Quantcast
[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/tg/ - Traditional Games

Search:


View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
>> No.40606998 [View]

>>40606946
Wait, FATE and FATAL are completely different things. FATE is a great game. FATAL is, well...

>> No.40159053 [View]

>>40158984
Yes. That is what we are complaining about. We HAVE to assume right angles, but right angles make the shape impossible (in Euclidean 2d yada yada yada).

>> No.38401965 [View]

>>38399412
>I'm just wondering if someone can help me with a concrete example of how explicit rulebook-rules make a game better
Say you have a conflict, and a player attempts something that could solve the conflict. Does the action succeed?

You could let the GM decide, purely based on what seems reasonable and/or exciting. But that's a heavy burden on the GM. Even the best GM in the world is going to fuck up at times, and if they have any systematic bias then all bets are off. Plus, sometimes not knowing how an action will turn out IS what's exciting. It can be hard to create a feeling of challenge when the players know all too well that the only enemy they face is the GM's whims.

That's for why you want to have very simple rules. I would play Dungeon World before fantasy freeform.

Now as to why you'd want heavier rules, well, that depends on what specifically they bring to the table. FATE encourages roleplaying and character development. D&D 4e offers a fun combat mini-game. Call of Cthulhu has a fair but harsh mechanic to keep track of how unstable your character is after experiencing too much trauma. They don't fit any campaign or any playstyle, and not every subsystem in every game has a reason to exist, but sometimes they do.

>> No.33537526 [View]

>>33537409
Those are the only three games I have with that much math.

>> No.20640790 [View]

>>20640407
You guys like charts and tables?
I got a few for you.
I hope you like solving quadratic equations.

>> No.18983191 [View]

You can not play it.
It lacks fundamental game mechanics.

>> No.18628742 [View]

>>18628726
Right, I was thinking of the sex rules page.
>solve for y

>> No.18355541 [View]

>>18355534
There is a significant difference between not designing a setting to cater to our modern tastes and going full retard FATAL style.

>> No.18202961 [View]

>>18202874
> heh. True, but RPing romantic sex can actually be pretty fun, in how you avoid making it excessively lewd.
Perhaps, for you. You're cool to do your own thing, as long as you don't try to do it with me, or do it in a place I might be in at the time.

>> No.18111853 [View]

>>18111653
This is small potatoes.
Check out the real ultimate stat system.

>> No.17802760 [View]

Affairs. Affairs and harems everywhere. Give that evil sorceress a nipple piercing or something.

Little things will add up.

>> No.17388302 [View]

>>17388277
See file name.

>> No.15907192 [View]

>>15907064
Attack Vector: Tactical.

>> No.15468325 [View]

Do you like math and 100% accurate historical simulationism?
Then FATAL is the game for you!

>> No.15376824 [View]

>>15376643
But it is unplayable. And I mean that on a mechanical level.
The conflict resolution system simply doesn't make sense. You can't play it.

>> No.15352532 [View]

No.
In fact, that isn't much more complicated than my favorite game: FATAL.

>> No.15170413 [View]

>>15170081
Read this.
This is why FATAL is a bad idea.

>> No.15053937 [View]

>>15053623
Make rules for describing a character's body.
Go into great detail.
More detail than some would want, even.

>> No.15031465 [View]

>Well, the other guys have bailed on us. Looks like we'll have to call it a night.

>Can't just the three of us play? Me and Jim already have character sheets ready.

>Really? Let me see....are you kidding? You're both serial rapists. And why is 'anal circumference' a stat?

>Yeah, we thought it would be interesting. Why not give it a try? It's not like we'll make it past the first combat, right?

>> No.14948989 [View]

Insane people need tabletop rpgs too.

>> No.14796600 [View]

>>14796558



Navigation
View posts [+24] [+48] [+96]