|
I feel like someone should mention Legends of the Wulin but his head might explode.
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 14:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 02:42 |
|
|
I was listening to System Mastery last night and they reviewed Shadowrun Anarchy and one of the mind-boggling design decisions there was that it used opposed rolls for everything like, if the PC was trying to unlock a door, the PC would roll for their number of lockpicking successes, but the DM would also roll for their number of... lock integrity successes?
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 14:27
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I was listening to System Mastery last night and they reviewed Shadowrun Anarchy and one of the mind-boggling design decisions there was that it used opposed rolls for everything Maybe that lock was having a particularly good day.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 14:28
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I was listening to System Mastery last night and they reviewed Shadowrun Anarchy and one of the mind-boggling design decisions there was that it used opposed rolls for everything That’s how all the Cortex games work and those are both good and generally well received. I’ve never read Anarchy and it has Shadowrun in the title so I assume it sucks, but opposed rolls for everything can work great.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 14:35
|
|
|
Splicer posted:I can't even be mad it's just all so cute https://twitter.com/SabreRunner/status/1615246468540923904?t=H9zQmk4SFy2ddmPoHijcWA&s=19 https://twitter.com/AndrewTeheran/status/1615212524206448641?t=ycXWw9P_klAYdZGWKxe9YQ&s=19 I hope all of these people read a second book.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 14:35
|
|
|
Goa Tse-tung posted:for the record: Das Schwarze Auge (Arkania or The Dark Eye) has had opposed rolls since the 90s, and my recollection from back then: combat drags out too long White Wolf built a subcultural phenomenon on the most unnecessary number of rolls to resolve single actions in 1991.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 14:38
|
|
|
One stat, Puissance, that goes up when you level. Call me Matt.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 14:43
|
|
|
That Old Tree posted:White Wolf built a subcultural phenomenon on the most unnecessary number of rolls to resolve single actions in 1991. "Each single combat action will require multiple opposed checks, each one involving multiple dice and a floating, arbitrary success threshold decided case by case"
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 14:43
|
|
|
- Cold - hosed Up - Mean - Relentless
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 15:12
|
|
|
-Itchy -Tasty
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 15:14
|
|
|
senrath posted:When a contract is ambiguous enough then they will look to outside parol evidence. The question is "what is ambiguous enough" because that varies from court to court. They're right in the sense that claims about the intent of a contract can't be used to overturn the actual wording of a contract. They're wrong in the sense that the wording of a contract is not always as cut and dried as it could be, and indeed even legal language can have its vague points and ambiguities. You can bring in intent at that point to resolve the "what does this wording actually mean?" question. They're right in the sense that the set of answers you can arrive at will still tend to be bound by the wording - you can't use intent in those circumstances to say "This contract said Down, but it's pretty obvious from the outside context that what was intended is actually Up". I think their biggest mistake is in assuming that the stuff Ryan Dancey is citing about intent is irrelevant because it doesn't address any ambiguities; I would say it's hard to look at the OGL and say the question of what is an "authorised version" does not introduce at least some ambiguity, especially in the lack of an explicit mechanism for deauthorisation.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 15:38
|
|
|
your only stats are how much of a Bear you are and how much of a Criminal you are.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 15:40
|
|
|
Just steal from the Toon RPG: Muscle Zip Smarts Chutzpah
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 15:40
|
|
|
4,300+ people saw this and said "Yes, I like this."
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 15:44
|
|
|
Mors Rattus posted:I feel like someone should mention Legends of the Wulin but his head might explode. Honestly, if my legacy is making people's heads explode, I'm cool with that. Go for it!
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 15:44
|
|
|
I've not gone deep into Opening Arguments' stuff on this (I don't have time to listen to long podcasts or videos just to see what they say about one particular point), but it's also possible that they are not taking into account what statements about the intended reading of the contract exist out there. Ryan Dancey saying decades after the fact "this is totes what I meant" is weaksauce. He no longer works for Wizards, the party which wrote the contract, and he's trying to address his recollections of discussions that happened decades ago. If he had documentary evidence (like e-mails) from the OGL negotiations, that would carry more weight. Wizards' own FAQ from the era clearly saying that if they update the OGL you'll be able to keep using old versions if you wish would tend to carry more weight. You still have a problem that it's from after the contract was drafted - but it's close to the time when it was, and was put out in the course of trying to convince other parties to adopt the contract. (One could also argue that the Wizards FAQ was, in fact, part of the contract negotiations when it comes to parties who started using the OGL after the FAQ came out, because of course a contract was not accepted between them and Wizards until they performed the acts specified in the OGL as constituting acceptance.) All you would need to do to convince a court to consider that is to successfully argue that there is an ambiguity as to what an "authorised version" is, or that there's ambiguity as to what the mechanic for "deauthorising" is - or if there is such a mechanic at all. Wizards would need to argue that there's no ambiguity at all, nuh-uh, not a shred of it, no need for further consideration. Wizards would argue that it's clear: an authorised version is one put out by Wizards, they can deauthorise versions through an update, the licence explicitly gives them (and them specifically) the right to update it so versions other people alter are not authorised. I think you could make a good argument that it is not clear, because the term "you may use any authorized version" implies that it is possible to have multiple authorized versions extant - otherwise the party being addressed would not have a choice between versions to use and the term would be meaningless. It does not, after all, say "you must use the currently-authorized version as most recently updated by Wizards" or language to a similar effect - which you would expect if updating the OGL automatically deauthorised old versions. Even if the court didn't consider the Wizards FAQ at all, successfully arguing ambiguity on the point would still tend to undermine Wizards case, because courts tend to default to interpreting ambiguous terms of a contract against the person who drafted it, which in this case is unambiguously Wizards. Warthur fucked around with this message at 16:04 on Jan 18, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 15:57
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/MongoosePub/status/1615719925728903169 Another one.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 16:16
|
|
|
Sage Genesis posted:Honestly, if my legacy is making people's heads explode, I'm cool with that. Go for it! Someone who isn’t me, I have made it a rule not to touch Twitter fights with people whose fanbase gets rabid and aggressive if I can avoid it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 16:19
|
|
|
Mors Rattus posted:Someone who isn’t me, I have made it a rule not to touch Twitter fights with people whose fanbase gets rabid and aggressive if I can avoid it. Ha! Yeah, wise.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 16:20
|
|
|
Lamuella posted:your only stats are how much of a Bear you are and how much of a Criminal you are.  Bear: 100% Criminal: 100% I have defeated your system.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 16:25
|
|
|
Kurieg posted:
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 16:28
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I was listening to System Mastery last night and they reviewed Shadowrun Anarchy and one of the mind-boggling design decisions there was that it used opposed rolls for everything Anarchy was generally a clueless design and was a serious low point until Shadowrun Sixth World said "hold my beer."
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 16:35
|
|
|
Mors Rattus posted:I feel like someone should mention Legends of the Wulin but his head might explode.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 16:38
|
|
|
Not surprised MCDM’s game is going to be bad DnD. Colville is a good idea guy, he’s decent at worldbuilding and making stuff FOR DnD if they’re not new mechanics. Action oriented monster manual: good. His rules for mass warfare: holy poo poo unplayable and boring
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 16:46
|
|
|
That Old Tree posted:Based on his follow-up tweets in that thread, I wouldn't be hopeful. "Two equal columns of stats means you can pick one out of each and boom, you've got character creation" and "we have a secret reason for six stats ssshh no spoilers" is not something that stirs confidence. Oh my god it's honestly kind of heartbreaking to watch these people who are supposedly leaders in this industry playtesting the most basic mechanics in a completely uncritical way and talking like they're stumbling onto some kind of amazing new concept. I know it's been said in here a lot but it's honestly mindboggling how so much of the RPG space doesn't have even a basic handle on game mechanics or how to develop that side of the equation, especially since the board game space has really grown and advanced in leaps and bounds in that respect in the last decade or so. Like I get the goal isn't to make "a great new RPG system," it's effectively to make "a slightly different D&D I can put my name on" since the latter involves much less retooling and rebalancing of anything and everything that you've ever personally released, but god that's only going to multiply the issues for a lot of people in the 3PP space... like even my 5E diehard friends know the mechanics kind of suck, they just have been playing it long enough that they've learned to ignore or houserule the mechanics they don't enjoy, I think it's something every group goes through and you eventually hit some sort of an equilibrium that just works over time. But they're willing to put up with that due to the cultural cachet and good art and whatever else that 5E brings for them in particular. I can't see that same kind of more-casual player being willing to put up with half a dozen different heartbreakers' bad rules (which if past waves of heartbreakers have taught us anything, they'll be somehow worse than actual D&D, in baffling ways) until they find one to replace 5E for them. Edit: weekly font posted:Not surprised MCDM’s game is going to be bad DnD. Colville is a good idea guy, he’s decent at worldbuilding and making stuff FOR DnD if they’re not new mechanics. Action oriented monster manual: good. His rules for mass warfare: holy poo poo unplayable and boring Yeah this is a big issue too, that a lot of the people I see out there trying to publicize their attempts at making a new system are fundamentally just not suited for making a new system, because they're great at the fluff side or bare-metal interaction side of the equation but just have the worst understanding of probability or how to develop mechanics that are comprehensible and fun to engage with. And I think if you've been playing a game for 20 years or whatever, and actively creating content for that game in a professional sphere, it can be really hard to recognize your own conceptual blind spots when it comes to the mechanical side if you've never spent much time thinking about it. The problem is a lot of these people don't seem to actually want to think that hard about it, they just want to recreate the same mechanics and player/dm/system interactions with a slight twist. MockingQuantum fucked around with this message at 17:15 on Jan 18, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 17:10
|
|
|
As good a time as any to travel back to 2002 and reread the original essay: The Fantasy Heartbreaker
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 17:14
|
|
|
MockingQuantum posted:Oh my god it's honestly kind of heartbreaking to watch these people who are supposedly leaders in this industry playtesting the most basic mechanics in a completely uncritical way and talking like they're stumbling onto some kind of amazing new concept. That's why it's called a hea- Siivola posted:As good a time as any to travel back to 2002 and reread the original essay: The Fantasy Heartbreaker ... yeap
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 17:20
|
|
|
Everyone who has pointed out that Colville's problem is that he's trying to make a new D&D rather than a new system is dead on the money. And that's not necessarily a bad thing, but it does hammer home that you're never going to get a unified theory of rpg rules. And this is a good thing. System compatibility is nice, for systems of similar types, but a D20ish system is fundamentally always going to produce a D20ish game. If you tried to build Blades In The Dark on the OGL it wouldn't be Blades In The Dark any more. My hope is that if the OGL stuff does cause a bunch of people to move away from D&D there will be some who explore other ways to play and other stories that can be told. Rather than going straight to "I'm going to play Pathfinder instead" it would be nice to see more people checking out Spire, or Agon, or other systems that are telling stories it would be very hard to tell with D20 mechanics.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 17:25
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:That's why it's called a hea- Oh yeah I totally get it now, I've never really had a genuine head-shaking reaction to fantasy heartbreakers anymore because I've known so many people who have tried to make them that it feels more like a right of passage for some designers... this is just the first time that I've seen people who really should know better, or at least are probably capable of doing much better, just taking the easy and dumb way and making their own crappy D&D. Like I don't expect some rando on the internet to upset the apple cart and create the new D&D killer that's actually fun to play and interact with its systems, but I'd hope that some of these people like Colville would actually give the slightest effort towards trying to do that. Though maybe I've got that backwards, and it'll really need to be a rando who creates the next big thing, I suppose some of these people are just too invested (economically, intellectually, emotionally, whatever) in the D&D paradigm to ever try to innovate it in any big way.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 17:26
|
|
|
MockingQuantum posted:Oh my god it's honestly kind of heartbreaking to watch these people who are supposedly leaders in this industry playtesting the most basic mechanics in a completely uncritical way and talking like they're stumbling onto some kind of amazing new concept. I know it's been said in here a lot but it's honestly mindboggling how so much of the RPG space doesn't have even a basic handle on game mechanics or how to develop that side of the equation, especially since the board game space has really grown and advanced in leaps and bounds in that respect in the last decade or so. Yeah, I suppose it's worth remembering that original D&D sprung forth out of the war game scene, and starting from a board game design space makes a lot of sense. I didn't play a lot of D&D 4e... except... there was actually a decent D&D Minis scene at one of the FLGS and I played several times. It was totally just 4e combat without the RPG stuff, and it was quite fun, imho.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 17:32
|
|
|
Finster Dexter posted:Yeah, I suppose it's worth remembering that original D&D sprung forth out of the war game scene, and starting from a board game design space makes a lot of sense. I didn't play a lot of D&D 4e... except... there was actually a decent D&D Minis scene at one of the FLGS and I played several times. It was totally just 4e combat without the RPG stuff, and it was quite fun, imho. I think WotC had a whole series of weekly (monthly?) combat encounters/mini-dungeons for stores to run with 4e. All you had to do was bring a character of the right level and then bash it up with whatever randos had wandered in. It was a great way to test out weird builds and take on challenging fights. If I remember right, the closest thing to roleplaying was the occasional skill challenge. I could be misremembering this, the scenarios could have just been an in-store thing, it was too long ago for me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 17:42
|
|
|
Pvt.Scott posted:I think WotC had a whole series of weekly (monthly?) combat encounters/mini-dungeons for stores to run with 4e. All you had to do was bring a character of the right level and then bash it up with whatever randos had wandered in. It was a great way to test out weird builds and take on challenging fights. If I remember right, the closest thing to roleplaying was the occasional skill challenge. I could be misremembering this, the scenarios could have just been an in-store thing, it was too long ago for me. Those were the "Delves", right? I didn't really enjoy those, mainly because one of the guys that played the delves really irritated me. So, I stuck with the Minis side, which was purely tactical.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 17:49
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:That's why it's called a hea- quote:Even aside from industry and promotion considerations, I think these games are doomed through a conceptual tautology: you can't do D&D fantasy, regardless of how streamlined or "more logical" your rules are, without being directly measured by the defining feature, which is to say, D&D itself. In other words, the game design is trapped - the less like D&D it becomes in function and content, the further it moves from its goals, to "fix D&D." And the more it stays with its goals, the more D&D compares favorably with it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 18:06
|
|
|
Opposed rolls for combat is fine and can even be fast if each roll is the totality of the action. See Pendragon or Fighting Fantasy - there's no roll to defend separately from the attack roll; whomever wins deals damage.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 18:26
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Wizards_DnD/status/1615765898861608961?t=jFxlZqJuPi4X0TcW9Wi5pw&s=19 Here we go again. I guess we'll have to FIND a PATH. canepazzo fucked around with this message at 18:43 on Jan 18, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 18:40
|
|
|
That's actually a competent response. That feels like it comes from an actual human.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 18:43
|
|
|
Its also a lot more clear and direct, and seems to address a lot of the bigger points. Though at that point it makes me wonder what an OGL 1.1 will even do.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 18:44
|
|
|
https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1428-a-working-conversation-about-the-open-game-licensequote:Hi. I’m Kyle Brink, the Executive Producer on D&D. It’s my team that makes the game we all play.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 18:47
|
|
|
The Bee posted:Its also a lot more clear and direct, and seems to address a lot of the bigger points. Though at that point it makes me wonder what an OGL 1.1 will even do. 2.0, but probably not much lol, Probably just get the anti-hate stuff in there. My guess is they go down the route that they probably should have done in the first place and just put the overt royalty stuff, and maybe rules on platform availability and tie it to being on D&DBeyond's VTT and that eventual third party marketplace.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 18:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 02:42 |
|
|
canepazzo posted:https://twitter.com/Wizards_DnD/status/1615765898861608961?t=jFxlZqJuPi4X0TcW9Wi5pw&s=19 I am completely fine with this as written.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 18:56
|
|
