|
The last time someone asked me to play 5e I called him a Nazi and walked off.
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2021 20:43
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 23:57 |
|
|
I think what it was was people calling Zak a scam artist that was selling a product that he had no intention of ever working on. And him offering to show them all the work he's done on the unfinished product early if they sign something that says they have to apologize and defend him if he proves he's done his share of the work on it. Still crazy.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2021 16:06
|
|
|
Calling it "Ukraine" instead of україни is already an unacceptable degree of WESTERN CHAUVANISM and furthermore,
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2022 21:28
|
|
|
In theory just making poo poo up on the spot is unlimited, but in practice having made a bunch of stuff up beforehand will probably lead to more actual variety.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2022 15:53
|
|
|
I don't think it's that unusual to think that players having a spaceship can make a sandbox game a little harder to run. I think players having a sailing ship in a setting can make a sandbox game a little harder to run too. If you're invested in making the world feel more fleshed out than it does when you just make everything up on the spot, then players having access to a ship means there's a lot more potential places they can go at a moment's notice, which means you're going to need to prepare a lot more in advance. Personally I think a good solution is trying to set things up so they're picking a destination at the ends of sessions so you have time to prepare before the next session.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2022 16:26
|
|
|
I can't escape the feeling that paying for a GM is like paying someone to be your friend. Which is probably unfair an unfair comparison, but that's where my mind goes.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2022 01:38
|
|
|
I've played with a ton of random strangers, all in what's at least potentially long term games because I don't like one-shots. My experience is that about 20% of them are awful to the point where they'll actively ruin the game to the point where either they leave or I'll leave. 55% of them don't actively ruin the game but are boring to the point where they're basically non-entities and the game better have something else going for it if I'm going to stick around long term, and 25% are very enjoyable players to the point where I'll make a point to try and stay in contact with them and play in other games with them. If you're doing a lot of random games you basically want to just assemble a roster of that 25% of players and then build whole groups out of them. They tend to have a lot of potential for being at least casual friends with over time too.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2022 17:12
|
|
|
I could never get excited about Dungeon World. It's always seemed solidly mediocre every time I tried it.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2022 01:24
|
|
|
Deptfordx posted:Agreed, and having also tried Monster of the Week. I've concluded I just don't like the Powered by the Apocalypse system. It's certainly very possible, but I'll also suggest that both of those were made pretty early in the PbtA cycle when people didn't really understand the technology very well. There might be some more modern PbtA games that work better for you just by virtue of being better designed.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2022 14:55
|
|
|
I'd put Masks up there on the list of the best designed PbtA games and well worth a try, if you're even remotely interested in the subject matter.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2022 23:28
|
|
|
Something I think D&D does that most TTRPGs don't is offer you the ability to play a very long running game that continues to offer mechanical advancement. It definitely starts to break down, but not as hard as most systems do if you tried to play them for a hundred sessions. It's kind of annoying that the extreme long term campaign niche is pretty underdeveloped because I think it's a lot of fun.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2023 00:48
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Is it no fun if a long-term game doesn't have continuous character advancement? Or if the game system offers some maximum advancement, it stops being fun to keep playing beyond that point? I don't think it's essential, but there's a reason games tend to offer character advancement, and that's because it's fun. There are certainly other ways to have fun, but one of those ways running out, particularly when it's the primary way the system has to represent growth, is rather disappointing. Which isn't to say the way D&D does it is particularly good. Character levels are a pretty blunt way of doing things and a game designed around smaller but more frequent advancements I think does it much better. It's one of the reasons I really appreciate Burning Wheel as a good super long term game. But I'd like having more variety in my choices than just that.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2023 03:32
|
|
|
I think a big part of what made the MCU so successful is that it was directly lifting plotlines that had been developed over like the past fifty years in comic book form, which means they could work from a roadmap and focus on adapting them to the screen instead of also having to plan out a whole cohesive story in advance. I'd argue this is a big reason why Disney Star Wars is flopping so hard, they never had a coherent plan and were making it up as they went. I know D&D has a lot of books, is any of it actually suitable for basing a whole extended storyline off of or would they have to build it all from scratch?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2023 18:41
|
|
|
The Guild, but about a D&D group could be entertaining I suppose.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2023 02:18
|
|
|
hyphz posted:It’s that they have the same effect as porn. They give people unrealistic expectations. Then when those people try the real thing, they’re disappointed, blame the other people involved for not trying hard enough, then potentially fall into despair and double down on consumption of the fake. Man, I don't know. I've watched a bit of CR when I had nothing better to do out of curiosity, and it just seems like a bog standard mid-tier D&D game with good voice acting. I've had much better games. Heck, I currently have much better games.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2023 05:27
|
|
|
I mean really it comes down to 40k as a setting having been written by dozens of writers over 35 years. Some of those people definitely intended it as a satire, some of them definitely didn't. That's why there's no clear answer, because there's no consensus among the people who made it.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2023 21:16
|
|
|
I think the Guard has always been both. There's glorious elite regiments and there's penal battalion human wave regiments, and everything in between.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2023 20:13
|
|
|
TheDiceMustRoll posted:Slightly off topic but it seems like a lot of people try to write mass battle rules for TTRPGS I've run a mass battle in Torchbearer before. The system uses the same basic sub-system for all conflicts. You play four cards against each other in sets of three, all the cards interact with each other in different ways, the type of conflict you're doing varies up which skills and weapons you use. The system details a bunch of different conflict types, but doesn't have much for Battle conflicts, so I wrote my own up. The setup was the band of wandering adventurers, most of them fairly notable high levels by this point, came to a town that was under siege by an undead army that had been sent by a neighbouring necromancer. They smashed through the siege, killing the Death Knight in charge of it in the process, and fled into the town, where they found the forces there in disarray. The mayor saw the prominent and clearly competent wandering adventurers and promptly put them in charge of the local militia before going and locking himself in his estate. The way I set up the system is the minimum buy-in for participating in a Battle conflict at all was either having command of a squad of soldiers, or being an exceptionally powerful being that could do the Sauron thing of wading into groups of soldiers and sending them flying with one swipe of your giant mace. And assuming you're not one of those exceptionally powerful beings, you mostly rolled various command type skills in the conflict to control your troops, apart from one action which let you use your soldiers as a distraction while you yourself dove into the heart of things. Anyway, the intention going into this was pushing the PCs into situations that they hadn't been in before, mostly having been tomb robbing adventurers, and they were all woefully inept at actually commanding an army. I gave them the benefit of the city's walls, which would provide a big bonus until the enemy took the appropriate actions to get rid of it. And with the Death Knight gone the remaining skeleton soldiers weren't particularly skilled at the command skills either, but they had the weight of numbers giving them some hefty bonuses for that. For the battle itself I opened with the undead giant going first and "disarming" the city wall by scripting the appropriate action for that and narrated it smashing the walls down with its giant club while the PCs led the militia in killing off a bunch of supporting skeletons with ranged weapons. There were a few actions of the PCs leading the militia in a street fight against the skeletons pouring into the town through the smashed wall. And then finally the halfling scripting the risky personal attack action against the giant and describing himself running down a remaining segment of wall, jumping onto the giant as it was busy swinging its club around smashing buildings, and stabbing it repeatedly in the head until it finally went down. After the conflict in Torchbearer you count how many conflict hit points each side lost and then figure out a compromise that the winner owes to the loser based on that. As the PCs lost all by one hit point the compromise we ended up with was the town militia was scattered and broken and effectively ruined as a fighting force for the foreseeable future, as well as the town being left defenseless by the ruined city wall. Which essentially led to a bandit leader rival of the group rolling up to the city, executing the mayor, and taking over running the place as soon as the PCs left town to go deal with the necromancer. Also the battle took place in freezing rain, which requires a health test after strenuous activities performed in it or becoming sick. The halfling went into it already sick, and failed the health test, so after killing the giant the poor little guy just couldn't handle it any more and keeled over and died in the freezing mud. I love Torchbearer.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2023 16:11
|
|
|
TheDiceMustRoll posted:This sounds incredible and you should be writing batreps. Also I'm heading out to go camping but come monday Im buying this book Good luck with it! I love Torchbearer, but it's a very divisive system in that most people I've tried it with have absolutely hated it.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2023 18:14
|
|
|
Dexo posted:As most people play boring goodie two-shoes characters. I was shocked to recently learn that 92% of the playerbase apparently went Paragon in the Mass Effect trilogy.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2023 06:26
|
|
|
Ash Rose posted:And yet, people make Paladins aggressively unhorny despite also having high charisma. Speak for yourself.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2023 13:24
|
|
|
Discord really shines for groups of like 10 people max.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2023 19:40
|
|
|
Something D&D offers that's unfortunately pretty rare is support for very long term games.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2023 15:37
|
|
|
Mors Rattus posted:It does? In what manner does it do so that other games with advancement systems don’t? Lots of modern games, see anything PbtA as a big example, have advancement systems that are designed to cap out at somewhere in the 8-20 session range and start to break down if you try to play them past that. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, tightly designed systems that are designed to provide a satisfying narrative arc and then end are often going to be better designed that sprawling systems that are designed to run indefinitely. But it is a trade off.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2023 15:52
|
|
|
For me, roleplay the pitch, then roll if there's a chance it might work, is the sweet spot. Pitches that are totally unconvincing, whether it be through being a bad pitch, or through being delivered very badly, don't get a roll because they can't succeed. Pitches that the person is never going to say no to just automatically work, no roll required. The rolls are for the grey area middle ground.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2024 01:20
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:I'm always against this because it limits people from playing characters against type. Just because a player can't on the fly articulate a clever ruse doesn't mean their character shouldn't be able to. I don't mind fuzzing over a few details sometimes. Give a few lines, summarize the gist of the argument, make a roll for it. But even then if the summary of the argument is X, Y and Z, and X, Y and Z wouldn't work, then I don't think it merits a roll. If people feel otherwise and want a game where you can always just turn it into a dice roll that's fine, I don't think they're playing wrong or anything. But for me, at a certain point, I'm probably just not going to play with someone who can't roleplay very well, because that's just not fun for me.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2024 05:36
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 23:57 |
|
|
FMguru posted:The original Dawn of War PC game was the gateway drug for so many of my friends into 40K. Handled correctly, video games can be a huge long-term customer acquisition machine. Another example is Bloodlines getting people into Vampire.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2024 19:26
|
|