrative and genre of underground agents working against a monarch, vigilantes showing up and investigating a disease thats spreading. Everyone bought into the narrative, the problem was that the game mechanics decides to shove you off that narrative to go into a dungeon crawl.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 00:59
|
|
|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:I think there's room for both games with sweeping narratives and the PCs at the center of it all, and games about being treasure hunters desperately searching dungeons for valuables, but maybe they don't need to be the same game.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 01:29
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:I'm kind of curious what the headline is actually trying to drive at since it's a pretty goofy statement otherwise. Gratuitous English means something is trendy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 01:33
|
|
|
Plutonis posted:Gratuitous English means something is trendy. that's actually pretty funny.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 02:20
|
|
|
Alien Rope Burn posted:It may be possible to have fun with imperfect games. Just throwin' that out there. You can, you just shouldn't be allowed to.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 03:29
|
|
|
Bedlamdan posted:You can, you just shouldn't be allowed to. The more reasonable version: You can, but you shouldn't be expected to. The game is there for the benefit of its players, not the other way around. That seems to be the core grognard fallacy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 03:49
|
|
|
I think Dungeon World is kind of unfairly maligned a lot because it’s trying to be better but still randomly and dumbly has a bunch of sacred cows. Like, when it first came out it was a breath of fresh air because it did D&D about as good as 4e but in the opposite direction, but with a similar level of warts and cruft. I feel like cause it was trying to be less poo poo than, say, Pathfinder it gets a harsher judgement. When really, if we’re buying into the “good GM” silliness it’s way easier to fix than most anything I can think of. Still not great and I think the hobby should be better than this, but in a world where there’s 2e Pathfinder, I don’t understand why anyone is mentioning Dungeon World in a negative. So by virtue of trying to be not terrible but loving up, people rag on it when there are openly crap RPG’s. I just disagree with the idea of calling things bad for only marginal improvements. Like, note that they’re marginal but in this industry we’re fighting against being outright regressive. But yeah the fact that the single best playbook was third party (The Dashing Hero, no contest) is a definite and obvious flaw.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 06:36
|
|
|
Dungeon World is maligned because PBTA excels at being a genre emulation engine, and Dungeon World's genre is 'D&D' which is not actually epic fantasy, swords and sorcery, swords and sandals, or dying earth. It's its own genre, which emerges from the simulation that is D&D not doing a great job simulating any of those genres. So Dungeon World is a PBTA genre emulator, emulating a genre defined by not being a genre emulation in any particular way. As such, Dungeon World emulates D&D rules more than anything else because the genre is just those rules. There is no D&D genre other than 'classes' and 'adventuring parties' and 'spell slots' and so on. The PBTA framework wasn't intended for that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 06:54
|
|
|
I would imagine that Dungeon World is rather perfect for all those people who LIKE that D&D 5e doesn't have a complete set of rules and relies on the DM to "fill in the gaps with exciting results"
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 07:08
|
|
|
I'm out of the loop and completely naive, what's 5E missing?
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 07:24
|
|
|
ConanThe3rd posted:I'm out of the loop and completely naive, what's 5E missing? Good Design
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 07:35
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I would imagine that Dungeon World is rather perfect for all those people who LIKE that D&D 5e doesn't have a complete set of rules and relies on the DM to "fill in the gaps with exciting results" Yeah, Dungeon World is basically 'what people who like 5e actually want out of it', which I guess is a big market but still. ConanThe3rd posted:I'm out of the loop and completely naive, what's 5E missing? It's 3.5 except tries to fix the problems of 3.5 by just deleting the problem mechanics and replacing them with GM fiat. It's basically 3.5, as run by lazy GMs. e: fool_of_sound posted:5e sought to throw out most of what 4e did and instead tries to implement it's own fixes to problems in 3.x. Unfortunately the fixes chosen are mostly '[mechanic] was fiddly and didn't work great? Just delete it!' fool_of_sound posted:Like, my go to example of 3.x versus 5e is the Rogue class. fool of sound fucked around with this message at 07:52 on Aug 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 07:50
|
|
|
Joe Slowboat posted:Dungeon World is maligned because PBTA excels at being a genre emulation engine, and Dungeon World's genre is 'D&D' which is not actually epic fantasy, swords and sorcery, swords and sandals, or dying earth. It's its own genre, which emerges from the simulation that is D&D not doing a great job simulating any of those genres. Yeah, that's a big chunk of it. There's also the fact that it makes several bad design mistakes of its own (Defy Danger, playbooks with 20 advances) in an effort to do that D&D mechanics emulation. Though there's enough genre in "poor unfortunate souls go raiding monster-infested crypts and caves as a get-rich-quick scheme" to support a "real" PbtA game, but it would have to skew closer to older D&Ds to work - AW-sized (so ~4-6 advances, instead of 20) playbooks, Fighter/Mage/Thief/Priest/Elf/Dwarf/Halfling as the playbooks, combat being undesirable, XP being gained through treasure, the PCs being lowlives in it for the money, etc.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 08:48
|
|
|
Lemon-Lime posted:Yeah, that's a big chunk of it. There's also the fact that it makes several bad design mistakes of its own (Defy Danger, playbooks with 20 advances) in an effort to do that D&D mechanics emulation. This sounds suspiciously like Blades In the Dark, swapping out monster-infested crypts with guard-infested mansions.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 08:54
|
|
|
Lemon-Lime posted:Though there's enough genre in "poor unfortunate souls go raiding monster-infested crypts and caves as a get-rich-quick scheme" to support a "real" PbtA game, but it would have to skew closer to older D&Ds to work - AW-sized (so ~4-6 advances, instead of 20) playbooks, Fighter/Mage/Thief/Priest/Elf/Dwarf/Halfling as the playbooks, combat being undesirable, XP being gained through treasure, the PCs being lowlives in it for the money, etc. World of Dungeons, John Harper's pseudo-retro, one-page Dungeon World hack, is almost this, but then the
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 09:00
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:This sounds suspiciously like Blades In the Dark, swapping out monster-infested crypts with guard-infested mansions. I find Blades less mechanically engaging than PbtA games even though it shares a lot of the same DNA, so my personal preference would be for a PbtA game to do this, but a Blades hack would work fine. Pretty sure one was one of the infinite stretch goals, too, since it's an obvious fit. gradenko_2000 posted:World of Dungeons, John Harper's pseudo-retro, one-page Dungeon World hack, is almost this, but then the Yeah, it's too far on the simplified side of things.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 09:27
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:This sounds suspiciously like Blades In the Dark, swapping out monster-infested crypts with guard-infested mansions. Blades Against Darkness is in rough shape right now, but it looks like it will be able to handle dungeon crawling in the Blades engine.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 11:23
|
|
|
Serf posted:Blades Against Darkness is in rough shape right now, but it looks like it will be able to handle dungeon crawling in the Blades engine. Yeah, I'm actually pretty interested to see how that one shakes out because "Blades but D&D" might be a good dungeoncrawler.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 11:26
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:Yeah, I'm actually pretty interested to see how that one shakes out because "Blades but D&D" might be a good dungeoncrawler. i'm pretty excited by the hexcrawl exploration and the weird flavor behind each of the zones because it feels extremely old-school however the game is really, really unpolished with some seriously basic mistakes. the 1.5 draft had a lot of confusing abilities and i hope he gets a lot of playtesting feedback to fix that
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 11:40
|
|
|
Lemon-Lime posted:Yeah, that's a big chunk of it. There's also the fact that it makes several bad design mistakes of its own (Defy Danger, playbooks with 20 advances) in an effort to do that D&D mechanics emulation. This, I would totally play. I recall the Roll20 World of Dungeons LP being pretty funny. Kai Tave posted:This sounds suspiciously like Blades In the Dark, swapping out monster-infested crypts with guard-infested mansions. Which I am still trying to get people at work to play with me!
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 14:38
|
|
|
Unity is finally for sale to the public. At long last.  http://www.unity-rpg.com
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 17:22
|
|
|
If you’re talking about the Rogue don’t forget that the 1st level Alarm spell defeats a level 20 Rogue. (To its small credit the Pathfinder 2 Playtest does mention that spells with trigger stimuli can be fooled by mundane means based on their DC, so that’s something. Although it appears you can shoot bows through walls..) I think the granularity confusion with PbtA might put D&D folks off it too. Like Fellowship - “Overcome. It says you prevent or avoid the harm something would cause.” “Yes.” “It doesn’t say harm only to me. And the plague is something, right?” “Ok...” “So I make a single overcome roll to cure the plague, preventing the harm it could do to the people of the city.” hyphz fucked around with this message at 17:28 on Aug 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 17:25
|
|
|
hyphz posted:I think the granularity confusion with PbtA might put D&D folks off it too. Like Fellowship - “Overcome. It says you prevent or avoid the harm something would cause.” “Yes.” “It doesn’t say harm only to me. And the plague is something, right?” “Ok...” “So I make a single overcome roll to cure the plague, preventing the harm it could do to the people of the city.”
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 20:13
|
|
|
hyphz posted:If you’re talking about the Rogue don’t forget that the 1st level Alarm spell defeats a level 20 Rogue. (To its small credit the Pathfinder 2 Playtest does mention that spells with trigger stimuli can be fooled by mundane means based on their DC, so that’s something. Although it appears you can shoot bows through walls..) and then the overlord asks 'how in the fiction are you curing the plague in one action?', a basic tenet of ptba is that you only roll a move if you can make sense of it within the fiction
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 20:24
|
|
|
hyphz posted:I think the granularity confusion with PbtA might put D&D folks off it too. Like Fellowship - “Overcome. It says you prevent or avoid the harm something would cause.” “Yes.” “It doesn’t say harm only to me. And the plague is something, right?” “Ok...” “So I make a single overcome roll to cure the plague, preventing the harm it could do to the people of the city.” I write moves like that too, it's a way to I've the player an "I've got this !" move they can bust out when poo poo goes down. Cure the plague for a whole city ? The GM needs to ask "OK, how do you do that?" An acceptable answer would be an extended apothecary-ing montage. Which costs time and lets the other plot threads move on without the PC.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 20:25
|
|
|
Ah... I wanna play 7th Sea...
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 21:12
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:Unity is finally for sale to the public. At long last. Would you (or someone else who’s been in the KS preview) mind making a thread?
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 21:25
|
|
|
hyphz posted:If you’re talking about the Rogue don’t forget that the 1st level Alarm spell defeats a level 20 Rogue. (To its small credit the Pathfinder 2 Playtest does mention that spells with trigger stimuli can be fooled by mundane means based on their DC, so that’s something. Although it appears you can shoot bows through walls..)
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 21:28
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:Unity is finally for sale to the public. At long last. Excellent! Thanks for letting us know, I had forgotten I wanted to check this out. Also, seconding the request for a thread
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 21:28
|
|
|
Yawgmoth posted:To be a bit overly reductionist about it, AW is 'I want to write a story, and maybe roll some dice about it" whereas D&D is "I want to roll dice, and maybe have a story about it". This is pretty true. I play D&D or D&D alikes to play them, and I have a story in those to facilitate playing them. If I want to tell an actual story, there are way better games for that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 21:30
|
|
|
If Kai Tave has a wish to do it, he could probably do a better job than I. I haven't fully digested the material yet - I've been waiting for my hardcover, because in some ways I am still a groggy nerd.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 21:33
|
|
|
oh boy is it time for this month's edition of "watch hyphz fundamentally misunderstand both conversations and pbta games all at once" already?
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 21:37
|
|
|
Splicer posted:"You have fundamentally misunderstood how this game works. You say what your character is doing and then we pick an appropriate move. What is your character planning to do?" Yup, this. State your intent and we’ll match that to a move.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 21:55
|
|
|
Pollyanna posted:Yup, this. State your intent and we’ll match that to a move. It’s not the same issue as before (pacing and Chandler’s Flaw) and it’s not just PbtA though - plenty of games with abstracted difficulty, like Strike, have the same issue. “State your intent and we’ll match it to a move.” “I intend to cure the plague.” “Yes, but what do you do?” “Cure the plague.” “I mean what action do you take?” “How should I know, I don’t know how medicine works in your made up world.” “Well, do you want to look for plants that might help maybe?” “If they use plants for medicine in your world, ok. I’ll try the ones that grow in the city garden. 10+ on Overcome?” “Well, those ones probably won’t work.” “I don’t even get to roll to see?” “Well, you’re trying to cure cancer by pulling up some grass.” “They probably did try that, it just turned out not to work. But they got to try.” “It won’t.” “So what will?” “I don’t know, it isn’t made up in advance.” “So what properties must a plant have for you to allow me an overcome roll against the plague using it?” I don’t think that’s a fun conversation. It could work in some cases I suppose. But I think that saying “I want to cure the plague.” “Ok, medicine DC 40.” “Ugh. If I get the other doctors in the town all together would that give me a bonus?” “Well, they could assist you for +2.” “Would I get a bonus for using good ingredients?” “Between 5 and 10 depending on how good and rare they are.” Is at least underrated. Being able to give a bonus rather than having to choose between a 50% chance and a 0% chance does enhance expression and rulesfeel here.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 22:19
|
|
|
what D20 game has a detailed enough medicine system to make the bonus anything other than a number the GM makes up on the spot? because you can do stuff like that in abstracted difficult systems too
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 22:22
|
|
|
If you don’t know what action you want to take, i.e. you don’t know what to do, then you aren’t doing anything and you aren’t rolling.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 22:24
|
|
|
hyphz posted:“State your intent and we’ll match it to a move.” This is not at all how the conversation goes if the people sitting at the table are actual human beings who understand how to play roleplaying games instead of the broken robots you use in all your examples, but since we keep explaining this to you and you still haven't gotten it after something like 6 attempts, I don't think there's any point in further unpacking things.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 22:25
|
|
|
I would have told them “too bad” after the “how should I know” line, or at least given them some sort of tinier alternative. Maybe try and pacify them with a GM move.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 22:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 08:30 |
|
|
Yeah, I think the turn the conversation should probably take there is "Does your character have some sort of medical background?" If yes, then they know what to do next. You tell them, they go off and do it. Make a quest of it. If no, then they'll need to find a cure. Which is, naturally, in the hands of a powerful druid who won't even speak to the beaten dogs of civilisation until they have passed the trials of the wild. That sort of thing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 22:33
|
|
