|
Elfgames posted:Just play an animefied historic figure searching for the holy grail or whatever wish granting macguffin you'd like. the master/servent poo poo is the dumbest fatestay thing ever why port it? Because the vulnerability of the relatively-human summoner is the whole point? That's what all the strategy comes back to, it's the most significant game-like concept in the entire franchise, if you're not going to use it then why would you bother with all of FATE's actual baggage in the first place?
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2017 06:52
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 19:50 |
|
|
Blockhouse posted:Funny how "anime is a mistake" is the Miyazaki quote that went memetic and not the time he said a CGI animated character looked like they had a disability and were an afront to God It's also not a real quote.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2017 00:36
|
|
|
Also you're wildly mischaracterizing the other quote too, Miyazaki doesn't say "that looks like someone who has a disability and is an affront to god." They show him an animation of a hideous zombie-like creature that moves by using its head as a leg (by using a learning AI to force it to figure out how to move from scratch), and Miyazaki says (paraphrasing) "I have a friend who's disabled and struggles just to do simple things like a high-five; whoever created this program has no idea what pain really is, and I find it disgusting." https://qz.com/859454/the-director-of-spirited-away-says-animation-made-by-artificial-intelligence-is-an-insult-to-life-itself/ So while I think he's being a grumpy old man about this and shows a surprising lack of appreciation for the grotesque for someone who worked on Princess Mononoke and Nausicaa, it's not like he's being disrespectful of the disabled here. Quite the opposite. Tuxedo Catfish fucked around with this message at 00:45 on Nov 19, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2017 00:43
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:Yeah, and like, EotE does it in a really clever way too, but it's also a way that could never be done in D&D. Switching to dice pools would be a massively radical change. have you considered Death To Ability Scores
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2017 13:49
|
|
|
hyphz posted:That looks good, but I’m not sure how any 4e like system can work without a grid. Movement is, like, a core part of tactical combat. Strike! has no setting and only the barest hint of a theme, but trying to make completely flavor-neutral 4E powers is impossible, so it occupies a really weird place narratively where it's not actually good for non-D&D things but it wants you very much to believe that it's not married to fantasy dungeon crawling. I find this mildly annoying but not a real mark against the system because all I want from a D&D clone is a vaguely disguised squad-scale wargame. Mechanically speaking, combat is good, and encounter design is very easy and fast which is by far the biggest reason to run Strike! over whatever else. Anything that isn't combat is really flaky and loose, and the resolution system encourages weird player and GM behavior, but it's functional and non-combat stuff is not really what you came for anyways. Tuxedo Catfish fucked around with this message at 23:22 on Dec 20, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2017 23:15
|
|
|
The best way to characterize Strike! in a nutshell is that there's a Necromancer class and they have a bunch of neat internal synergy with forced movement fear effects, corpse explosions, allied and enemy reanimation and so on, basically everything keys off of "use the death of your enemies to fuel your powers" and then the game looks you in the eye with a straight face and tells you that you could definitely reskin this class as some kind of space psychic. And I mean yeah you could but they'd literally just be A Fantasy Necromancer, But in Space, because the mechanics actually do strongly support and imply a certain narrative conceit, and spoilers, it's a spooky hooded guy who raises the dead with magic. Tuxedo Catfish fucked around with this message at 23:24 on Dec 20, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2017 23:21
|
|
|
fool_of_sound posted:Thats really only a sin of the necromancer class. I’ve seen everything else reflavored without issue. The thing is, that strong connection between mechanics and flavor is actually a good thing. I'm not taking the Necromancer to task, the Necromancer is great. It's the context around it that's the problem.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2017 00:16
|
|
|
Mr.Misfit posted:They do, but that´s mostly because trpg-nerds are bad at bows. And also because we have totally distorted images of archers. It´s not like the people being best at bowyering were lanky mofos, but the buff military people who could pull back an 80-pound-bow to survive the storm of frenchman in mail and plate running at them at 300 paces distance. It's not that complicated. Legolas is sexy and nobody cares about the Welsh.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 27, 2017 18:48
|
|
|
Insofar as ability scores serve any useful purpose at all, the point of tying archery to dexterity and not to strength is to manually enforce that someone who's great at long-range combat either shouldn't also be good at close range combat or should have to give up significant bonuses somewhere else in order to be good at both. There are a variety of reasons this doesn't work out (the universality of ability scores tends to mean that everyone can "give up" one or two or three of them without actually giving up much of anything) but setting that aside, the idea of exclusitivity in the name of gameplay and making players more interdependent as a team is generally a good one. Also I'm pretty sure at least one version of D&D had strength influence what kind of bows you could use and had bow damage scale with strength, whereas crossbows were purely driven by dexterity/accuracy. I think it was 2E AD&D.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 27, 2017 20:31
|
|
|
Alien Rope Burn posted:I feel like 2e gets too much credit in general hereabouts just as a backlash against 3e, I'm not sure it has any merits that really elevate it beyond basic competence in a modern context, compared to Gygax's scrawled-on-the-walls-of-a-room-style of 1e. God yes, absolutely. The real second-best edition of D&D is Basic.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 28, 2017 19:22
|
|
|
Antilles posted:If your game is 100% focused on a single aspect, like combat, and if you reduce everything down to raw numbers and uncomplicated maths you might be able to just crunch the numbers and get something workable, but as soon as you start comparing apples vs oranges? How do you put a point value on "doesn't need sleep" and "cannot be poisoned" and expect them to be equally valuable in every circumstance? You buy them with completely separate point currencies so you don't have to.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2017 21:33
|
|
|
Haystack posted:Has any game really managed to tackle the broad vs narrow problem with freeform skills? Heroquest technically has rules that are supposed to penalize really broad abilities, but I've always felt like they put the GM in a bad place. Video games solve it by only allowing you to do what is explicitly permitted. You could do this in a tabletop RPG, but I suspect most posters in this thread wouldn't go for that. Every other alternative is just some variation of "let the GM handle it" or "don't be a dick."
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2017 21:58
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 19:50 |
|
|
My Lovely Horse posted:Man Perdido Street Station is great but could not possibly be further from classic sword and sorcery Yes it could. It could be Iron Council. 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2018 09:17
|
|