|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:another thing that would help is if you have players who are good about keeping track of their own mechanics and can take some of the tracking workload off the GM This is a basic requirement in my Awakening2e game. If you're going to cast a spell, you have to know the basics of what it does. I won't be telling you because I'm too busy trying to tell a story, dealing with multiple souls and temporal phenomena, and dealing with 98% of my planning getting skipped (because mage) to be arsed to tell a person how Control Electricity works. RTFM. Granted, this works really well now because the players are flexible and know what their sheets do. And they help any new players so I don't have to worry about it as much. Got them trained up right. (Also, I think they're having fun, so that helps.)
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2019 05:29
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 04:07 |
|
|
Loomer posted:There’s an interesting notion in the fairly terrible Predator and Prey series. Michigan’s young kindred float between small cities that can’t really support s vampiric population to avoid overpredation. If we made this a more universal model, it could be quite interest8ng in its ramifications demographically. This idea comes up again in Requiem 1e's Nomads book. Not exactly Michigan, but vampires that travel around. There are plenty of small towns in Michigan that are 30-45 minutes apart that you'd only need a way to reliably hide in the daytime. Most of the Midwest could be done this way and it would really be more like ranching than herding.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2019 15:11
|
|
|
Warthur posted:There's two types of IP at work here, copyright and trademarks. For the purpose of copyright, you're correct that streams are likely fine unless you're flat-out reciting substantial sections of the rulebook into your video. With trademarks, on the other hand, using someone's trademark in the course of business without permission (ie, advertising your stream, which you monetise, as a Dungeons & Dragons stream as opposed to a fantasy roleplaying stream) is trademark infringement. (Acknowledging that the game you are playing is D&D in the course of the stream would probably be fine, using the D&D logo and name specifically to advertise your stream would likely be infringement). On the face of it, it looks like the Dark Pack is a trademark licence. Not to mention that reads like it did ten years ago when I did more chat games and MUSHes and stuff. Not really anything new here. Basically, just attribute where it's due.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2019 18:11
|
|
|
But then what would Loomer have done with all that time? I too don’t bother with population limits. They make for tedious story. For me it’s a lot like tracking encumberance in D&D. Great once in a while for a good reason, but otherwise it just gets in the way.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2019 21:05
|
|
|
Chernobyl Peace Prize posted:See I think of this in the opposite direction: population limits bring conflict over limited resources to the forefront, which gives vampire games a tangible and perpetual reason for conflict beyond ideological slapfights, Sabbat poo poo-stirring, and pissy courtly intrigue. Not that they should be a hard-and-fast thing, but I think they give more plot hooks than they take away, and also help you start to think how VtM as a macro setting functions, if at all. I guess that's sort of fair, but I can think of other ways to do that that are just as effective? I've never had any issues with making it a thing in Requiem either. I just make it a thing because power is the real drug and control of food supply is just one way to manipulate and control the masses. I've just never needed an arbitrary rule to make it interesting and not a requirement. Forced plot hooks based on somewhat random numbers is not at all useful for stories I'd prefer to tell. Scarcity of resources can be a thing without putting population caps on things that only sort of make sense in major metropolitan areas. It's just the choice that they made when they wrote the books. I'm not sure it's necessary in that form to put forth that setting function, when really the idea is scarcity of resources and not over-hunting so as to raise suspicious, not population density. It's fine if it works for you, but the fact that it comes up in ways that routinely make people go "huh?" doesn't make it necessarily a good design decision to get that point across.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2019 22:23
|
|
|
Signs of Sorcery can be purchased via print now if anyone else was waiting for that. It was probably weeks ago, but I don't pay that well attention. That and the Deviant KS is done today.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2019 15:00
|
|
|
I can't think of a good reason to buy WoD minis? I don't think I've ever even thought about a vampire game with a combat map. I mean, if they look cool, sure, but I'm not sure there's must purpose other than looking cool. I do wonder if they do any market research though, or if they're just doing 90s throwback for the sake of it these days like everyone else. *Also, many props to the Best Setite. It's the best LARP story I've ever heard. The only sad part is there won't be any more of those great 'zines.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2019 15:37
|
|
|
Chernobyl Peace Prize posted:For books that devote as many pages to combat rules (whether direct Combat Rules or gifts/disciplines/powers/etc. that only have combat applications), I've never really understood how pure theater of the mind is supposed to be the de facto mode of play. Then again, my ideal system is probably something like Strike! rules and WoD/CoD flavor so I might be in the minority here. I think it's more an issue of scale for me. I don't have room for 200' of map in each direction, and because of all the various powers, I don't know that I've ever had a combat last more than a few rounds anyway. Maybe Werewolf would be different I don't know, but I normally run mage so any map I would make is immediately not useful because they're going to look at it and immediately compensate for everything on it. Every vampire combat has also been short and sweet due to disciplines too. I guess I just have never seen a reason why it would be necessary past a cool looking luxury thing. I understand the wargaming aspect of maps and minis, but even with all the combat rules I've never needed it because of the shorter amount of time dedicated to the combat portion of the game.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2019 16:08
|
|
|
I don’t ever see myself playing cWoD again, but I would read the narrative version and probably buy a strict timeline too. It’s the thing that it was missing for me as l came into it in about 1998 and the history was just confusing and well out of a high school budget to ever catch up. So I never did. $5 for it seems cheap to me too, especially considering just how much pure information that will be there. I’d easily pay $10-15 for it, because it’s going to be quite the tome and it seems a much more appropriate price for such a thing.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2019 17:44
|
|
|
Soonmot posted:Who knows what page number in Mage they talk about building mysteries? The section that goes into opacity (?) And how many successes you need to break through a later to reveal information? I forgot my tablet, so when I go to the bar to work in things tonight I have to use my phone and gently caress searching for anything in a PDF on the phone. p293 is for building mysteries. Mage sight and opacity are on p92. Have fun building scenes.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 25, 2019 00:49
|
|
|
Rand Brittain posted:I keep wishing they'd get into ePub instead of doing those weird little phone PDFs. The quality on the POD books is pretty good, but I shell out the few extra dollars for the better printing. Just have to remember how to break in the spines because they're always super stiff when I get them. Signs of Sorcery is a nice sized book with good density of information. I'm looking forward to integrating it into my game.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 25, 2019 00:53
|
|
|
It would be amazing to play Ars Magica, but it’s hard enough to find people to play an Awakening game, I don’t know enough people with the amount of reading time to make AM even an option. If I did, I would definitely buy those books and read them. Until then it would just work it’s way into my brain much like Shadowrun did in the early 00’s where it became a perfect game in my head that I have still never gotten to play. Now there is no game that could ever live up to my imagination. I’ll just stick to occasionally throwing cyberpunk stuff into my Awakening game.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2019 20:17
|
|
|
Definitely something a group of Seers might do to keep themselves in control and keep the proletariat suffering in their struggle so they hopefully don’t awaken. They might not be super keen about the Strix either, but what they don’t know...
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2020 23:35
|
|
|
I might use that idea, and I'm running a Mage Awakening 2e game. That's a sick idea. Clearly, I have fewer issues with destroying china shops with mashing things together. It fits the world we're playing in really well, and as they won't ever discover all the deep meanings part, it would be a really nice way to have some werewolves drop by for a while.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2020 16:59
|
|
|
Chernobyl Peace Prize posted:That survey was wild for me, as someone who listens to rpg actual play podcasts, watches hours of twitch streams and vods of video games every week, and would choose the bullet if you made me watch a twitch stream of a ttrpg actual play with a gun to my head. Yeah, and it was very long. But they didn't seem interested in what I wanted, just what I did. If they could only figure out that to make it more relevant these days, they have to stop bringing all the lovely baggage along and stop creating new lovely baggage, they might actually have decent bones to tell interesting, political, social, and scary stories. But it's been almost 20 years since Requiem came out and they still haven't figured it out so I won't hold out hope.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2020 18:31
|
|
|
I will say, the Awakening 2e and Signs of Sorcery are both better laid out for playing reference than it is for creation. We recently added a new player and I’d forgotten how much flipping around is required at that stage. Actual order of information aside, it’s still better than 1e Awakening was at information layout. Regular play though the book gets opened and the chapters in the middle of the book get the heavy traffic, which is nice because it’s happy to lay open without the binding getting destroyed. Even finding the necessary rules is easy enough as they’re in basically one of three sections. Except conditions and tilts. Those are in the most unfortunate location, so I’m glad I bought the cards.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2020 22:01
|
|
|
A Renaissance Nerd posted:My issue was keeping the names of all that stuff straight, but I imagine you pick it up fast enough when actually playing. Mage spellcasting is a lot of fun, and once you get a hang of the names for things it’s very easy. Bonus points for all of that being in about 6 or 7 pages total. I’ve only had one person that wasn’t a mage newbie in my game and everyone else is pretty decent with those mechanics after 2-3 sessions.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2020 22:34
|
|
|
I Am Just a Box posted:Finally, a new CofD 2e corebook where Chapter One isn't just a set of character splat splashes. Because it's a nod to how the world changes? These are mostly mortal compacts that are getting absorbed it looks like. Which makes sense? People change all the time, and their groups and important communities change with it. I don't see too many people going to Lodge meetings on a regular basis anymore, it stands to reason these groups fall in and out of favor too. Granted, they put them all in the conspiracy that I find least interesting with TFV, but whatchagondo?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2020 22:46
|
|
|
Rand Brittain posted:Is it just me or is the 2e Cheiron Group about 30% wackier? Like, it almost feels like a comedy game now? I haven't read Hunter 2e, but everytime Cheiron came up in play in 1e for me it always ended up being crazy mad-scientist org and people seem to have had fun with that. I mean sure, you're putting a werewolf part in you or something, but it was always pretty wacky in my playing experience. Did it go full ham this time around? I can see that as being fun to play.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2020 21:17
|
|
|
Xinder posted:I’ve run a few 2e games in the past but I’m building a new group after moving and I wanted to run a Mortals GMC game. Is it worth buying the Chronicles corebook if I only want the story seed ideas? Really depends on how you want to run the game. Have you found success in finding story ideas in the chronicles books in the past? Then you might have some luck. I've always ended up going different directions than any of the hooks in the books, so aside from mechanics they've been less useful for me (except Geist, I'm just starting in on the hardcover copy that has shown up from the KS, this one is giving me story ideas). For low power, weaker monster things, I've always just pulled from folklore and places like the Twilight Zone and monster-of-the-week episodes of the X Files and Supernatural. When I start there, I can start to tailor the game to the players because I can easily react to how they've dealt with the problem and the strengths/weaknesses they have. It's better than starting a mage game all about the spirit world, but where you don't have any players who have invested any dots in Spirit. Sure, it's possible, but it just leads to frustration when the Moros is going... "why couldn't it have just been about ghosts?"
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2020 15:37
|
|
|
I haven’t had issues with the POD from Drivethrurpg. The Mage 2e core has seen very heavy use for three years and the binding hasn’t had any issues. It’s gotten more use than my 3.5e Player’s Handbook even and stayed in better shape. The newer Signs of Sorcery is fine too. Just remember that new hardcovers of that size like to have their binding properly worked before your use it and it’s been fine for me. The Geist 2e book is quite nice and I do wish I’d gotten some of the other nice printings. I’ll just have Deviant and Geist and that’s all.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2020 04:00
|
|
|
A thyrsus in my Mage game needed a feral cat for something ages ago, and that cat has stuck around ever since. He’s the most stuck up, proud, proper, and sarcastic cat in the game. And I honestly just made him (maybe all cats?) capable of conversation so long as you know how to talk to them. No magic required, and it was a good moment when a sleeper NPC just started a one sided conversation with that cat. You don’t really need an Acanthus to throw weird things at your mages.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2020 14:24
|
|
|
In the 1e era new world of darkness there was also a blue book supplement, Inferno. That already dealt with the demons and Faustian pacts and things like that. It was only an okay book and while I don’t remember if you could actually play the demons, I do remember it not being a good fit for the rest of the world at the time. I do think it’s a good thing they went a different direction with Demon. It fits so much better into the themes of the rest of the game lines and doesn’t handcuff itself by being rooted in religion and religious mythology. It does narrow down the number of people who might be interested in it a lot. (Just like mummy does, but for similar reasons.)
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2020 23:01
|
|
|
Warthur posted:One thing I do somewhat miss from the 1E era was the briefer, slimmer blue books like that and the psychics supplement and the like, which seemed to be good testbeds for what would and wouldn't work in the framework of NWoD/CoD. No joke. I miss the shorter supplements too. Some of them were really a lot of fun, or just generally good for mining for other ideas. Immortals was one that came up a few times in games that ended up being fun. Equinox Road was a little longer, but was a good CtL book. The Blood from Requiem, and Secrets of the Ruined Temple from Awakening. No, they weren’t all perfect, and they probably didn’t make a ton of money. But I enjoyed them and the depth they added to games.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2020 00:53
|
|
|
pseudosavior posted:Oh gods, what evil have I brought forth? You’ll just have to live with the terror that you have spawned. I guess you’ll think twice about trying to summon supernal creatures next time. Even with pure intention, the abyss can creep in.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2020 00:38
|
|
|
Mors Rattus posted:No, see, the moon-engine will stop that. And collect all the light in the sun for storage. Now we just have to stop all procreation so that the light doesn’t get sealed in the falsity of flesh and ignorance, and also end the consumption of all meat, as animals have souls and light within them, but plants don’t. Except beans. Yes, but animals cannot awaken, so they mean much less to the Supernal. And that’s truth that you can measure. You don’t gain near the amount of mana from sacrificing an animal as you do from sacrificing a sleeper (according to a book of course, I’m not left handed). So by measuring the mana you gain you can measure supernal importance which clearly means that lesser beings are less important than mages, so you can eat that cheeseburger with a clear conscience. Also, it’s local grass fed beef which was transported via clean energy (magically enhanced), so the carbon footprint is negative to help rebalance the ecosystem.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2020 00:59
|
|
|
My players are also big babies and almost never risk paradox either. On one hand, it makes me sad. On the other, I totally understand why they don’t. The few times it’s gotten through it does complicate their night. So working as intended, because those are the times they’ve had to push and risk things. I smile when I do get to roll for it, even if they’re going to mitigate or soak it. They’re much more likely to agree to dramatic failures than they are to paradox, and we use a static XP gain system now.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2020 03:23
|
|
|
Everyone posted:Neither will most humans. Does that means it's okay to eat the ones that don't get magic sooperpowerz? I was definitely on Mage chat, but this logic carries for what I was saying in that somewhat tongue in cheek example, yes. Although, when you’re a mage, you’re probably less worried about being a snack for a vampire and more worried about your soul getting lost somewhere along the way. Or maybe you’re not scared of either. Hubris is a coward’s word after all.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2020 14:17
|
|
|
Rand Brittain posted:It's widely regarded as quite bad. I have not read it. I have read it. It is quite bad. If you really want to blend the two, research the real world stuff you want to add and then add it yourself. It’s much easier and less cringing.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2020 15:39
|
|
|
Mors Rattus posted:Sexy Snake just wanted to gently caress a cruise liner, and who can truly call that evil The people riding that cruise liner.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2020 20:36
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:I would say either make your game centered around Second Sight or just poach Mage stuff (let them buy Rotes, for instance around a certain theme but not use capital M 'magic') just to save yourself the hassel of coming up with stuff on your own. This is a great idea. You could focus it along the lines of popular thematic supernatural archetypes. So pyromancers should buy forces rotes about fire. Telepaths stick to mind stuff, and things like that. Shapeshifters using some of the life spells, etc. And while this would definitely work for me, it might be everyone’s ideal, but you’d be better served with the 1e Second Sight book in that case. Or probably even a different gameline depending on the core story of your game. I would stay away from half templates as written though. They just don’t have enough cool things to use that aren’t more splat specific than is probably useful.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2020 02:08
|
|
|
Morpheus posted:I hear a lot about how dull it is to play a Mortals-only campaign, how you should immediately try to get them into another splat or something, but I had a session the other night where my players essentially did nothing but talk to two NPCs (a hedge mage barista and a pickpocket) and they said it was one of their favourite sessions in some time. Which is something to hear, coming from a group with roots in D&D and Pathfinder. This is routinely how my awakening game nights go. They'll spend a bunch of time arguing about how magic works, a bunch of time talking to some Consilium NPCs, and about 1/4 of the time enacting whatever extremely convoluted plan they came up with to perfectly do whatever they're planning on doing. It's regularly fun and exciting, and it often brings up questions about how much influence they're using on the world, and what that means for their wisdom. It's a very unique roleplay experience for a lot of people, and I'm just happy to keep telling these stories.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2020 14:54
|
|
|
I’m kind of with you on Scrutiny. It seems a little clunky, but I like the concept. At low dice pools, you can be really limited in how much you can figure out. Once you start gaining gnosis it becomes a lot easier to crack mysteries. It’s pretty trivial at the stage my game is in, but so are most magical problems. I had one that was 15 levels and they got all the way through it. It was absurd. Before we got to absurd levels, it still was only occasionally useful for us. Mysteries are great, but they’re very much better as a quick way to figure out “what”, but the “why” turns out to be the important part of it, and that’s not something that they roll dice to figure out. That’s really the bulk of the story.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2020 01:14
|
|
|
I've just never run into a reason why I'd need to use Doors for those small scale forcing interactions when you could just roll Presence+Intimidate and get there the same way or quicker. There was a section on Social Combat/Encounters in a 1e VtR book that was great for situations where you were trying to win an argument about a very important thing, and that was very useful in some situations. I put 2e Social Doors halfway between the single roll to deal with a short term NPC and the 1e Social Encounters in terms of weight. I feel like the goal was for it to be used with recurring NPCs, but it just seemed forced anytime I've tried to use it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2020 20:50
|
|
|
That Old Tree posted:Anyway, I took a second to bang out a one-roll Scrutiny house rule and would appreciate some critique. I like the idea of boiling it down to being faster, but I think it's missing a few tricks on the purpose for how scrutiny works in the RAW. First, for very complex mysteries, they're going to be basically impossible to ever gain any sort of information about. You'll very often be rolling a chance die for complex ones. I wasn't kidding that my group put their teamwork together and broke through an Opacity 15 mystery completely. It gained them some massive information because of it. They would have earned far less information had they only broken through 5-10 levels. Why only one yantra, that's tied to gnosis. Scrutiny also isn't a spell so how does it incur paradox? So I'd go one way or the other. Either it's becoming a spell and you risk paradox and can use your yantras as dictated by gnosis, or it's not a spell and no paradox and no yantras. If it is a spell, you should be getting free reaches somehow for having a deeper understanding to try to stay system consistent. I'd stay consistent with the rest of spellcasting rules too if you end up going the spell route, where you use all the spell modifications for casting. I wouldn't restrict them from using teamwork though. This is the sort of thing that should be easier with more eyes through more lenses. I like the bonus for Obsession. I wish that came up more frequently than just beats and wisdom checks. I like the part where you're spending mana. I'd just tie it straight to gnosis though. Yeah, it's less when you're a baby mage, but that kind of makes sense that you wouldn't be able to spend as much as someone who's spent a lot of time improving their understanding. Maybe make it Gnosis+1 or +2 max. I was going back and forth on how you've done the Deep Mystery portion, and for a minute I thought it was being more restrictive on what information you needed to give, but I've realized that it still just gives you room to be inconsistent with how much info you get when you succeed. That for me is the biggest part of why you even roll for scrutiny. To determine how much/what/if any information you can figure out from just looking at traces of magic. I think the biggest loss though is not being able to break through a level or two, then come back another day to try to break through further. That and the binary nature of either you figure it out or not is unfortunate. I can see the potential for it throwing a speedbump in the way that may just not add to the story in a useful way. With the extended version you at least have the option of giving some useful info that can move the story along. I think this pass/fail version would make that more difficult for the ST to do. Maybe you don't, or can think of good ways around it, so that's definitely not a deal breaker, especially for a house rule. Just something to think about. Either way, I'd make up a bunch of different potential opacity/caster pools and see how they line up with all the +/-. Mysteries should be a thing that help move the story forward, so it does take some balancing and I like the idea to make it quicker.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2020 03:09
|
|
|
That Old Tree posted:Please don't take this as a bunch of "You're wrong!" I don't take it as a "you're wrong", because you asked for feedback and gave good responses. I didn't know that about obsessions, and we've never used that part because as you say, it's tucked into the wrong section of the book and I'd never know to look at that when we're doing mage sight. I also missed the yantra thing, but that's because I've only skimmed parts of Signs of Sorcery. I haven't dug in on Chapter 1 because we won't really be using it in the tail end of this story. I will suggest that it does need a way to scale better for higher gnosis, unless you just don't ever want your game to get there. I also haven't seen that Belladonna example, for the same reason as above, but giving partial information is one of the default options in the core book. It did come up a couple times when they were newbie mages and I wanted them to at least get a breadcrumb instead of having to figure out another plan for the session. Now that we've been playing for 3 years it would be a lot less of a roadblock if they didn't solve a mystery, but that's because we only use them for points where it makes sense to roll some dice and have a graduated failure state. For context though, I have double masters and gnosis 7 mages at the table now, so I appreciate how the extended actions scale very well. The other issue is that as soon as you hit combined spells, you're looking at higher opacity, and maybe it's because my game has gone on so long, but some of the mysteries they've run into would leave most mages scratching their head. They've run into everything from archmaster's spells to mysteries caused by ochemata. So you're right that 10+ opacity is the realm of not entry level mages, but that's why I bring up the question. I'm pretty sure they'd be throwing chance dice at the stuff they're supposed to be interacting with. So even with a Gnosis 7 + Arcana 5 + 7 mana + 1 yantra + 1 obsession, a Opacity 11 spell leaves them with -1 die before they have to reach. I'm not sure that makes sense when I'd expect them to be able to be able to create mysteries of opacity 11+ themselves without taking more than a few seconds. This is definitely a product of my game being where it is, but I've just been glancing through Signs while typing this and there's a lot that just doesn't jive with my experience with the system. Like Mysteries of Opacity 6+ having stood for hundreds of years... That might make sense if your games only get to Gnosis 3 or so, but that only barely gets to the fun magic stuff. Then again, that also is one of my criticisms with WoD/CoD games a lot of the time. There's a lot of cool stuff that no one ever seems to really get to use. So maybe that's where I'm coming from too.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2020 05:17
|
|
but these are things I have considered and am continuing to think through, so this is more of a (possibly disjointed) explanation and extrapolation than a rebuttal. Maybe I'm not good at sounding like I'm not rebutting, though! Thank you for your response, it's helped me better clarify some of my own thoughts and sparked a few ideas that may lead to changes.
|
That Old Tree posted:Honestly, and I think at least Signs says this though I can't check right now, if it's something you think a Gnosis 7 mage should be able to do with a simple base dice pool or maybe a little extra like the one you described, maybe it's not cool and big and weird enough to be Opacity 8 or 10 regardless of what the suggested Opacity-derivation math says. I think this is probably my issue with it. I'd expect that a system built for a range of abilities should be able to function along that whole range of abilities. Whenever the books say something that resembles "when you get to be powerful, just ignore the system", it makes me just stare at it and shrug. Why even have the system if you can't scale it along for an entire character arc? It's one of those things that makes me wonder if anyone's meant to play at the middle-high end of gnosis at all (spoiler, it's fun and chaotic). This discussion has caused me to think about what would be hubristic about scrutiny. I'm not sure I buy into it on a regular basis, maybe just for dramatic failures. It's like putting a chemist in a lab and saying, if you do what you're expected to do, you have a good chance of loosing fingers because that's bad that you're doing what you're expected to do. In a game about uncovering mysteries, I guess it would bother me to find that when you're only just trying to learn about magical things, you might get system punished for it. When you're doing those magical things, then sure, you might get punished for it. I guarantee that by adding paradox to just learning that a lot of mages will just go... "eh gently caress it", and we'd be back in the realm of 1e's vulgar vs subtle magic issue. There's already that cost benefit analysis with risking paradox in 2e, but it's situation/story that seems to force the risk most of the time and not the system.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2020 15:23
|
|
|
That Old Tree posted:You've definitely convinced me that I should try to do something other than the Reach/Paradox thing, at least. Thanks again for your responses! I feel like the world might be ending. That was a whole mage discussion that happened and no one started yelling at each other or derailing the entire thread. I really like the idea too and I hope it works well for any games you use it in.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2020 20:14
|
|
|
That Old Tree posted:Yeah I'm a little iffy on how attractive being Rabashakim is supposed to be considering how tough it seems to actually derive any benefit out of it. Also I hate adding extra rolls to rolls you're already making, and these rules do that quite a bit. I think you should be happier with it. It looks like it fits really well, has a good amount of risk involved, keeps with themes pretty well, and should only take a minute or so to roll and finish dealing with. It'll also be cheaper for newbie mages when mana is a more rare resource unless they're sticking their noses into complicated mysteries. I might have made a copy of it to try in the next mage game I start.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2020 14:48
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 04:07 |
|
|
Chicago is perfectly serviceable as a setting. Even better if you’re not scared to just throw things out and make a mess of things. I was hoping to see New Wave Requiem in that list. If I was running a solo game, I’d absolutely take a stop in the 80’s for a few sessions. So many narrative devices that you can use solo that are much more complicated in a larger game. So I’d definitely time skip things as much as is fun. You can really nail that feeling of being a vampire over the ages where the world changes, but vampires have a hard time keeping up and hold long grudges. Definitely mix and max between 1e and 2e Requiem too. Setting is the easiest to just do what you want, and the 2e rules are a lot better in enough places that I would probably start there. Sounds like fun, leave a trip report if you get a chance.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2020 00:54
|
|