|
I have spent years trying to break my one D&D-only-for-two-decades friend out of the "never ever expend a resource for any reason" mindset. But show a dude like that a game that both encourages plunging headlong into danger and gives you the ability to retroactively have made a perfect plan, and they'll still sit there and try to plan everything out in advance so they don't have to expend any of the "I planned for this" resource. What I'm trying to say is that it's not the game, it's a fundamentally weird take on how to play.
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2021 23:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 07:30 |
|
|
Elector_Nerdlingen posted:I have spent years trying to break my one D&D-only-for-two-decades friend out of the "never ever expend a resource for any reason" mindset. Maybe D&D really does give you brain damage.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 00:46
|
|
|
Arivia posted:Maybe D&D really does give you brain damage. Didn't get my start with D&D, still understand the "trying to plan in advance despite having flashback tools available" approach - working with flashback mechanics and the like to "retroactively" solve problems is still a pretty alien mindset to get into and I've never been a fan of any implementation for it. While it's not how the system is intended to work and negatively affects the gameplay experience, familiar with people trying to advance-plan Blades in the Dark and the like more than it's designed for, and understand the mindset.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 01:01
|
|
|
Did the PCs have an opportunity to scout ahead or assess enemy resources in some way?
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 01:27
|
|
|
SkyeAuroline posted:Didn't get my start with D&D, still understand the "trying to plan in advance despite having flashback tools available" approach - working with flashback mechanics and the like to "retroactively" solve problems is still a pretty alien mindset to get into and I've never been a fan of any implementation for it. While it's not how the system is intended to work and negatively affects the gameplay experience, familiar with people trying to advance-plan Blades in the Dark and the like more than it's designed for, and understand the mindset. It’s a reference to an infamously terrible essay about game design instead of a substantiative point.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 03:08
|
|
|
Arivia posted:It’s a reference to an infamously terrible essay about game design instead of a substantiative point. Ah, okay, missed the joke/reference. e: oh wait, no, I remember the "brain damage" thing, I thought you meant the post you were replying to SkyeAuroline fucked around with this message at 05:27 on Mar 1, 2021 |
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 03:21
|
|
|
I loathe the “D&D causes brain damage” thing because it’s ableist and facile, but it is true that only playing certain kinds of games exclusively can lead people to have some very weird and unhelpful expectations.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 04:11
|
|
|
And it’s an overhang in D&D too. The reason I asked about scouting above is that D&Ds resource management at base is still designed for a wargame where the other side has a similar number of points to you and you are allowed to consider that as part of your tactics - on top of the old heist style D&D where the objective was gain optimisation over narrative climax. As it is, if the other side has no certain resource limit and you can’t learn anything about their allocation, and the consequences of running out of resources isn’t “less loot” but “total failure”, it’s not surprising resource management goes haywire.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 06:14
|
|
|
hot take: d&d is not good
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 10:17
|
|
|
So, Sentinel Comics RPG question for those who have had it longer than me: how would you build something like Superman's vulnerability to kryptonite, or Martian Manhunter's weakness to fire, or the like? There are a couple of principles that address some kind of weakness (Principle of Dependence covers things like Cyclops needing his visor or Iron Man needing his heart implant thing), but nothing I can see that really hits that Achilles' Heel type weakness. Obviously it could just be handled purely in the fiction (which is how I'd handle minor limits on powers like "Superman's X-Ray Vision can't see through lead"), or I could create a Principle of Vulnerability or something, but I'm curious if I missed something obvious in the rules. Or maybe that kind of vulnerability just isn't really a thing in the Sentinel Comics universe so it's not modeled? GimpInBlack fucked around with this message at 10:48 on Mar 1, 2021 |
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 10:46
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:I loathe the “D&D causes brain damage” thing because it’s ableist and facile, but it is true that only playing certain kinds of games exclusively can lead people to have some very weird and unhelpful expectations. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 11:18
|
|
|
It doesn't help with the impression outsiders have of this forum as being full of spiteful indie designers who hate the biggest market share owner.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 11:34
|
|
|
paradoxGentleman posted:hot take: d&d is not good Truly this take is hotter than nuclear fire.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 12:58
|
|
|
Plutonis posted:It doesn't help with the impression outsiders have of this forum as being full of spiteful indie designers who hate the biggest market share owner. Outsiders have...any impression of us?
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 13:26
|
|
|
Did anyone do any of the beta playtest or quickstart for the new Dune RPG from Modiphius? Looking to read some thoughts on it but I'm not finding a ton out there in ~*the blogosphere*~
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 13:34
|
|
|
Plutonis posted:It doesn't help with the impression outsiders have of this forum as being full of spiteful indie designers who hate the biggest market share owner.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 13:45
|
|
|
GimpInBlack posted:So, Sentinel Comics RPG question for those who have had it longer than me: how would you build something like Superman's vulnerability to kryptonite, or Martian Manhunter's weakness to fire, or the like? There are a couple of principles that address some kind of weakness (Principle of Dependence covers things like Cyclops needing his visor or Iron Man needing his heart implant thing), but nothing I can see that really hits that Achilles' Heel type weakness. While typing this out means somebody will come up with something much more concrete, check out the Formidable Villain archetype on page 223 where the more relevant their weakness is at the moment the higher a boost die you get to use against them. Hinder also looks like it's used a lot for specific weakness-related things so maybe just make it an environmental type thing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 16:23
|
|
|
Plutonis posted:It doesn't help with the impression outsiders have of this forum as being full of spiteful indie designers who hate the biggest market share owner. D&D is bad but the constant complaints that D&D isn't a narrative-first rules-light RP framework is like people being upset that a crock pot isn't a colander. But that doesn't erase the problem that a) D&D is a lovely crock pot, and b) Crock Pot Inc. hires serial abusers.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 17:00
|
|
|
basically spite is good but i want something i can make chili in
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 17:02
|
|
|
I can't design my way out of a wet paper bag but D&D does suck
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 17:09
|
|
|
Dawgstar posted:While typing this out means somebody will come up with something much more concrete, check out the Formidable Villain archetype on page 223 where the more relevant their weakness is at the moment the higher a boost die you get to use against them. Hinder also looks like it's used a lot for specific weakness-related things so maybe just make it an environmental type thing. I think this would be the best way to handle it; there aren't really any characters with a specific "this thing/substance/etc. is my weak point that I can just stumble into" in the established canon. When it has come up, it's because a villain has made something specifically to screw with a specific character, or it's a generic "just turns off powers for a while" object. Case in point: Baron Blade made a substance that emits radiation that keeps Legacy away from him, but it only affects Legacy and nobody else, and even then what little he had was destroyed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 17:12
|
|
|
This forum loving loves LANCER which probably makes it easier for some totally hypothetical DnD stan to say that SA is just made of angry hipsters who hate pop. Whatever, fine, sure. Anyway, speaking of being a weird indie guy, I've gotten suggestions about a few games but I'm trying to keep a budget stretched. This pack by the Bakers and Stewpot Tales are what I'm eyeballing. I'm more interested in something that's interesting and innovative than that is practical to play, since I'm in multiple games as is and do not know when I'll be able to play everything, but sometimes a rulebook really gives me some great inspiration for other stuff. Has anybody here read these books and got opinions on how valuable they are?
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 17:12
|
|
|
GimpInBlack posted:So, Sentinel Comics RPG question for those who have had it longer than me: how would you build something like Superman's vulnerability to kryptonite, or Martian Manhunter's weakness to fire, or the like? There are a couple of principles that address some kind of weakness (Principle of Dependence covers things like Cyclops needing his visor or Iron Man needing his heart implant thing), but nothing I can see that really hits that Achilles' Heel type weakness. Build those vulnerabilities as suggested twists in your principles section. The principle of invulnerability for example has a suggested twist like "who has discovered your one weakness?". You wouldn't need a principle of Vulnerability, you'd want the opposite. Superman is invincible but what if something hits him anyway? Was that magic or lead or kryptonite, what's going on? It's a twist! The weaknesses being more common than that wouldn't really feel right anyway. Twists come up pretty often in play and attaching weaknesses to abilities would be like "well Superman gotta deal with Kryptonite like seven times a fight."
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 17:14
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:But that doesn't erase the problem that a) D&D is a lovely crock pot, and b) Crock Pot Inc. hires serial abusers. I think this is a bit of an issue as well - D&D is a lovely crock pot but too much of the actual innovation is going into colanders. I'm not sure what'd be a better crock pot. Pathfinder 2e, maybe, but that's an Internet-enabled e-crockpot that requires three levels of activation and registration before the lid unlocks.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 17:16
|
|
|
i can't really complain as loudly as i used to, the truth is there are a solid 3 or 4 D&D 4E successor projects now and the funny part is most of them were made by goons. this forum may actually be the best loving laboratory of high-crunch tactical RPGs there is 
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 17:20
|
|
|
hyphz posted:I think this is a bit of an issue as well - D&D is a lovely crock pot but too much of the actual innovation is going into colanders. D&D isn't even a lovely crockpot, though, because crockpots have many uses. It's like one of those kitchen claw monotools that's only good for shredding pulled pork and nothing else, but it's a terrible shredder and doesn't really work. No-one's trying to put much innovation into kitchen claws because you can use fork instead for the same result and also a dozen other applications. Also, the kitchen claw is made by people who support rapists.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 17:26
|
|
|
Tulip posted:This forum loving loves LANCER which probably makes it easier for some totally hypothetical DnD stan to say that SA is just made of angry hipsters who hate pop. Whatever, fine, sure. Lancer is, like, fine? But it's newcomer on-boarding consists of poring through pages of setting detail whilst the people on discord repeatedly ask you to wait for the introductory module to be done, and I'm pretty sure a good 50% of the Harrison mechs are dogshit and exist to be looted for parts for better mechs. At least as a GM the pain of making encounters is solely map design and not building or playing as enemies, since CompCon takes care of that work. The Deleter fucked around with this message at 17:31 on Mar 1, 2021 |
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 17:27
|
|
|
and right here we have a good example of why my complaints are still relevant lol
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 17:29
|
|
|
hyphz posted:I'm not sure what'd be a better crock pot. Pathfinder 2e, maybe, but that's an Internet-enabled e-crockpot that requires three levels of activation and registration before the lid unlocks. I have had great success with Shadow of the Demon Lord. It's relatively easy to remove the poop-and-cocks content from it if you feel like it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 17:32
|
|
|
the actual reason so few people advance the tactical combat-centric wargame/RPG hybrid design space that D&D examplifies is because it's loving hard work, requiring far more published content (in terms of player options, opponents, etc.) to work effectively, which in turn is measured on far more objective terms (game balance), than your average indie RPG
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 17:33
|
|
|
The Deleter posted:Lancer is, like, fine? But it's newcomer on-boarding consists of poring through pages of setting detail whilst the people on discord repeatedly ask you to wait for the introductory module to be done, and I'm pretty sure a good 50% of the Harrison mechs are dogshit and exist to be looted for parts for better mechs. God help you if Discord isn't an accessible route, too, since essentially every resource or piece of advice that's not in the book itself is routed through there. Including CompCon support last I checked. (Not interested in importing offsite drama, just an observation about the way the community has set things up. There's a thread here and a subreddit for the game... but both also have a lot of "pointing to the discord instead of answering questions".) Is the "introductory module" still Wallflower, the module that breaks, like... half the setting concepts? It was interesting from a narrative standpoint but felt like a bad setting intro, and I think Miguel acknowledged that at some point. Module aside, I was a playtester and it was fun, but yeah, I don't have the mental energy for mapping and closely tracking every single encounter any more. Would definitely play it, got myself the hardcover for a reason, but tactical RPGs carry too much mental overhead from the GM side even with CC's aid.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 17:33
|
|
|
SkyeAuroline posted:Is the "introductory module" still Wallflower, the module that breaks, like... half the setting concepts? It was interesting from a narrative standpoint but felt like a bad setting intro, and I think Miguel acknowledged that at some point. Module aside, I was a playtester and it was fun, but yeah, I don't have the mental energy for mapping and closely tracking every single encounter any more. Would definitely play it, got myself the hardcover for a reason, but tactical RPGs carry too much mental overhead from the GM side even with CC's aid. I think Wallflower is getting a rewrite to not break that so much, although considering the amount of material that is basically floating in the ether at this point I have no loving clue. The shine is wearing off a bit as the campaign goes on and design assumptions are starting to grate on the group a bit. We switched to Wicked Ones for a while for a break and now I'm trying to play a lot more loosely and not stress about prep so much.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 17:37
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:and right here we have a good example of why my complaints are still relevant lol We're not complaining that D&D isn't a rules-light narrative-first RP framework, though. We're complaining that a) even for the purpose it expressly says it's designed for, D&D sucks, and b) it's taking up all the air in the room for the hobby. No-one wants D&D to be something it's not, we just want it to be better.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 17:46
|
|
|
Plutonis posted:It doesn't help with the impression outsiders have of this forum as being full of spiteful indie designers who hate the biggest market share owner.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 18:43
|
|
|
hyphz posted:I'm not sure what'd be a better crock pot. Pathfinder 2e, maybe, but that's an Internet-enabled e-crockpot that requires three levels of activation and registration before the lid unlocks. Maybe just Old School Essentials. It's OSR throwback to the one not-4E D&D rules set that is widely acclaimed around here with modern layouts and presentation. And with the new advanced rules sourcebooks, it covers most of the character options that people want. Tuxedo Catfish posted:the actual reason so few people advance the tactical combat-centric wargame/RPG hybrid design space that D&D examplifies is because it's loving hard work, requiring far more published content (in terms of player options, opponents, etc.) to work effectively, which in turn is measured on far more objective terms (game balance), than your average indie RPG Another possible point in OSE's favor is that it's compatible with most of that content published by TSR.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 19:44
|
|
|
PeterWeller posted:Another possible point in OSE's favor is that it's compatible with most of that content published by TSR. while OSR stuff doesn't interest me much the inter-compatibility is a pretty clever solution to the content problem, yeah ultimately there are some things that unfortunately do work better with the funding and manpower of a giant company behind you
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 19:54
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:ultimately there are some things that unfortunately do work better with the funding and manpower of a giant company behind you Neither TSR nor Paizo were giant when they started. Not that their existence as giants doesn’t make competition harder, but tactical design by small firms is totally possible.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 20:17
|
|
|
hyphz posted:Neither TSR nor Paizo were giant when they started. Not that their existence as giants doesn’t make competition harder, but tactical design by small firms is totally possible. Yeah it's not like businesses and in particular the powers and protections afforded to large corporations have fundamentally changed in any way over the last fifty years.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 20:32
|
|
|
Richard Garriott wasn't a big deal when he started, I'm going to sell my computer role-playing games on floppy disks in sandwich bags, just like him.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 20:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 07:30 |
|
|
hyphz posted:Neither TSR nor Paizo were giant when they started. Not that their existence as giants doesn’t make competition harder, but tactical design by small firms is totally possible. e: Which is why I really wish the not poop version of SotDL would come out so it wouldn't be "Do you want to play D&D but good? OK first off, please ignore all the poop jokes no wait come back" Splicer fucked around with this message at 20:40 on Mar 1, 2021 |
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2021 20:37
|
|