|
sexpig by night posted:is there a runetera sourcebook, fanmade or otherwise? I don't really play LoL so I don't know much but it seems to be a mashup of magi-tek/steampunk stuff and traditional fantasy stuff, could be a neat setting but I have no idea what I'd do with it. How is it used in the moba? Apparently yes
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2021 23:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 15:58 |
|
|
I didn't even know about that. Will have to take a look. I have the companion, which I assumed was enough a la World of Android.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 01:18
|
|
|
nifty, I may check that out, I hosed around with the card game for a bit and had a little fun
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 01:30
|
|
|
CitizenKeen posted:Yeah, I gathered by the silence. Mildly surprised, but alas. I've had friends talk about doing one but they've never gotten past the "what system would we actually use do to this and when can everyone actually meet together" stage.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 01:48
|
|
|
Runeterra as a setting is like... how many more layers of utilitarian gameplay-first fantasy xerox can you get? Tolkien/Vance > D&D > Warhammer > Warcraft > DOTA > Runeterra.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 03:21
|
|
|
Plus I think they retconned a ton of stuff a while back after the original lore writer left.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 03:26
|
|
|
quote:We tried to make it as complete as possible detailing the cultures, places, fauna/flora of each region. It is currently featuring (v 0.91): This sounds life-sapping, but it makes me wonder.... what's the best "officially licensed" game someone here has ever played that feels like a proper translation of the IP into a tabletop RPG? And yeah I know "feels" is really subjective, but if you have a good way of explaining what about the "feels" made it hit for you, that'd be great to know too.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 03:47
|
|
|
Nuns with Guns posted:This sounds life-sapping, but it makes me wonder.... what's the best "officially licensed" game someone here has ever played that feels like a proper translation of the IP into a tabletop RPG? Sentinels of the Multiverse. Like yeah I imagine a card game into a RPG is cheating and you were probably asking about videogame IPs, but Sentinels is an extremely close translation of the source material, making it easy to recreate the characters from the card game or new characters that would immediately be recognizable as new parts of it. Heck, they added a bunch of the card characters to the game as NPCs and didn't cheat the system once, every one of them uses the same tools and resources as any player character. Plus the big gimmick of Sentinels as a card game was that the environment you battle in gets its own deck, and the RPG recreates that perfectly, adding a built in countdown counter to the environment that raises the stakes constantly and keeps new stuff entering the fight.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 04:04
|
|
|
Nuns with Guns posted:what's the best "officially licensed" game someone here has ever played that feels like a proper translation of the IP into a tabletop RPG? And the first edition Usagi Yojimbo game. It helps a lot if you hire Robin Laws or Greg Stolze to design your game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 04:05
|
|
|
Nuns with Guns posted:This sounds life-sapping, but it makes me wonder.... what's the best "officially licensed" game someone here has ever played that feels like a proper translation of the IP into a tabletop RPG? Fria Ligen's licensed Alien RPG does an amazing job of mechanically translating the tension and overall atmosphere of the franchise into RPG format.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 04:14
|
|
|
The Leverage RPG is another good example.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 04:20
|
|
|
Star Trek Adventures did a great job of simulating an episode of Star Trek, which is both respectable in itself, and also made me realize how few people often actually want that. A lot of people want to do the stories they want to do in a universe they love, which is not the same thing as emulating a genre or source.Mr. Maltose posted:The Leverage RPG is another good example. I would argue that 3/4 of the Cortex Plus games are excellent translations of their source.
Firefly, however, was mediocre at best.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 04:43
|
|
|
West End's Star Wars d6 game worked out really well. Every session I've been in, on either side of the GM screen felt Star Wars-y and Star Wars type stuff could easily happen. It's super fast in play too, even with novice gamers - you just roll the number of dice indicated on your character sheet and try and roll high.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 04:52
|
|
|
I can't put my finger on why, but yeah. Something about it felt extremely Star Wars. I think it could have been some aspect of the rules book itself?
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 04:57
|
|
|
WEG's game predates most of Star Wars. Stpry goes, when Timothy Zahn was writing his original Thrawn trilogy and needed source material, all they had to mail him were the RPG sourcebooks. It might be more that Star Wars feels a lot like the WEG game. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 05:21
|
|
|
That's fantastic! One bit of trivia I did know was that Zahn would repeatedly play audio recordings of the original trilogy in the car for his kid. Which is almost certainly why the characters in his books "sound" like their film performances.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 05:31
|
|
|
Because it's good at making you feel like you're constantly on the edge of failing but just barely succeeding because you're the protagonist but this feels organic and intentional and not just the DM fudging things to keep yout character alive. This is both because the probability curve of multiple D6 is much smoother, more predictable, and less "swingy" than, say, a single D20, and inherent mechanics to WEG D6 such as Force Points which represent those times in the movies where the protagonist does something impossible by channeling the Force, consciously or unconsciously.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 05:31
|
|
|
The power of a Force Point to turn you (for a moment) from "guy who is slightly better at <x> than the average movie extra" to "legendary badass who noscope 360'd that challenge" was huge. In combat, it paired really well with the multiple target rule. Horribly outnumbered and out of ideas? Everyone spend a force point and take out three bad guys at once!
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 05:40
|
|
|
The d20 is perfectly predictable. You get 5% chance of getting any particular number.  Figuring out the probability of success on a fistful of dice is obviously more complicated because you need to start doing real math.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 05:42
|
|
|
Siivola posted:The d20 is perfectly predictable. You get 5% chance of getting any particular number. Yeah exactly. You've got exactly the same chance (assuming no modifiers) of rolling a 1 as rolling a 20. Whereas with, say, 3D6 you've got a huge chance of rolling between 8 and 13 every single time. In D6 Star Wars "moderate" difficulty starts at 11, so if you're rolling 3D6 or more then you're almost always going to just barely succeed, fairly predictably.  
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 05:54
|
|
|
So what you're saying is that the d6 system feels good because the skill rolls target numbers are low? The bell curve doesn't matter! You only care which side of the hump you fall on. If you're on the easy slope it'll be super easy, and if you're not, gently caress it you're not going to pass. You can do the exact same thing by setting easy DCs very low and hard DCs very high on a d20.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 05:56
|
|
|
Siivola posted:So what you're saying is that the d6 system feels good because the skill rolls target numbers are low? What I'm saying is I'm not going to get into a weird internet slap fight about it so enjoy your D20 if that's your thing IDGAF
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 05:59
|
|
|
Siivola is right. In a binary pass/fail system, the distribution of outcomes is not and cannot be a bell curve. It is always a Bernoulli distribution. That is, X% chance of success and 100%-X% chance of failure for some value of X. All you do when you make your dice have a bell curve in that context is you make the relative effects of bonuses and penalties inconsistent. A +1 bonus means little, then a lot, then little again, depending where on the curve you are. Bell curves from dice pools can do more good work for your design when you have gradations of success and failure or other sorts of non-binary outcomes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 06:19
|
|
|
Okay, thinking about it a bit, you're totally right that the d6 system lets you win or lose by small margins, like rolling 13 when the TN is 11. It'll feel good when the fate of your character hangs on that roll. It's a completely different vibe than blasting five points past the DC on a d20. But now that I know that's what the system is doing, I can't help but feel it's a bit of a sleight of hand trick. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 06:29
|
|
|
It’s not really sleight of hand. “Rules feel” in that sense is a legitimate design consideration.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 06:56
|
|
|
Nuns with Guns posted:This sounds life-sapping, but it makes me wonder.... what's the best "officially licensed" game someone here has ever played that feels like a proper translation of the IP into a tabletop RPG? The One Ring.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 10:15
|
|
|
It also matters if the system/gm gradiate their success' at all. If pass =do the thing, pass+5 =do the thing well or whatever then the d6 system will vary even more
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 10:40
|
|
|
When people say 3d6 is "more reliable" they mean the likely rolls cover a smaller area compared to the possible rolls. So a 3d6+4 guy is as likely to hit tn 15 as a 1d20+10 is to hit a dc 21, but a 1d20 + 0 character cannot natively hit 21 while a 3d6+0 has a 10% chance at the Hail Mary play. So while the vast majority of the time you're basically rolling a wonky d8+6 you're also kind of rolling a wonky d16+2. Rolling a 3 or an 18 is theoretically possible and it might happen today!
Splicer fucked around with this message at 13:29 on Jul 16, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 13:18
|
|
|
Tag urself, I'm "cum prob" Also, yeah, I'm endlessly fascinated by how much of WEG Star Wars became Canon. There's a lot of species names, as the big thing. Also, names for random extras (some of which have percolated into New Canon, too). It was mentioned at the time, and I agree, that Rogue One felt particularly like WEG d6.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 13:32
|
|
|
The normal distribution curve really does sell you on feeling like you just barely made it or missed it by inches, which is something I've felt but a thought I'd never actually articulated. I have a friend who once told me he prefers D20 to D% systems because "it feels like too much rides on one roll." I tried explaining how d20 is literally a D% rounded off to 5s, but he wasn't having it. There's a lot of weird psychological stuff like that, like how we're wired to add faster and rules systems where you add feel more intuitive, despite someimes being more needlessly complex.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 14:19
|
|
|
Normal distribution also matches what you instinctively feel statistics should be. You've just as likely to roll a 10 on a d20 as a 20, but a 20 feels like it should be rarer, because 10s are boring but 20s are cool. In 3d6 you really will roll a bunch of boring 10s and 11s more often than a kick rear end 15 or lovely 6
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 15:04
|
|
|
Anecdotal, but the amount of time players spend whining about poor die rolls is less on 3d6 versus d20. The outcomes being on a bell curve means that you have more near misses and near passes in a play session, as there are more (numerically and by percentage) die combinations that are +/- 2 of your target number. The fact that a known percentage of outcomes are above and below the target in 3d6 and d20 is robot logic.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 16:33
|
|
|
Do people still play board games in TGR? I remember back when BSG was popular and I wouldn't mind trying something like Fury of Dracula or Eschaton, even though that one's got no real social aspect to it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 17:50
|
|
|
C... posted:The fact that a known percentage of outcomes are above and below the target in 3d6 and d20 is robot logic. Edit: I mean, I believe y’all. I just wish my crew would actually look at their sheets and do the things they're good at. 
Siivola fucked around with this message at 21:19 on Jul 16, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 21:04
|
|
|
I like 2d6 or 3d6, or similar, because if the base target number is closer to the average then positive and negative modifiers are more impactful. And if a roll is very favorable there is a much smaller chance of it failing than if the distribution is flat, smaller than the ever-present 5% failure/5% critical chance in d20 systems. GURPS uses 3d6 and it's one of the few systems I've experienced that use well-considered math where the modifiers are actually important and not nickle-and-dimey poo poo. FATE too - the 4dF rolls follow a nice bell curve even if the fact that the average roll is 0 may be less exciting for people who like rolling and seeing the numbers come up.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 21:33
|
|
|
psychological effects of presentation in this context are very real but also should be discouraged as much as possible from being used as the basis of design decisions the actual mechanical / mathematical effects of a standard deviation are great, though BattleMaster posted:I like 2d6 or 3d6, or similar, because if the base target number is closer to the average then positive and negative modifiers are more impactful. And if a roll is very favorable there is a much smaller chance of it failing than if the distribution is flat, smaller than the ever-present 5% failure/5% critical chance in d20 systems. basically seconding all of this
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 22:03
|
|
|
BattleMaster posted:I like 2d6 or 3d6, or similar, because if the base target number is closer to the average then positive and negative modifiers are more impactful. And if a roll is very favorable there is a much smaller chance of it failing than if the distribution is flat, smaller than the ever-present 5% failure/5% critical chance in d20 systems. I think Pathfinder 2E does stuff with nat 1s/20s though Splicer fucked around with this message at 22:09 on Jul 16, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 22:06
|
|
|
Also there's an optional rule in the 3.5 dm guide for removing autohit/automiss from combat rolls iirc.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 22:22
|
|
|
Splicer posted:A common misconception! Neither D&D 3.x, 4e, 5e, Pathfinder 1E, d20 modern, or any other d20 product I am familiar with officially had nat 1s or nat 20s mean anything for skill checks. It's a rule everyone gets wrong. I should have specified "for attacks," the most common type of roll in D&D that also results in a 5% chance of your turn doing nothing no matter how favorable the roll is
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 22:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 15:58 |
|
|
Splicer posted:I think Pathfinder 2E does stuff with nat 1s/20s though It does: they bump your grade of success up or down one, and sometimes have other effects. Also I'm sure D&D 3.0 did something with nat 1/20 because there was an official alternate rule where you treated a nat 1 as a roll of -10 and a nat 20 as a roll of 30. Can't remember what it was an alternate to mind you, but I'm sure it wasn't 'nothing'.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 01:05
|
|
