TG Chat Thread 2018: Please welcome our new mod, Count Strahd von Zarovich

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Traditional Games > TG Chat Thread 2018: Please welcome our new mod, Count Strahd von Zarovich

«‹›8 »

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

2017 was an international game of Paranoia. Or Fiasco.

What will 2018 be like?

# ¿ Jan 1, 2018 15:59

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 10, 2024 00:17

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

gradenko_2000 posted:

2. at any time, the GM can introduce a complication to try and gently caress you over. You can either accept this and receive XP in exchange, or spend XP to block the GM. Since you also need XP to, you know, level up, this can get really annoying really quickly

The young kids are hip to these "Fated Points", howsabout I give them a cursory glance and then made Deadlands chips but worse?

# ¿ Jan 2, 2018 09:21

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

grassy gnoll posted:

I need to buy a couple of sets of transparent d20s in five-die blocks - five red, five blue, etc. Anywhere I can actually buy individual dice in specific colors for not appalling rates? This is turning out to be more difficult than I anticipated.

Where are you in the world?

http://www.chessex.com/Dice/Translucent/trans_dice_home.htm
Order button is on the lower right of any of the specific pages.

https://www.thediceshoponline.com/cat/41/sides/15/d20
Same dice, ~20% surcharge for the pleasure of using a website not made in 1974.

Alternatively, stop by your LFGS and ask to do a bulk order, if you're ordering 20 d20s at once they should give you some kind of discount.

e: define appalling rates.

Splicer fucked around with this message at 21:28 on Jan 5, 2018

# ¿ Jan 5, 2018 21:23

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Leraika posted:

buy a pound of dice and ~~let god sort out the rest~~ give the rest away as presents or sell them to your LFGS for store credit at cost.

# ¿ Jan 5, 2018 21:37

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Zomborgon posted:

That does not, however, free the game designer from the need to provide guidelines for challenge. For example, D&D variants generally suggest some X encounters per rest.

If the objection is that the game does not provide guidelines as to what makes for an easy/challenging/hard run then that's a good objection, assuming the game doesn't do this (I haven't played BitD).

If the objection is a lack of map does the game say you shouldn't have a map or is there just not usually one provided?

Splicer fucked around with this message at 17:57 on Jan 7, 2018

# ¿ Jan 7, 2018 17:55

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

hyphz posted:

Yea, but both of those lead to degenerate strategies.

For example, quite a few games feature "story points" which you can spend to make a challenge easier. This will usually involve making the challenge take less real time, or consume less resources.

If the GM is judging the number of obstacles based on real time or remaining resources, then rationally you should never spend story points; if you make the current obstacle take less time or resources, then there will be more obstacles added until the minimum required level of resource expenditure or time is reached. It's like the "never boost when you're in 1st place in Mario Kart because you just aren't allowed to get more than a certain distance ahead" issue.

BitD has heavy attrition; failures can count up to consequences which take substantial resource expenditure to resolve. If the GM is fixing that level of resource expenditure in advance as the condition for the number of obstacles to encounter, why bother even trying to deal with the obstacles cleanly?

(Edit: I know about clocks in BitD, but there is no clock used for "exploring the mansion" in the sample of play, and using one would be a serious breach of versimilitude. I suspect quite a few groups would actively parody that "hey we have looked in 3 rooms so this is the last spot on the clock, let's go look in the outhouse and the artefact will have to be there!" In addition, does an empty room advance the clock as one full of hostile spirits?)

Where is this sample of play?

# ¿ Jan 7, 2018 18:15

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Zomborgon posted:

Precisely. Even if there must be a challenge to advance things, it still has the "bust through the wall" problem of having to shuffle things around so the clock runs fully before success is allowed occur, invalidating the reason for the map.

If the standard challenge is 4 as per serf then this seems like a non-issue. I can't think of a heist scenario that didn't involve at least four serious challenges. That said, for formality's sake:

Serf posted:

Blades in the Dark specifies that a 4-segment clock represents a complex obstacle, and is the average challenge that players will encounter.

So let's say we're trying to steal a necklace. It is established through play that
1) there is security we need to evade to get in
2) we need to locate the necklace once we're inside
3) there is necklace specific security we need to evade
4) we need to get out.

I spend a story point or just come up with a real good piece of RP to make finding the necklace a non-issue. Does this still count towards the clock? Is "I don't like it, this was to easy" a central conceit or is going "good job w/d mission complete you really nailed that one" within the game as written?

Conversely if we prepared for a hard exit but do something stupid between 2 and 3 to cause Problems, do the credits roll after 3 and it's just assumed we got out?

Or is the whole 4 segment clock a formalised "Just go with the flow but probably don't keep throwing poo poo at them after 5 and if there's less than 3 it's probably been kind if a boring session" (which is cool by me)

e: I'm aware that in *world games the players mainly throw things at themselves but you get what I mean.

Splicer fucked around with this message at 19:15 on Jan 7, 2018

# ¿ Jan 7, 2018 19:03

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

hyphz posted:

Nah, I'm not quite that mad against the "magical tea party". But if every sip of tea is gradually draining my life force, I want to know how deep the pot is.

From what Serf said, it's at most four cups deep. From what Flavivirus said, pouring cups into the potted plant is allowed and in contrast to your initial fears this does not require the GM to make a fresh pot.

Splicer fucked around with this message at 20:35 on Jan 7, 2018

# ¿ Jan 7, 2018 20:31

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

hyphz posted:

In the case of a �trapdoor� which is just an interesting potential feature which is explorable without direct cost, yes, sure.

But I said a �trapped door�, a door protected by a trap. That�s going to cause attrition and damage to the PCs. My making it up is arguably a bad thing for the players. If I�m going to do so �when it�s interesting� then one day the success of a heist will depend on it not being interesting, and the players will thus be rewarded for playing so that it isn�t.

hyphz, you need to sit down with some good friends and play a game of Danger Patrol.

# ¿ Jan 7, 2018 22:58

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

hyphz posted:

Oh god, not those rules. Yea, the ones that say the GM gets to make a hard move when the "players look to them to see what happens next", which they arguably do all the time. And which is a truly lovely thing for the players to learn they are being penalized for. And the ones that make "use up their resources" a single move when resource management is meaningless if it's determined by how often the GM picks that option from an arbitrary list. They're the single worst part of the whole PbtA idea.

OK even I know this is wrong. When the "players look to them to see what happens next" the GM makes a soft move, which is just describing a thing that's going on for the players to act on or react to. It's the entire basis of a GM run RPG. The only difference between this and, say, D&D, is that the GM plays a lot more soft moves in D&D because *world games have a lot more player agency in the fiction.

# ¿ Jan 7, 2018 23:37

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

hyphz posted:

I was using a sample adventure which had that exact setup. Even if they're running against big corps they apparently get recruited in dive bars because that's a cyberpunk trope.

Why did he shoot everyone though? How was that helping set up the run?

# ¿ Jan 7, 2018 23:53

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

hyphz posted:

And that's hitting the nail on the head - I can't see how you can possibly do that unless it's decided in advance. If it's not in advance, then at the moment you make the fiction up, you just have too much information to not set up for a particular outcome. If the players are worn out and out of spells and you spawn a dragon, you know what the outcome's going to be, and you've effectively set up for it whether you like it or not. If you don't spawn the dragon, the players know they can walk around worn out and there will never be one.

The Dimmer Sisters house is explicitly described in the printed fiction as one that nobody who has entered has ever left. Isn't maintaining the integrity of that statement exactly the same as setting up for a particular outcome?

So if you're playing a *world or similar game and your players walk through four rooms, use up all their spells in those rooms, then open the last room and there's a dragon in it, that's a dick move because there's no way they can survive that.

But if you're playing D&D or similar game and your players walk through four rooms, use up all their spells in those rooms, then open the last room and there's a dragon in it, that's fine because the dragon was already there.

Do I have that right?

# ¿ Jan 8, 2018 00:03

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Serf posted:

it literally says "don't be the enemy of the pcs". that is a nice way of saying "don't be a loving rear end in a top hat"

I think his argument is that if you've already put the dragon there, the PCs will be careful because they might run into a dragon, and if they're not careful they'll feel like it's their own fault. If you haven't already put the dragon there, choosing to put the dragon there makes you an rear end in a top hat, but not putting the dragon there means there's no reason for the PCs to be careful.

It's a polite fiction (heh) that allows you to shift responsibility for the consequences of character actions away from the GM. He's saying that without this psychological barrier/misdirection/whatever between the GM's actions and player's misfortunes the players will be mad at the GM for making a dragon eat the dwarf rather than at the dragon for eating the dwarf or at themselves for making the dwarf look so delicious.

It's the same reason why people get so hung up on rules for monster creation. If the GM "follows the rules" in making a monster and the monster kills you, it's the monster that killed you. If the GM "just makes up some bullshit" and it kills you, that's the GM making up some bullshit to kill you. Even if the result is exactly the same monster.

# ¿ Jan 8, 2018 00:16

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

hyphz posted:

Nail on the head. Well, with one exception: it's in the GM's head. It's not "the GM making up some bullshit to kill you", it's "me making up some bullshit to kill the PCs", again even if it's exactly the same monster.

You're not wrong.

BUT

hyphz posted:

It doesn't matter what system you're playing.

This is very wrong! In *world style games (Or Danger Patrol or similar) the players have way more say in stuff that would be GM stuff for D&D (or shadowrun or similar). In D&D you roll Arcana to find out things about a monster. In Dungeon World you roll Spout Lore to decide something about a monster. This shifts where players have their emotional investment. In D&D games your primary method of narrative agency is through the actions of your character, so that's where most of your psychological investment lies. The greater meta agency granted to a *world character puts greater investment in the narrative, and gives you a greater sense of ownership over the world. "Yeah there's a dragon there, says so on the map" is replaced with "Yeah there's a dragon there, it fits in with the world we've built together". You'll also get players saying "I kick the door open... gently caress, there's a dragon in there isn't there."

Also, magical tea party games tend to come with better consequences than "You died, roll up a new character".

But you are also 100% right that some people will never enjoy a game like BitD, or will enjoy running but not playing, or playing but not running, for the reasons you posted. You'll also get people who will never enjoy games like D&D, or will enjoy running but not playing, or playing but not running. But you have to look at the rest of the game in context to get why some people do.

# ¿ Jan 8, 2018 00:47

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

What I'm getting here is that some of us find the perception of impartiality a useful tool. This is not to say that improvisation or explicitly rule of cooling things is verboten, but the pretence is they're explicit case by case exceptions by an otherwise impartial adjudicator. This helps the players and GM maintain their suspension of disbelief and other such things so they can get on with having fun playing the game

What I'm also getting is that some of us find the openness of "we're all making poo poo up what's an interesting thing to make up" freeing and fun due to a bunch of other psychology words I can't be arsed thinking about so they can get on with having fun with the game.

Those of us fortunate enough to be in the galaxy brain intersection of these two groups :smug:

(or at least get the appeal of both intellectually if not personally) understand that both can be equally fun, assuming as always that everyone involved is on board with and the systems are designed around the pros and cons of each approach. You don't have to like both, but if you get where the appeal of each comes from it only makes both more fun.

Splicer fucked around with this message at 12:40 on Jan 8, 2018

# ¿ Jan 8, 2018 12:13

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

gradenko_2000 posted:

Holy poo poo is this seriously what I fuckin' think it is

I need my pretty 3D graphics though

# ¿ Jan 8, 2018 16:04

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

hyphz posted:

I mean I ran FFG Star Wars for a while and that has a premade with a scene where the PCs are exploring a giant wrecked spaceship underwater to recover something, and there�s a sea leviathan poking around at it. And it sounds cool but there�s no map and the leviathan has no stats or actions other than �if the PCs actually try to fight this thing they lose�. And so hey let�s have them find a few empty rooms so it feels big and let�s do the dramatic escalation thing where they see a shadow and then it goes by in a window and then there�s a bang and then after they�ve explored an area it creates a breach in the hull but obviously it will never actually matter and I�m just sitting feeling like a bad stage magician because I can see all the wires.

What's the adventure called?

# ¿ Jan 8, 2018 17:42

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

hyphz posted:

Well, how often do you normally have a conversation which will at the end have a "positive or negative outcome", that you're invested in? It's when you're trying to persuade someone to do something, or sell something to them, or give you a job, or go on a date, and so on.. and all of those interactions are characterized by social behaviors which don't apply to regular conversations with no such stakes.

Seriously, take a break from your current campaign and run some danger patrol one shots. I'll answer any questions you have and give you some tips!

# ¿ Jan 8, 2018 18:44

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

I think part of the disconnect here is that in D&D style games bad things happening to your character are a fail state and to be avoided.

# ¿ Jan 8, 2018 18:54

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

hyphz posted:

I could only find a beta version that seems to be 7-8 years old and a "pocket edition". I read the pocket edition since it wasn't described as alpha/beta, so maybe I missed a lot of stuff. But as far as I can see it's just a dice game, the actual actions you take never matter. You're encouraged to use certain stats against enemies that are weak to them but since there is no limit on what any stat can do there is no reason to ever not do so.

Should have specified, I meant the Beta. It's obviously unfinished, and never will be, but it's good fun and great for teaching you how to have fun hurting your darlings.

# ¿ Jan 8, 2018 20:13

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

hyphz posted:

I see what you mean, but it avoids the original issue which is how, with no map, the GM decides how many obstacles to spawn before success. In Danger Patrol the game locks that number in the rules and makes every threat a separate encounter so there are no pacing errors caused by that. Most narrative games either don�t do it at all or use a clock so the numbers are predictable.

I'm saying play it because part of the core mechanics is explaining why what your character is about to do is a terrible idea. Then the table uses these explanations to describe why terrible things just happened. So you spend all night explaining why both good and bad things happened to your character and both were fun. The thing you're complaining about is that there's no map and that there's no challenge if bad things can't happen that are "out of your control", but that's because you're missing the context of the players having fun making bad things happen to their characters. Bad things happening isn't a fail state, it's an assumption, or even a goal, and coming up with the bad things is fun as heck. Danger Patrol is one of the purest distillations of this concept I've ever played and it genuinely completely altered how I play RPGs.

# ¿ Jan 9, 2018 00:08

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Nuns with Guns posted:

me earlier today: you know, maybe I was a bit harsh saying that guy's understanding of player/GM interactions is sociopathic and implying he has fundamental problems understanding non-toxic behavior in RPGs

me catching up on this thread: ahahaha welp

How do you think I feel? :smith:

# ¿ Jan 9, 2018 14:48

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

hyphz posted:

I don't mind that. What I mind is the implication that when the players meet a goblin, they have their PCs throw down their swords and fight it hand to hand with one hand tied behind their back because "we want the game to be a challenge so we'll make it one, and anyway if we failed it might be interesting".

This is lunacy, but to go back to your original, more sane objection, if they kill the red dragon kobold worshippers, then follow a trail of gold to a door saying "Red Dragon", and one of the players says "At last, I have found the dragon that killed my liege! With its death my life will be complete!", there's a good chance the player is OK with being horribly maimed and/or dying in a dragon battle.

# ¿ Jan 9, 2018 17:16

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Almost every objection hyphz has raised applies just as equally to any form of RPG EXCEPT running an extremely procedurally tight system in a set module with no player deviation from the railroad.

At this point they seem to be objecting to the concept of free will.

# ¿ Jan 9, 2018 23:06

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Antivehicular posted:

I'm not even sure Godbound would work, because the core problem is that the things I loved about Exalted (beyond the general "it was huge in my college scene, you had to be there" stuff) were the weird setting bits, particularly Jenna Moran's work on the line, and where that took me in terms of chargen and imagination -- but that was mostly in a really low-power direction. I could definitely run the "my ideal Exalted game" stuff for him, but given that one of my ideas for that sort of thing is a police procedural game set in a modern-tech city populated by Demon-blooded, it's probably not going to be the actual game as published, you know?

There's a game called Mutant City Blues you might like to check out.

# ¿ Jan 10, 2018 10:05

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Antivehicular posted:

I have MCB and it's great. I just need to get other people to play it with me, but isn't that always the problem?

It's a procedural, trick people into playing a one shot, then later run another one shot "and in hey I still have your sheets from last time!", repeat.

# ¿ Jan 10, 2018 16:29

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

hyphz posted:

The fiction ad-lib thing was more triggered by the sea monster encounter in Star Wars. The problem I had is that without a gamist subgame to delegate to a la DnD combat, following the fiction seemed to rob the game of tension because the GM is not the only one familiar with fiction and the players can all see exactly where it is leading.

Could you post the name if the adventure because I really want to talk about this fish but I want to fact check first.

# ¿ Jan 10, 2018 18:08

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Serf posted:

how do they get the laserbeam to stop at sword length

I think the :goonsay:

answer is that it's actually a torus that arcs up to a fixed length then arcs back down to the handle, so if you peered in the top you'd see the base of the emitter surrounded by a tube of laser.

# ¿ Jan 11, 2018 19:13

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Halloween Jack posted:

It works pretty well if the options are just based on type: Pistol, Big Pistol, Carbine, Rifle, Sniper Rifle, LMG.

This was WFRP3 and it worked fine there. Though even then they got a bit weird when it came to ranged weapons.

# ¿ Jan 11, 2018 19:18

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Covok posted:

The official explanation is there is a line of plasma that surrounds it. Basically, and energy field is generated around the surface. Lightsabers actually have an edged side and a blunt side because of this.

If they didn't do that, the weapon would disperse so much that it be too unfocused to actually cut anything.

*charges laser torus* let's take this outside

# ¿ Jan 12, 2018 13:15

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Blockhouse posted:

I thought I really wanted to run some dumb fantasy bullshit

turns out what I actually want to run is some dumb space fantasy bullshit in a system that doesn't give me a migraine

http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/228813/Genesys-Core-Rulebook?cPath=36_29258 genesys pdf is half price if you want to run both!

# ¿ Jan 18, 2018 13:33

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

dwarf74 posted:

One of my best friends from high school - Doug - is the reigning world Diplomacy champion.

We played it once, I think, about 20 years ago. I don't remember how far we got, and I realized it was really not my thing. I think we always had a lot more fun playing D&D, Earthdawn, and - horror of horrors - Mythus, before we knew any better.

I've played one game of diplomacy to completion, and it ended with me and a friend with an impenetrable wall across europe, while the other three desperately tried to get us to betray each other instead of just reinforcing round after round after round.

They were so angry, and couldn't understand why we were refusing to push for the win.

But we had already won.

# ¿ Jan 22, 2018 22:13

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Plutonis posted:

Post a selfie so I can be cruel to you but on an informed point of view.

Ettin's a big blue eye in a crt monitor.

Hey Ettin! You look like a 90s nazi trying to figure out his lovely 1st gen webcam! Friend computer more like fail computer amirite?

# ¿ Jan 24, 2018 13:09

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

gradenko_2000 posted:

Starfinder's level-gated equipment was put in because the the designers at some point realized that the narratives that would spring from a sci-fi game might produce outcomes where the players could become fabulously wealthy beyond the prescripted wealth-by-level rules, so they had to say that you couldn't wield a level 20 Gun even if you could afford it.

It shows how criminally unimaginative and wedded to their system they are that they saw "The fighter can get infinite fireballs" as a problem rather than an opportunity, and "solved" it in the dumbest way possible.

# ¿ Jan 25, 2018 17:29

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

food court bailiff posted:

This is so frustrating because it seems like it could be solved by some kind of narrative consequences if they ever decided to have narrative rules outside of what skill does what. It's a space opera game, there's always a bigger fish out there - you do some run that gets you twenty tons of sixteen-barrel repeating laser rifles or some other ungodly armory, suddenly half the thugs in the galaxy have a vested interest in robbing you and yours. "Not a high enough level to find the trigger" is such a dumb rule idea - even understanding the apparent intent! - that I really don't quite know how to respond to it.

"Not a high enough level to take the heat" is one decent way to do it, yeah. If you're level 5 and packing above your skill then you become a target, since everyone knows you're out of your league. Level 10 with the same equipment, nobody messes with you because you're armed and dangerous, but if you pick up a planet killer somewhere then whup, that's another target on your back.

Give the fighter equivalent a scaling badass bonus for guns and stuff so nobody thinks twice if she's packing a tricked out laser and power armour, but the wizard needs comparatively more street cred before he can get away with it.

# ¿ Jan 25, 2018 17:45

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Andrast posted:

I'd play a Dr. Phil tabletop game

I'd play a Jerry Springer/Maury show where you're all trying to top each other with your horrible hosed up families.

# ¿ Jan 25, 2018 20:28

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

food court bailiff posted:

Comics are good. I read pretty much the whole run of Gwenpool in a single night and now I'm reading Howard the Duck and I keep thinking a game about normies in a superhero world would be fun, but even as a one-off I'm not sure I can come up with enough content that's actually fun instead of just funny.

There's a FATE game called Base Raiders which is set in generic superhero universe after all the heroes and villains are killed off in a crisis event, and you're just some normies ransacking the batcave for stuff to sell and/or use to fight off the bunch of malfunctioning iron man suits "protecting" Detroit.

Or go full survival horror. Cloverfield except instead of an incoming nuke it's not-the-flash sonic booming through the city. Yeah the good guys will win in the end, but can you avoid being part of not-superman's "I couldn't save them all" speech?

# ¿ Jan 29, 2018 19:12

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

1337JiveTurkey posted:

As far as the colors of the suits go, I'm a protanope so I can't meaningfully distinguish something like 99% of colors. Black, white, red and blue are about as safe as I could choose so that both me and my tritanopic sister-in-law could play. For honest-to-god Monochromats? �\_(ツ)_/�

I had half an effortpost typed up explaining the different kinds of colour blindness and how you'd be limited to maybe four colours max, glad I hit preview! :v:

You could squeeze out a fifth die type by making the unupgradeable die into another die size. So Mighty Strength gets you a d12 or maybe 2d8s, leaving you three kinds of d6s to upgrade to.

# ¿ Feb 3, 2018 15:46

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Xelkelvos posted:

None of this die color stuff that seems fine for a board game, but is probably too fiddly for a TTRPG

I will fight you IRL.

1337JiveTurkey posted:

Writing this all out, I think that it works much better if I reroll ones instead of dropping the lowest dice. That reduces the cognitive load to looking for red 6s and blue 1s rather than looking for red 6s and finding the biggest blue dice. That was really the thing that was worrying me.

Yeah, that makes sense. It also prevents e.g. someone mistakenly thinking that the "drop lowest" applies to all the dice in a blue dice roll, as opposed to just the blue ones. Or weird corner cases where you get two blue-drop-lowest piles from different sources, do you drop two or just one etc.

On that note, you could maybe allow buying of black dice for benefits across the dice. Like spend 1 white die to get three black die and you also get to drop the lowest total roll.

Splicer fucked around with this message at 19:55 on Feb 3, 2018

# ¿ Feb 3, 2018 19:20

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 10, 2024 00:17

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Tuxedo Catfish posted:

wait in what sense is a bonus action not an action

None of the things that trigger off actions trigger off bonus actions. Also things that require an action cannot be performed using bonus action.

# ¿ Feb 10, 2018 22:26

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Traditional Games > TG Chat Thread 2018: Please welcome our new mod, Count Strahd von Zarovich

«‹›8 »