|
Pienso que el Cthulhu Dark es muy interesante y divertido. También quiero jugar Dread, pero no puedo jugar lo por pbp y no tengo un grupo aquí para probarlo. ¡Ay caramba!
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2014 04:42
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 21:26 |
|
|
Cthulhu Dark is great because the mechanism is super simple and doesn't slow down the game much at all to roll. Also the rules are like five pages total, and a big part of the game is this adversarial aspect of other players challenging rolls, which encourages everyone to pay attention and engage in the game.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2014 05:06
|
|
|
Specific languages are fun if members of the group share a language that the locals don't. Then you can play around with the party members sneakily communicating, how others respond when they don't understand, suddenly realizing that one of the NPCs does understand the language, etc.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2014 05:59
|
|
|
I meant like two player characters talking to each other in a rare shared language in order to hide what they're saying from NPCs who don't speak it. Sneaky spy stuff.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2014 06:37
|
|
|
Look the actual answer is that in that scene Riddick isn't rolling an attack, any more than a GM would ask you to roll Dex in order to tie your shoes or open a can. Riddick overwhelmingly outclasses the other guy, failure wouldn't be possible regardless of weapon. That he's using a teacup has no mechanical bearing, it's just a bit of flavor, since there's no roll to penalize anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2014 08:59
|
|
|
Okay, try this. The combat system works on "successes," you get a certain number, usually like 3-5. Fancy maneuvers and poo poo eat up successes. Most enemies, with armor, or behind cover, or in groups, need those 3-5, depending on the enemy and circumstance. This enemy just needs one. So, "use a teacup" is a maneuver, costing like two successes, "fighting stylishly" or whatever, maybe in public it gets you something neat, but here the player is just doing it because he had an excess two successes over the mere one he needed, and they wouldn't do anything else anyway, so he says he uses a teacup.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2014 09:12
|
|
|
Obviously that's a high concept.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2014 10:52
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 21:26 |
|
|
Having the right weapon still changes the context of what the character is capable of. Riddick with a teacup can kill a dude, no problem, but Riddick with a minigun can kill a roomful of dudes. John McClane without a gun needs to play it smart, stay in the shadows, get within arm's reach of guys, because if he just screams and charges someone, he's going to get shot. Lots of action movies with murderizers have scenes where they're at a disadvantage, whether they're outnumbered or don't have the right equipment, and "you don't have the right weapon for this job" should still be a reasonable narrative concept to apply to the situation. Having that manifest as -4 attack is really, really bad, but it's also too much to say that weapons are purely an accessory. An abstracted system where negative aspects or problems are relatively freeform feels like the best solution. Then you can have Riddick killing a dude with a teacup in a scene where nothing else is entering the picture, while also later on hypothetically having a scene where he has to stalk some badass with a machine gun while he only has a knife, where just charging that enemy would end poorly. Or you could have an aspect on the enemies that there's a whole lot of them, so even though Riddick's a murderizer, he can't just use a teacup, he needs a minigun or a bomb or needs to divide and conquer or something different than usual.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2014 11:47
|
|