|
bewilderment posted:Fate Core is a complete game in itself that does not require you to write any specific rules. The thing is, the base rules in Fate Core are a complete game, but they're also a bad game. You have a good core mechanic, but a good core mechanic and stunts that amount "you get +2 in a niche situation" aren't enough to make a game that's actually interesting. The reason people on SA keep saying Fate Core doesn't work as a full game out of the box is that a lot of people around here (including me, let's be honest) treated Fate as the be-all end-all of generic systems out of the box and it took a lot of games that felt really mediocre to realize that Fate kind of sucks if you don't tailor it to what you're trying to do in some way.
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2021 04:32
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 04:31 |
|
|
Flaggy posted:Any threads for Starfinder? Planning on playing a game soon, wanted to read up on it. There used to be a Starfinder thread, but since it (iirc) fell into archives the Pathfinder thread is probably the best place for Starfinder chat. It isn't the most popular system around here, but if nothing else someone should be able to answer any questions. EDIT: The Pathfinder thread, which is over here. Also, right now the most recent topic of discussion in the thread is how one of Paizo's designers had a seizure and is now drowning in medical debt, so go toss some money at his GoFundMe if you can. Lurks With Wolves fucked around with this message at 15:05 on Sep 2, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2021 15:00
|
|
|
Yeah, I'm going to just second what everyone else said. If this was a supplement to the X-card and it clearly stated that it was intended to be used in situation where failing would gently caress someone up far more than is healthy for a game, it'd be fine. As-is, it's a way to solve a problem that isn't the actual problem and kind of encourages people to not actually play the game.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2021 15:23
|
|
|
Hostile V posted:If you want to do Gumshoe with mystery and horror and danger, Fear Itself 2e is Gumshoe's agnostic horror system that covers a full spectrum of different horror types and isn't inherently tied to the Cthulhu mythos and their idea of downward spiral sanity loss. It's legit pretty focused on you getting through it if you're careful enough. I know that's not picking one of those three choices but like if they're leaning Gumshoe I really recommend something that isn't just inherently Cthulhu-leaning. Also, even if you do want to do Cthulhu mythos and downward spirals, Trail of Cthulhu is still one of the first Gumshoe games. I haven't read enough Fear Itself 2e to know for certain, but I have to assume there's been enough refinement of the system that it will work better unless you specifically want to run a Trail of Cthulhu adventure. (There's a lot of interesting Trail of Cthulhu adventures, to be fair, but that's probably a bigger investment than I'm willing to recommend.)
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2021 05:38
|
|
|
drrockso20 posted:It's the kind of thing I could see working but it would work best not as some super expensive premium book but rather one of those super cheap POD books you get off Amazon for like 5 to 10 bucks To be fair, adventures like the Dracula Dossier are already 75% of the way there to making a legacy RPG. If not in terms of the rules changing over time, then in the emphasis on giving players a big, interesting thing to untangle over time as part of an adventure that you're realistically only going to play once. Pelgrane just hasn't tried applying that kind of energy to the rules themselves, and they're the only big adventure publishers that I'd trust to attempt something like this enough for it to be a premium book. Lurks With Wolves fucked around with this message at 16:47 on Oct 2, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2021 16:44
|
|
|
Still, the only two groups I'd actually trust to make some kind of legacy rpg adventure are Pelgrane Press and extremely weird indie RPG people. Everyone else, no way, they don't have the right drive to make weird high-concept adventures to actually do this in an interesting way.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2021 17:13
|
|
|
Also, reminder that one of the selling points of Betrayal Legacy is that you run through a curated list of 13 or so good Betrayal events and then you have a customized but otherwise normal copy of Betrayal at the House on the Hill. Of all legacy games, they have the least to complain about with this one.MockingQuantum posted:Just an FYI that one of the developers for Betrayal Legacy, JR Honeycutt, was outed as an abuser a couple of years back and basically blacklisted in the industry. No idea if he still gets royalties from the game but it's worth looking into if that factors into your game buying decisions. Well poo poo. That genuinely really sucks, and I'm mad now.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2021 20:05
|
|
|
Nessus posted:The main fellow himself has sixteen skills, and it is suggested in the deep lore of "the patch on the neck of a boutique jacket replicating what your buddy Kim wears in game" that Kim himself does not have the same skills. It's a complicated situation. You know, Cortex Prime does have overarching values as one of its potential main stat sets, and it does have systems for each character having their own unique values already. You could make this work... EDIT: Also, UnCO3's post made me think that you could make a really weird Bluebeard's Bride hack work. (It would help if I remembered the actual name of the game.) Lurks With Wolves fucked around with this message at 18:07 on Nov 1, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2021 17:59
|
|
|
MonsieurChoc posted:Wasn't one of the Pathfinder leads really into Theosophism and trying to inject it in the game as much as possible? Yeah, Erik Mona is ultimately why Occult Adventures for Pathfinder 1e was full of Victorian occultism and orgone boxes and all that jazz. It's more of a "dipshit that doesn't know the things he likes are really iffy" vibe than "secretly Nazi-adjacent", but it's still... weird. At least the worst of those impulses seem to have been shaken out of 2e.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2021 23:59
|
|
|
ninjoatse.cx posted:I'm about half way through reading 13th age, and I really wonder what why they kept the attributes the way they did. They did a better job at making "no bad attribute", but you still need to have your attributes since your saves now depend on every stat, and your class still needs 1, 2, or 3 primary stats. Because Rob Heinsoo was the lead designer who wanted to do new experimental things and Jonathan Tweet was the lead designer who was a D&D traditionalist who put really pissy messages into the intro of 13 True Ways when people disliked the Monk during playtests. I'm oversimplifying, but 13th Age does genuinely have a major internal schism about how traditionally D&D it wants to be.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2021 05:24
|
|
|
senrath posted:Theater of the Mind, I assume. Which, for reference, generally refers to the D&D playstyle where the GM just describes the scene and where everyone is in it, and you get to use the richness of your imagination instead of being constrained by a 5-foot square grid map. Which just means you're imagining a 5-foot square grid because that's what everything in modern editions of D&D is measured in, but it's a slightly different grid than what everyone else is picturing and someone's inevitably going to get confused about what's going on.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2021 04:16
|
|
|
ninjoatse.cx posted:In every edition hacking has always been "now you go do your thing in La La Land" while the rest of the team does the run/has fun/twidles their thumbs. To be fair, splitting the party should be encouraged in a heist game. The problem is that Shadowrun's rules have never been snappy enough to make "let's cut away to see how it's going with the decker" not be boring as sin. Like Ghost Leviathan said, Shadowrun just needs to go back to basic principles and make sure all these subsystems work right.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2022 17:24
|
|
|
hyphz posted:But that's where things are strange. Why aren't players as excited as the GM is? Well, you see, the wedding planner and the referee are being paid to do it, so they are more excited than the random bride or children they're working for. But seriously, the reason people always ask for players and not GMs is because GMing an adventure is always going to involve more work than being a player in that adventure, and asking someone to do the harder part feels weird. Groups looking for a GM is possible and it still happens a lot, but you're asking someone to get the same amount of "this game's going to happen" excitement for more work and it's awkward. EDIT: Okay, on second thought I may have lost track of where this conversation ended up. Not going to delete this post or anything, because you have to live with your mistakes.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2022 21:31
|
|
|
As an aside, part of why I really enjoy superhero settings in RPGs is that they can get around some of the enforced stasis they traditionally have. You can't go all the way with it, since it still needs to be recognizably similar to the real world, but you can have Dr Fantastic donate a bunch of healing lasers to local hospitals or have the power grid run on superscience and have that actually mean something.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2022 19:33
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:guy behind Wheel of Time, Torchbearer, Mouseguard Burning Wheel. Wheel of Time is the fantasy novel series with the Amazon show. Also it's worth noting that a big part of Crane's fall from grace in recent years was that he kept acting like he was the avant-garde wizard-punk indie RPG creator he was when he started when he was also the head of Kickstarter's tabletop division and generally considered one of the elder statesmen of indie RPG design. (Trying to sneak Adam Koebels in as some kind of weird statement on cancel culture is still the worst part. It's just important context for why him making some kind of weird indie zine kickstarter was so annoying before that happened.) Lurks With Wolves fucked around with this message at 17:38 on Feb 8, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2022 17:33
|
|
|
hyphz posted:I do have to give a deep sigh to the Pathfinder AP which uses milestone levelling but also awards the PCs bonus XP for certain tasks. Since the bonus XP isn't anywhere near enough to reach the milestone level early it's basically meaningless. Nice. Honestly, if they just said "yes, the random bits of bonus XP probably won't matter, they're just there to make everyone feel textually rewarded for doing cool things", I wouldn't even mind.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2022 18:48
|
|
|
Kestral posted:Yeah, Burning Wheel is not a commercial endeavor for anyone but BWHQ, and it isn't meant to be. It's the passion project of like half a dozen people who are all RL friends, and they don't even seem to be in it for the money: there's no way they're making more than pennies per copy, given the pricetag of the corebook compared to the absurdly high production values of the books. Indie game design is built on a lot of people looking at other people's work and iterating on it. Games like Apocalypse World and Blades in the Dark presented themselves in a way that made them very easy to work with, and thus the PBTA/FitD communities have done a monumental amount of work with these mechanics. Burning Wheel Gold has a ton of really interesting mechanics that you'd want future RPG designers to read and fiddle with and implement versions of in their own game. It's also an intentionally obscure game that you can only get legally by sending Luke Crane $35 plus shipping and handling and having a literal book mailed to you. Thus, all of these interesting mechanics are going to fade away like tears in the rain, because you need to be such a huge RPG nerd to even know that they're there and you should put the effort into looking at them in the first place.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2022 00:02
|
|
|
PurpleXVI posted:Perhaps if something is broken enough to completely annihilate the game's balance/invalidate certain types of play that the game is intended to support and need big "WARNIGN! WARNING! DO NOT USE!"-stickers, perhaps they should simply not be in the game or should be rebalanced. Okay, here's an actual breakdown of what rarities are like in PF2e in practice. Common: This is the basic, core stuff that's everywhere. Wizards and clerics and fighters and +1 longswords and all of that. This is the tier you can use in Pathfinder Society by default, because Pathfinder Society is boring that way. Uncommon: This stuff is all basically balanced mechanically. If your group is cool and aren't fantasy purists you can mix it all together and it'd probably be fine, but it could be a bit weird in some campaigns so asking people to not take specific uncommon things isn't that weird. (ie "this is a big divine campaign against a devil invasion, a tiefling PC would feel kind of weird" or "I don't want guns in Cheliax aesthetically, please don't make a gunslinger") Rare: This is where things get janky, sometimes in ways that change the basic plot of the party. Sometimes it's janky fictionally (like the ancestry about being a horribly gross science experiment, or the background for being a runaway prince). Sometimes it's janky mechanically (like the background where you were rescued by merfolk and now you can breath water, which is either going to be incredibly powerful or incredibly useless). Either way, it's where things get weird and you'd want that explicit permission. It's also the rarest tier. Also, if something's in a more obscure book like a random adventure path, it's probably going to be knocked up a tier or two. The point is, you're really overestimating how broken things mechanically and how common those broken things are in PF2e's rarity system.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2022 21:11
|
|
|
hyphz posted:Sadly, Paizo seem to be working the opposite way, especially in the setting books. The worst case is that shifting a log you are standing on back and forth in order to cause someone else to fall off it is an Archetype Feat. So to be able to do it, you have to take a feat, and that feat requires you to be a lumberjack trained by a very specific group of lumberjacks. (Actually, the feat works on any uneven surface which is a bit better for a feat, but it does mean that if you're on a tightrope and want to shake the tightrope to make someone else fall off, you have to be a lumberjack. No amount of circus experience will allow you to do this, which since there is an AP about running a circus, is a bigger omission than you might think.) Personally, I feel like Paizo could solve my issues with this approach with two pieces of GM advice. 1) Establish that anyone can try to do the same basic thing, it'd just be a regular-rear end trip attempt. Maybe give them a +1 bonus for doing something cool the first time they do it, GM's discretion. Non-attack maneuvers are already something Pathfinder 2e encourages, just make sure people know that feats like this aren't intended to be limiting that way. 2) Write a long example of a GM deciding what archetypes to actively recommend their players take in their campaign, and have it include them deciding to take this archetype for an adventure path's local logging company and reflavor it for their local logging company. Heck, maybe they can even reflavor it enough to fit a local mining company. Something that lets GMs feel like they're allowed to take these mechanics that are technically tied to very specific locations in Golarion and reuse them if they see a spot for them that feels appropriate in their home games. As is it feeds into some of Pathfinder's worse tendencies, but I feel like you can still make it work.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2022 19:55
|
|
|
Andrast posted:Well, mechanically the feat is kind of just a trip or a shove with acrobatics instead of athletics and some additional restrictions. Nothing is stopping people from doing a trip on a log. It's dumb, but it's how people's brains work. Which is why you need to explicitly say it doesn't and foster a different approach to looking at rules in your game and so on.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2022 20:12
|
|
|
Also, this is partially a problem with held-over expectations from PF 1e. Because it did have combat maneuvers that were completely useless without heavy feat investment, and it did release a ton of feats to do incredibly specific things that were necessary to do that specific thing at all in a way that's mechanically viable. So Pathfinder fans are now predisposed to think about feats in that way, and it makes the problem worse. (And as other people mentioned, Pathfinder itself was just continuing a long tradition of feats being limiting this way from earlier d20 RPGs, and so on. It's a problem.) Lurks With Wolves fucked around with this message at 20:27 on Feb 15, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2022 20:25
|
|
|
hyphz posted:I think a kingdom has something like this? On one hand, this is kind of how Command Lore works in Fellowship so I know this works in moderation. Even when your Fellowship game has a cohesive aesthetic, I doubt other people are going to be as into the people you created to play as you are. On the other hand, I don't know it works when you need to do that for everything. At least, not when everyone is simultaneously thinking as a single character and someone planning out a complete story arc. (Then again, writing this made me realize Whybird's suggestion is functionally similar to just running a game with a rotating GM, so maybe I'm overthinking it.)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2022 14:50
|
|
|
Siivola posted:The reason I ask is, a lot of AW design speaks to the opposite: It's got lots of tools to support extended games with developing characters and settings. It's got moves for beginning and ending game sessions. Even the language is weird and requires learning. To be fair, some of that does also make things easier to run in a one-shot. Start of session moves are the main example, just because they automatically give a bunch of good hooks to add into the rest of the one-shot as improv. Some of the other things you mentioned are extensions of what you described as systematizing good GMing advice, and mostly exist in the full book and not the core of the game you could print out on ten sheets of paper. As for the language... I'm just blaming that on how easy it is to forget that Vincent Baker is a indie game design weirdo than you'd think, given how big PBTA ended up being. It's easy to remember Apocalypse World as being as approachable as the mechanics ended up being, but then you reread the book and it's all hx and sex moves and weird new jargon. Ultimately he's just a guy making very niche games, and sometimes those niche games were made to be easy to pick up if you're already the kind of RPG nerd who'd know who Vincent Baker is in the first place. (Of course, I don't actually know if Tulip's right and AW was originally made to be good for cons. I just don't think your points are as anti-that as you're implying.)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2022 03:33
|
|
|
Nehru the Damaja posted:Any opinions or experiences with the #iHunt rpg or feelings on the FATE system in general? I don't know anything about how the mechanics of this would play out, but the style and presentation is very much my poo poo. The biggest problem with Fate in general is that it's much more of a generic toolkit than people have traditionally assumed when they made games using the system. A lot of people just used the generic skills plus aspects plus a few relatively boring stunts framework straight, and that framework is like sliced bread. It's an amazing innovation and we would be worse off without it, but by itself it's kind of boring. You need to do something new mechanically on top of that base, or your system is never going to actually sing. Does iHunt fall into these problems? I don't know, I've never read it. But if it ends up being a very flavorful wrapper around one of the generic versions of Fate, I won't be surprised.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2022 22:32
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:What's a good game that uses FATE as a toolkit properly? Well, if you look at Breakfast Cult by famed author Paul Ettin, which is completely unrelated to the contest entry former forum moderator Ettin made for a contest several years ago- But seriously, off-hand Breakfast Cult hits all of my requirements for what a good implementation of Fate should do. It has a good, tight hook, it adds something mechanically, and it has stunts that are actually interesting and not "you get +1 to X". There's probably less SA-related third party examples, but I haven't thought too hard about Fate games in a while. If anyone else has any thoughts, feel free to add them.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2022 23:02
|
|
|
GimpInBlack posted:Are we not even doing to discuss the madness of the 5.3333333 foot square implicit in "Speed: 32 (6 spaces)"? I'm betting it's something like "exact speed matters for determining initiative, but it's rounded down to the nearest multiple of five for determining how many spaces of movement".
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2022 14:08
|
|
|
Splicer posted:Looks like it rounds to the nearest 5, check out "Swingline Speed 64 (13)" Yeah, I didn't notice that until just now. And to your point about levels not being innately bad, having some amount of square-based movement in a superhero game isn't necessarily bad. It's still a good way to keep track of where everyone is in a given scene, if you abstract the map enough. But with nothing to go on besides a sheet, having a 13-space speed next to a 6-space speed is making me think they're going to try and just do a D&D grid, and that is 100% not a good way to abstract out superhero movement in a scene. Just having enough space to make moving that much faster worthwhile is going to make a grid annoying to use.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2022 16:06
|
|
|
CitizenKeen posted:I've been noodling over a grid-based supers game for years, and I think it's doable, but it would require something like Lancer or Icon with a strong grid/narrative split. Hulk builds up "flip the table" points in the grid mini-game, then wins the grid mini-game and uses the flip-the-table points to lift the Las Vegas strip. imo, you can do something really interesting if make the grid a bit less abstract than something like Fate zones but a bit more abstract than a full D&D grid, then add that combat scene/noncombat scene divide. The point is, there's a lot of interesting work you can do in this context that I don't trust this game to do.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2022 17:41
|
|
|
CitizenKeen posted:I don't know. If they get too generic, then you're just back to "I have Energy Blast d10". I'm tired of seeing supers as either Ice Blast d10 or Energy Blast 2d6, Armor Piercing, Half-Stamina, Elemental Effect: Cold, Increased Range +2. I'd enjoy a 4E middle ground. If it helps, Sentinels RPG is at minimum adjacent to what you want here. To make a long story short, character creation involves you taking blocks of power sets, which include both the assorted Super Strength d8s and Fire Control d10s you mentioned, and the dice tricks to make you actually feel unique and interesting in play. In this step you take the Occult power source, so you take these powers and this subset of the dice tricks Occult offers and flavor them appropriately for what dice tricks you're matching with what power. In this step you take the Speedster archetype and do the same. And once it's all said and done, you have a character sheet that should uniquely feel like the guy who made a devilish pact to jump really well that you set out to make. The only problem is that there's only a dozen or so sample characters in the core book, and you really need a critical mass of examples if so much of a character's feel is in getting the flavor right for your dice tricks.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2022 17:55
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Oh god that sounds horrific. Yeah I'm 100% against that. When a nWoD 2e game builds its condition system well, that whole system works fine. You're a Mage so you get beats from focusing on your pet interests, and you have the Scared and Broken Arm conditions so you get beats when you play those very clear things, and it all makes sense. Most of them aren't that. Sometimes you're a Promethean and everyone just has a bunch of weird, unclear conditions based on the kind of mystic path of discovery you're on, or you're a Sin-Eater and every power you have places a Condition on someone and the only place those Conditions are fully detailed is in the appendix four chapters away and I am going to scream. It's just a system that only works when the design is really tight.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2022 22:55
|
|
|
CitizenKeen posted:What if crunchy games leaned into and accepted "PHB + 1", not as an excuse, but as a first principle? The problem is that crunchy games that actually do produce a ton of expansion books in this day and age tend to be complete kitchen sink settings with multiple areas where characters can be customized, and the most generic (and probably the least interestingly designed, given how long it takes to really figure out how to design for a system) options are going to be the ones in the core rulebook. Say I'm playing Pathfinder 2e. I want to play a Catfolk because I don't want to play something as generic fantasy as the humans and elves in the core book, and I want to play a Gunslinger because they seem neat. But that doesn't work with a PBH + 1 system, and with the way Paizo releases books it will never work without limiting things in a way that ruins the fun of making a kitchen sink system that's constantly adding fun new mechanical options. Maybe it would work if the PHB is really an SRD or the like that you're shuffling mechanical options that won't affect things too much into, but that's not the model people are using now and "only take options from one book" would still be an extremely easy rule for groups to ignore. On the plus side, crunchy games that produce a ton of expansion books don't really get made any more so this won't be a problem most of the time. Either you're D&D, you're one of the few big publishers that could make a game with that many books if they wanted to like Pelgrane or Paizo, or your game had the right mix of advantages to actually blow up like Lancer. Otherwise games are lucky if they get more than one expansion book at that scale in the first place.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2022 19:46
|
|
|
Besides, Monte Cook's problem has always been that he keeps talking about how he needs to update his game design for modern standards but keeps releasing games that are still fundamentally rooted in 3e game design. Arcana Unearthed/Evolved are 3e products, so that isn't a problem.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2022 18:28
|
|
|
MonsieurChoc posted:4E character builder is widely regarded as one of the best though? Or was it poo poo at launch and became amazing after? From a business perspective, it was too generous for something you could download once and play with indefinitely. And that's without getting into all the virtual tabletop stuff they had planned that never happened. Point is, it was great but if a few things were different it could have started the current D&D revolution earlier. (I personally don't think it would have, just based on how the internet has changed since 4e came out, but it could have.)
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2022 15:35
|
|
|
Tibalt posted:I might have my timelines and facts all messed up, but didn't it start great, get gated behind a subscription, the person working on it died, Microsoft discontinued Silverlight, and it became effectively offline abandonware before D&D Next even started? It was always a subscription service, even when it was downloadable. The murder/suicide led to WotC dropping everything that wasn't the character and monster builder, but those were still really good products until they switched from a downloaded program to a pure subscription service some time around Essentials. It became abandonware and obsolete and etc after that, but it was still a really good product for most of 4e's run.
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2022 15:49
|
|
|
hyphz posted:I do wonder why they kicked out Rob Heinsoo so hard if 4e didn’t do badly. Honestly, as far as I know that's just how the D&D team operated at the time. You work there for a certain number of years, and then you get shuffled out for new talent. Rob Heinsoo just happened to get shuffled out at a really inconvenient time for 4e's overall development.
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2022 22:21
|
|
|
Agreed. Nobilis has a reputation for being impenetrable, but that's in my opinion there's two main reasons for that. One, the games are just kind of dense and impenetrable. Two, Jenna Moran's writing style means the expected play style trends towards weird cosmic-scale slice of life, which isn't really a genre the RPG community has a lot of experience working with. They're good games overall, they just take a bit of work to wrap your head around.
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2022 16:20
|
|
|
To be fair, there's probably a middle ground between "literally laying out an entire heist" and what hyphz is describing. "If your players try to steal one of the artifacts, it should probably involve a scene or two of set-up and the actual theft, here's a short example so you know roughly how many rolls you should expect/if your party needs more ideas". Is the adventure as bad at it as hyphz is describing? I don't know, I don't pay attention to 5e. But I also don't really trust WotC's adventure design, so I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't super helpful.
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2022 14:41
|
|
|
Tulip posted:I'd just create custom assets in TTS but that's because I already have that set up*. Second choice would be analog with index cards As far as I know, you can do a similar thing in roll20. It's fiddly, but it would probably work fine for their needs while being a free program.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2022 19:57
|
|
|
redleader posted:had a quick look at the playbooks (or whatever they're called) and yikes, it seems like it encourages a lot of sex with PCs and NPCs. not quite what i think of when i think "post-apocalyptic world" It's been discussed before, but sex moves are one of the biggest signs that Vincent Baker is much more of an indie RPG weirdo than most of the people who went on to make games with its system. Hence, why they've been iterated into something that's much more playable if you aren't in the kind of group that can comfortably go "logically, if this was a piece of non-corporate post-apocalyptic media, this is when things would fade to black while these characters had sex". Both in the direct evolution on making them about moments of emotional intimacy, and with things like Masks' "when you share a triumphant celebration with your team, X" moves for each playbook.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2022 13:20
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 04:31 |
|
|
Tulip posted:My hypothesis is that the sex moves are not really Vincent's contribution but Meguey's. Partially this is based on Vincent himself saying that he finds sex at the table to be uncomfortable and that he's unwilling to RP sex with other players, but also by comparing writing credits - consider Mobile Frame Zero: Rapid Attack which has Vincent but no Meguey writing to Mobile Frame Zero: Firebrands, where Meguey has primary writing credits. And for all the blatant transgressiveness of Poison'd, sex plays a very minor role in it. I also just forget that Apocalypse World was actually written by a writing team and not just one person. I do stand by the idea that we've collectively forgotten how weird and indie Apocalypse World is until the sex move conversation restarts, though.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2022 14:50
|
|