SkyeAuroline posted:

So I'm actually curious. How many of us are in ongoing (or imminent) games & what are they?
Personally in delay limbo for a switch from Eclipse Phase to CPRED, plus an Over the Edge game that's starting soon.

PerniciousKnid posted:

Didn't Vincent D Baker have some kind of pbp-specific game system? That sort of thing seems like the way to go rather than tediously taking traditional turns by post.

100YrsofAttitude posted:

So how many games do people participate in at a time? Is it kosher to do more than one or is that just trying to spin too many plates at a time?

Jimbozig posted:

I've got a smallish 2-player game that I'm just about to roll out on Kickstarter to fund some extra art for the game (trying desperately to carve enough time out of my schedule to make the KS page and video right now... fall semester is always too drat busy!)

It's called Ariadne and Bob and the elevator pitch is that Ariadne is a hypercompetent know-it-all and Bob is her long-suffering sidekick and they go on adventures. It's got a few different playsets that you can choose depending on the setting you want, like sci-fi, fantasy, high society, horror, history and fiction. You could call it GMless, but I think it's more accurate to say that the traditional GM role has been divided between the two players in a fun way.

The game itself is finished and ready to go, and if you'd like to give it a try, just let me know and I can hook you up with a pdf.

grassy gnoll posted:

How are the non-Blades games in this FitD bundle? I've heard of exactly zero of them. https://bundleofholding.com/presents/Forged

hyphz posted:

I’m aware that there are many games which decentralise GMing by sharing it with the players. But I was wondering if there is any game that does not do that bit. Where the players are just players, and the GMs are just GMs but there is more than one of them.

Magnetic North posted:

Like, I haven't watched The Boys for various reasons, but I think that bigboy fashy superman is just a complete loving sicko in part because who could ever stop him? In a warped Ring of Gyges kinda way.

BattleMaster posted:

That's absolutely the worst setting/system match I've ever seen; I guess they wanted D&D alliteration that badly?

SkyeAuroline posted:

In absence of a dedicated thread appropriate to it: did anyone here actually play Dogs in the Vineyard? It's one of those games where APs basically don't exist (found all of two) and reviews are sparse on mentioning how the mechanics actually worked in practice. I've been interested for a long time & ran it briefly years back, was hoping to get some insight from people who managed more than "character creation and one session" (like me) on how the mechanics held up in play.
Despite the reaction last time I mentioned wanting to do a western, I have the brain itch again and I'm wondering how salvageable the dice system is.

BinaryDoubts posted:

There's a new, settingless version (fully approved by Vincent Baker) that might be worth a look. Might be easier to add in the Western flavour to this than to take out the weird Mormon stuff in the original.

PerniciousKnid posted:

Anybody know what this is called?

Splicer posted:

I'm not asking in the context of blade runner! I'm asking in the general case of an RPG where you play as specific purpose robots trying to adapt to situations beyond the scope of their original programming. Like the story "Who can replace a man?" or this short: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49t-WWTx0RQ

That Old Tree posted:

I don't doubt that Cook will reliably fumble the ball and still sell 10,000 tickets, but what game is this? What does "literal and in-character" mean in this context?

trapstar posted:

I'm not really familiar with how paid dming works. Do they usually have pre-planned settings and campaign stories that they then run for people who hire them out?

Jimbozig posted:

-Some characters have moves that revolve around removing hit points, but you should first try to avoid letting them do that because it's a grind. And if they do end up using their moves (because the casters and talky dudes couldn't bypass the fight), you should punish them specifically.

Again and again, I wonder why anyone would play a fighter in any of these games. Except 4e, because 4e fighters loving rule.

Jimbozig posted:

The only in-game action we know he took was to ask to go last so that any disruptive effects of his wish would not step on the other characters' moments, which shows some consideration for fellow players.

Lemon-Lime posted:

your questions in here.

There used to be a FS2e thread but it's long since been vaulted for inactivity.

hyphz posted:

Just ban the Killer Archetype. It’s an exemplar of bad design.

Covok posted:

How does one run a PbP game without like losing interest and giving up? All my PbP games go that way and I want to play Fabula Ultima and I don't have time for another discord game.

Lemon-Lime posted:

Thanlis posted:

I would strongly recommend against Feng Shui for players who want that kind of tactical defensive option. There is nothing wrong with wanting them, but Feng Shui is the wrong game.

hyphz posted:

No, that would make sense. But Dodge lasts for “the single attack you are interrupting”. So if 4 people fire at you, you can Dodge behind a barrier for the first one, but then inexplicably are not behind the barrier anymore for the next three, even though you didn’t get to fire back.

Lurks With Wolves posted:

Yeah. I'd definitely call it a refinement of Masks over a ripoff. Mostly because reading it helped me crystalize a lot of the issues I have with Masks. If you're curious, it's two main things.

1) Each playbook having a central issue that shifts instead of literally every stat makes it a lot easier to keep track of what each character is good at, and means you don't get into that weird situation where you want to find excuses for have authority figures call a character freakish because Freak is their main stat but it's gotten low lately and they're getting salty about it being that low for however long it'd take to get it back up normally. Of course, this scenario is only a problem because of my second main issue with Masks.

2) The main moves were trying to do too much in too compact of a space. Both Avatar Legends and Masks cover roughly the same three scenarios: emotional discussions between characters, big cool fights, and antics that draw on the mechanics for both emotional moments and fights. But Masks tries really hard to have a tight set of core moves, so each stat only has one or two moves attached to it to cover all of that, and that means you end up with stats like Savior whose only default move is "react to what someone else did to threaten something". And part of the point of high stats is that they prompt you on what you could do in a scene, because it's what you're going to be good at. But if your Masks character has, say, Savior and Mundane as their highest stats and they're in a fight, that prompting points to "talk to people" (which probably isn't super feasible fictionally) and "protect people" (which is entirely reactive).

Epi Lepi posted:

I mean it's true. Shocking as it may be, not everyone wants to play PTBA game number 8000.

Admiralty Flag posted:

Something like this could be handled with a hack to Dogs in the Vineyard, which includes a push-your-luck option with making hands vs. escalation. At the start of the job, everyone rolls the appropriate die pool according to their role. Then, when people run out of dice as they proceed through the job, instead of going from words -> fists -> guns (was there a fourth stage? I can't remember...), as a group they go from undetected -> suspicious -> alerted when someone has to escalate the situation to stay in contention by rolling additional dice.

Servetus posted:

According to the character advancement rules in AW you can only take a maximum of 2 advances from outside your playbook. So you are confined by the definition of the archetype in the mind of the author, which may not fit into what you want for your character because you see different archetypes than they do. In addition the archetypes for Apocalypse World only apply if Mad Max is your view of the post-apocalypse, maybe Fallout if you really stretch things. If your view of the genre is more based on Earth Abides or A Canticle for Liebowitz than very few playbooks will be useful at all, which leaves you either trying to create you own Playbook or sitting unhappily in an existing one. If you do need to create a new Playbook to run past your GM you need to create an entire set of Moves to go with it; you need to not only create a view of your character's starting state but all the places you want to go with the character.

theironjef posted:

Sure. Though in that case I'd argue that, to my knowledge, the character not being blase about, being affected by it, is what the mechanics represent. It's function following form. Like I'd even have figured that it was the point of there being sex-driven mechanics, to sort of try to evolve sex in games away from "if there's whores in the tavern I wanna do them" and towards being part of the story. Having a big old counterspell that targets story mechanics related to intimacy is, again just to me, both wild and antithetical. Further, if you want to respect that it's in there, being like "Yeah, I don't get my sex move granted hold or whatever, but I'm gonna act exactly like I would if I had gotten it" runs counter to intent anyway! But anyway, I really did enjoy AW and my read through of it. Just a small YMMV for me.

Tarnop posted:

I like that Blades puts them front and centre and also ties them to the stricter mechanical rules for effect. I'm pretty sure the number of segments shaded in AW is always MC's discretion except for the harm clock

hyphz posted:

With all the debate about interesting moves in combat, it always feels that everyone forgets the issue of RPGs making those hard to use by definition by eliminating safe experimentation. Since you can’t just reload the game, or play that opponent’s army again next time, the scope to try tactics and learn from them is massively limited. That throttles any attempt at mechanical depth.