[ 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

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
[ERROR] No.24942628 [Reply] [Original] [4plebs] [archived.moe]

What do you think are the most wretched game design choices? Ivory Tower, what have you.

>> No.24942773

"Roll to move," made most prevalent in Monopoly.
Ffffffffffffuck that.

>> No.24942789

Allowing rolling for stats in most game systems is fucking stupid.

>> No.24942790

Dedicated healer classes

>> No.24942831


It's not so bad in Monopoly, but it's annoying in, say, dungeon crawler games.

>> No.24942837


>> No.24942852

Rolling for stats helps encourage roleplay.

>> No.24942858

Overemphasis on combat rules at the expense of rules for actually interacting with the world when not killing shit.

>> No.24942883

>having fun is bad and wrong
Fuck you.

>> No.24942897

This can be really bad, although the emphasis is understandable: conflict is integral to many a story, so it has to be done well. It doesn't excuse not elaborating at length on anything else.

>> No.24942954

Letting bonuses stack, then making more and more ways to get those bonuses... and not bothering to run the numbers to check how wide a spread you just enabled and see whether it breaks all your other encounter difficulty math.

Made worse by companies that then publish even more material with more races (with more bonuses) and more classes (with different bonuses) and more items (with more bonuses) and so on.

>> No.24943014


Well, I guess the problems is that overemphasizing combat also puts the player into the mindset that combat is the only answer, as well as the only form of conflict.
And then there's the fact that in many games, say in D&D, combat feels like a wholly separate thing from the rest of the game. It's another "mode", so to speak, and when you couple that with the fact that most of the rules have to do with the combat stuff, it makes characters feel very "sterile" and removed from the general world.
I dunno, this is of course only my own opinion, but combat-heavy games fuck with my head something fierce.

But as to my own biggest hatred in games, big focus on gaining experience, leveling up and power levels. They fuck with my head even worse.

>> No.24943022

Games that lean too much towards GM fiat.

>> No.24943067

The most commonly-accepted definition of "rolling for stats" only generates the most boring part of a character. You don't randomize original backstory or amusing quirks, just numbers. You can easily play a flat character with rolled stats. Not to mention half the time the player has some say in where those numbers go, so it's not "roll for what you're good at", it's "roll for how many things you can be good at". If you wanted to encourage roleplay, you would randomly generate your character's personnality and profession, then choose numbers to reflect that.

>> No.24943094


It does for me. Random stats make me think about things. It works for me, and that is all I can really say, I guess.

>> No.24943098

Games that justify bad mechanics with 'people can houserule it' and games that assume their mechanics and say 'You Can't houserule it, RAW only'

The two extremes are both wrong. A good design covers all the bases in a clear, coherent set of mechanics focused towards what the game wants to do, but acknowledges that players will play the game their own way, and give them tools to do that.

The former sort of laziness seems to occur in bigger games from known companies, while the latter control freakery is the quirk of indie devs.

Speaking of indie devs- Stop the pretentious bullshit. Fucking seriously. I love indie games, but I find it legitimately hard to get some of my friends into them due to the sometimes dozens of pages of pointless, self indulgent crap spread throughout the book. Stick it in an appendix or make it easy to skip. You can't force people to give a fuck about your design philosophy.

>> No.24943110

Point buy encourages rollplay because if your character dies you can change the name on the sheet and slap it right back down as a new character with no effort.

>> No.24943156


Also, because it can easily make you spend a lot of character creation just fiddling around with numbers to get mechanical benefits.

If nothing else, random rolling is fast and final, and you can stop worrying about it after it's done.

>> No.24943164


If this sort of thing affects how you play a character, you probably aren't a good roleplayer anyway.

>> No.24943174

I actually like how Burning Wheel explains its design philosophy because it explains what the rules are good for and what they're bad at.
This allows you to assess the system as well as easily house rule shit if you like other parts and there's just something specific you dislike.

It may be because Burning Wheel quite explicitly marks sections that have to do with design philosophy.

>> No.24943197


I think the design philosophy bullshit is mostly for the DM. It helps get a grasp on what kind of games the system is suited for.

>> No.24943226


There's a difference between explaining why you made the decisions you did and waxing lyrical about whatever bullshit thematic, ethic or moral quandary you think underpins the fundamental metaphor of the paradox of why your game resolves conflict with tic tac toe.

This is an exaggeration, but I've read books that are almost as bad.

>> No.24943260


I don't know what to tell you. That I'm sorry that I draw inspiration from different sources than you? Or maybe that I seem to be, since both me and my group are happy with my roleplaying? (On a sidenote, also with everyone else's).

But if rolling doesn't work for you, then I'm happy that you've found a method better-suited for your purposes, and hope that you'll continue using that and playing cool games. Peace, bro.

>> No.24943308


Well, in some games, understanding the design philosophy is important in understanding how to make the game work properly. Someone mentioned Burning Wheel, and that's a good example. The game is all about characters fighting for their beliefs and having those beliefes challenged, and struggling against the opposition your ambitions create.

A lot of the game's mechanics and workings are geared towards that, and if you ignore it and try to play something completely different, it can easily make for an unsatisfying game.

But yeah, I do agree that some games go needlessly elaborate and wordy with it.

>> No.24943378

"Oh hey my intelligence stat may be abhorrent, but I'm gonna act like a smart guy anyway" sure is good roleplay, anon

>> No.24943429

Exactly, and don't get me started on how many groups treat the character's CHA stat as meaningless by substituting the player's.

>> No.24943457


How does rolling stats make this less likely?

>> No.24943546

>conflict is integral to many a story
Yes, and when your rules neglect conflict for the sake of combat, you have a problem.

>> No.24943650

I think that stats are a questionable concept in the first place. It seems really arbitrary to just pick out X things and make them central to describing your character, plus that statbased systems tend to encourage minmaxing which I loathe with a passion.

>> No.24943656


Stats seem like a combination of various skills anyway.

>> No.24943687


Yeah, I vastly prefer skillbased systems.

>> No.24943710


I prefer systems like Fate, where you yourself nominate the dramatically important things in your character. And there's skills as common ground.

Yes, I'm an arty git.

>> No.24943737


I like HeroQuest because you kinda make up your own skills.

>> No.24943766


Every time someone mentions Heroquest, I immediately think of the old boardgame and get confused.

>> No.24943797


It's a bit of a shame that HeroQuest is so obscure. The second edition is probably one of the best roleplaying systems ever.

>> No.24943837


I think it's in part because there's, and excuse my French, a fuckload of versions. I once tried looking into it, and quickly got confused because there's many different Heroquests by many different publishers, and I can never find out which is the one I should go for.

Mind enlightening me on that?

>> No.24943880


On a sidenote, I've heard a lot of good things about it, even considering. Sounds like it has a lot of same design ideas (at least about the feel of the game) as a Finnish system I very much like, Praedor.

Sadly, that thing will never get translated to any foreign language.

>> No.24943911


To be brief, the one you want is HeroQuest 2nd edition by Moon Design Publications. It's an extremely simple yet surprisingly well balanced system.

>> No.24943957

The holy trinity can die in a fire.

>> No.24943959

The issue I have with a combat-rules-only approach is that sometimes the distinction between combat and non-combat in some systems is artificially rigid and out of balance. Maybe that's not the best wording.

But like, let's say you're playing A Certain Grid-Based Edition (a purely imaginary game), and you have all these levels of pretty detailed things you can do in combat space and in combat time. And then because they're defined in terms of combat space and combat time, trying to apply them outside of those terms is really awkward, because it just doesn't fit. So in this mostly-hypothetical for-the-sake-of-argument system, my character is super well defined in combat but none of that informs his out of combat activity much. I could have a special combat ability of picking up my foe and hurling it into a tree, but outside of combat, any impressive feat of strength has to just fall back on the same generic strength check that other characters with the same strength score get, even though they're not foe-into-tree-hurlers. And the distance I can throw something that isn't a foe is the same as everyone of the same strength and level, even though, again, I can hurl a foe into a tree at 60 feet and they suffer penalties every ten feet. Or the bard is better at confusing an actively hostile enemy in combat than he is at talking to a neutral person out of combat. Or the wizard can incinerate a whole crowd in combat, but when facing the mighty Thin Wooden Door his options are 'push' or 'pull'.

I feel that characters should be more... holistic. That the stuff on this one part of their character sheet should more broadly inform the other parts. I would feel the same way if the imbalance was reverse - if I had a character in some other hypothetical system with greatly detailed skill lists, yet who could somehow not ever apply anything learned at those to combat, only roll a Boring Standard Attack every round.

>> No.24943978


Haven't heard of Praedor, but HeroQuest has some really, really innovative ideas when it comes to running a campaign. It actually makes fudging dice rolls and manipulatinf difficulties for dramatic effect a part of the rules, and it works ridiculously well.

>> No.24944008

can you link or upload pdf of heroquest?

>> No.24944059

When it comes to wargaming, most problems I find are when a designer or design team does not know what scale they're aiming for. Not just miniature size, but the size of battle itself.

This leads to messes of (even in really game-y games) mechanics that are either too detailed or too broad and abstracted for what's going on. A classic example of this is the 3rd edition of EPIC, where the rules were good, but for the next size of battle upwards (which is why they also worked fine for BF:G) so they felt distinctly wrong for a game that still counted 1 tank as just 1 tank and 5 guys were just 5 guys.

It also leads to randomness where there should be precision control, overwhelming amounts of stats and things to keep track of where there should be a few abstracted things and all that kind of chud.

>> No.24944087


I'm afraid I don't have it on hand, but I can give a brief rundown on the core concepts if you're interested.

On the other hand, it's just 15 bucks for the e-version, so it's not even expensive.

>> No.24944102

(minor continuation)
Now a secondary and related problem is: so yeah, maybe a good DM would be all "I don't see why not. Roll for throwing that rock the same way you would roll for hurling-foe-into-tree if it's better than a flat strength check", and a bad DM would be all "no! it's not on your sheet!"

However, "no! it's not on your sheet!" is sort of the default rule for the combat side of any system with an elaborate list of stuff you can and can't do in combat. The book says pick X things you can do from chart Y, and those are the things you can do, and you can't do the other things because you didn't pick them. And so I can't entirely blame a DM. We normally would expect rules to be consistent, right? There's been a long term trend towards consistency, hasn't there been?

So if the system heavily favors one side of combat vs noncombat, we've got to fall back on our own entirely non-standard forms of faking it and making up our own rules. Which can work out okay, but is far from ideal, since we're then all playing wildly different games.

>> No.24944148

please do

>> No.24944172


Heroquest has been mentioned ITT, and it uses the exact same mechanics for combat and non-combat situations. The trick is to make most of your abilities broad enough so that you can always at least try something, but still allow a character to have a few specialized skills that they can excel in.

>> No.24944273

But people do that all the time. It's so common there's a scientific term for it.

>> No.24944307


Right. So the basic building block in HeroQuest are keywords and abilities. Keywords are broad descriptions of your character, such as cultural background and occupation and so on. Abilities are more specific things that your character can do, such as speaking a foerign language, fencing or being attuned to a magical rune. Equipment and the skill in handling it also falls under abilities.

Now, all keywords and abilities can be used in any situation where the DM agrees it would make sense. If your character is a mafia guy, it is reasonable to assume that he knows how to handle a gun and hotwire a car, for example. You get a bonus to your roll to succeed if your ability is closer to the thing you want to do and a penalty if it seems like a stretch, however.


>> No.24944407


All abilities and keywords are given a rating from 1 to 20. If you want to use your ability to do something you roll a d20, and if you get under your ability score you succeed. If you roll 1 you get a critical success and 20 is a fumble.

Now, all skill checks are actually contests. The DM also rolls a die against a specific difficulty assigned based on a couple of factors, and the same rules apply for that roll.

The result of the contest is the difference of the levels of success of the relative rolls. If the player scores a critical and the DM a fumble, then the player gets a complete victory, a success versus a fumble is a major victory and so on. You can also have extended contests where you make several ability rolls if the narrative calls for it.


>> No.24944488


Hmh. Seems neat so far. And from a few reviews I eyed up. Like something I should definately think about getting.

Weird, just today I was thinking about what I should get with some of my loose cash. And it seems that my FLGS even has it, so... there's some of that, I guess.

Thanks for pointing the game out, kind anon.

>> No.24944508


However, abilities are scalable, when you get an ability above 20 you get a so-called mastery level, for example if you went up to 21, it would be noted as 1M1. The skill still works the same, you need to roll under the number, but for each mastery level you have you get an additional level of success, for example one mastery level lets you bump up a fumble to a failure or a failure to a success.

You can also use related abilities to boost your main ability a bit if applicable, such as if you have the ability "calm nerves" and try to shoot a target with the "expert sniper" ability.

You also have character flaws that act as debuffs if applicable.

So basically your character concept determines your skills, and not the other way around.

HeroQuest also does a lot of nifty stuff with varying difficulty levels as the campaign progresses, but it's like four AM and I need to go sleep, so I'll leave looking that up as an excercise to the reader.

>> No.24944579


Though now that I think of it, I think I'll have to mention the Pass-Fail cycle as well. More in a minute.

>> No.24944710


So about the Pass-Fail cycle. It's probably one of the simplest and cearest, yet very often overlooked means for the DM to keep the game interesting.

Basically assigning difficulty levels in HeroQuest is based on the demands of the narrative. If you are Big Damn Heroes fighting a grup of goblins it shouldn't be hard, and the BBEG shouldn't be a cakewalk. However, everyone knows that losing all the time isn't fun. Neither is winning effortlessly all the time. So HeroQuest has the Pass-Fail cycle, which basically means that you should fudge the difficulty if the players have had a lot of successes or failures recently.


>> No.24944761

>You don't randomize original backstory or amusing quirks, just numbers.
You must not play the same games I do.

>> No.24944830


This naturally doesn't mean that you should start railroading the players into impossible situations just because they've been doing well, but by continually shifting the difficulty to be harder and harder it's statistically likely that the players will suffer setbacks sooner or later. This is done out of both a desire to keep the narrative interesting and for realism.

Say that you're playing a game as Robin Hood and his merry men, and you've had a string of successes in taking from the rich and giving to the poor. Well, mybe the Sherriff will react and send out more patrols making your work harder. Maybe the Bad King will take personal interest in rooting you out. Maybe you get a big bounty on your head which tempts some of your associates to sell you out. The DM basically has to invent a compelling reason as for why things are getting tougher or easier as necessary to preserve the fun in the game.

This structure is inspired by RL myths and heroic epics. They actually go through the story of Beowulf in the HeroQuest rulebook as an example of a story where the hero suffers alternating setbacks and successes but finally emerges victorious. Basically what the game strives for is a gradual movement towards the heroes succeeding, but it makes sure that the probability of setbacks on the way will be high.

>> No.24944839


This game sounds pretty neat.

>> No.24944882

This sounds like Drakengard, except in Drakengard the GM just makes things harder and harder until the heroes fail and the world ends in a terrible blaze of fire as horrors descend and eat your friends.

>> No.24944955


>> No.24944962


Well, you can do that if you want. Actually you should do that if that's what the narrative demands. Thet's the thing about HeroQuest, really, everything is based around serving the needs of the narrative. The rulebook even tells you to flat-out cheat if that's what needs to be done to keep the story going.

>> No.24944974

>Point buy has nothing to do with rerolling the same character, doesn't encourage such behavior, and generally isn't exclusively conducive to it. A person who is a shitty role play will reroll the same character regardless of what stat system they're using, and only an idiot would think that the two are mutually inclusive.

>> No.24944990

Whoa, a rule book telling you to cheat?

Holy shit, what an innovative concept that no book has ever mentioned before and that isn't a common, spoken and unspoken rule of a large sum of GMs.

>> No.24945003

Point buy doesn't encourage rerolling the same character because it doesn't encourage rolling at all.

>> No.24945020

>stating nothing

>> No.24945021


>Herp derp I do not understand rpg terms.

>> No.24945036


There's always that GM who needs reminding of this fact.

>> No.24945063

Technically, he's right, since there's little to no dice rolls involved with point buy systems.

>> No.24945132

Dread Jenga Edition had a long section on "The tower as a metaphor". It was a story clock dressed up as a resolution mechanic ffs.

>> No.24945169

If your trying to make a game about horror films, it seems like the two are the same damn thing.

>> No.24945331

>You don't randomize original backstory or amusing quirks
You do in Traveller, last I heard.

>> No.24945387


Eh, that's all right as a starting point, but I've got to craft a hopefully entertaining personality myself.

>> No.24945969

Which is why hardly anyone plays it.

>> No.24946011

Intentionally bad options.

No serious game designer ever goes near these. They only do it when they want to sell you stuff, like with MtG, or when they're fucking retarded, like Monte Cook. All it does is reduce the depth:content ratio of your game.

>> No.24946073

Actually, quite a few people do. It's not completely random, anyway. You pick a career and roll for events.

>> No.24950428


>> No.24953165


Originally you rolled 3d6 once for each stat individually and whatever you rolled that was what the stat was.

Then you had to imagine, okay, what kind of class will this adventurer grow into? What is he good at, or, what is he going to try to do even if he's not that good?

Meeting stat requirements was also a lot more important, and it made for memorable characters that were either heroic or struggled through adversity.

It didn't always generate what you were hoping for, but then again, you could re-roll after a death and play something new.


To be honest, after all the point-buy, and 4d6 drop the lowest, and assigned super-hero scores that I've been doing all along.

I'm thinking of running my next game with 3d6 each stat one by one, locking them in.

Then say "okay, now tell me, who is this person and what does he do?"

I have a feeling people will think more about the character they are investing in, and appreciate them more.

>> No.24953196

But what about the people who already have an idea in mind for what they want to do but can't because of the stats?

>> No.24953212

Plenty of people enjoy taking support roles.

>> No.24953213



>> No.24953219


I love Pathfinder/3.5 Healer monkey cleric

>> No.24953230


Ideally GM gives them the heads up so they don't walk in with a concept

>> No.24953246


Or you use a system that doesn't assign you a character based on random rolls. HeroQuest was mentioned earlier, you could try that out.

>> No.24953247

>stats are questionable

But people do vary in dexterity, strength, intelligence and constitution.

Stats and skills are entirely different things.

>> No.24953268


>But people do vary in dexterity, strength, intelligence and constitution

But those variances don't neatly fall into a numerical scale.

>> No.24953279



>> No.24953281

Random rolling for stats only works as a roleplay aid if there are a shitton of other random things to roll for.

>> No.24953295

So? people do not have 6 points in Driving (auto-mobile) in real life either. And for some stats like strength its extremely easy to relate it to a real world level of strength.

>> No.24953300


You simply can't take some dude and say that he has 16 STR and that's it. Maybe he's got really strong arm muscles, but his leg musculature or endurance is much weaker, yet D&D would use the STR modifier for everything strenght-related. It's pretty much clumping together arbitrary characteristics that aren't necessarily related.

>> No.24953318


Specific skills are much easier to quantify than stats because stats are so much broader. It's pretty easy to set approximate elvels of driving ability, but it's absurd to try and set numerical values for, say, intelligence.

>> No.24953377


True the game does make some assumptions but that's mostly done to streamline the game. There are systems that have elaborate "drawback" systems to do things that specify things like weak legs and other stuff. As for D&D you could easily talk with your DM and say that you want your character to have X or Y quirk things and it'll probably be all fine.

>> No.24953390


not really, there are people who have an easier time picking up on certain mechanical stuff (i.e Intelligence) and others who hone in on more interpersonal things (Wisdom) so assigning numerical values to represent that isn't far off.

>> No.24953470


Look, you know as well as I that the distinction between what falls under intelligence and wisdom in D&D is arbitrary as all fuck. The distinction was made back in the day because they wanted to make Wizards and Clerics focus on different stats, and the idea of what they actually represent has changed like ten times since then.

>> No.24953480


There also are systems that don't make a grouping of arbitrary characteristics into a core mechanic. Why do you even need stats in the first place?

>> No.24953488


Intelligence is knowing the number of drops in a waterfall.

Wisdom is knowing why they seek the earth.

It's a knowledge vs comprehension distinction.

>> No.24953496


because they are useful in streamlining a system and is a nice shorthand to get a sense of character?

>> No.24953511

>hardly anyone plays Traveller
Ha ha, 40kids.

>> No.24953517


Once upon a time, DMs made that stat rolling the first part of character creation, and hopefully were pretty up front about it.

It made people pick classes and races based on thinking.Fleshing them out by adding stats onto ideas that had to work around who they actually were; instead of assigning tropes onto stats that are taken for granted.

I think that's the phrase I'm looking for, "taken for granted".


Point buy isn't random.


All I'm saying is, I can't remember the last time I saw somebody go through 3d6 stats (no swapping!).

I wonder how fast it would get rid of the That Guys, the munchkins, and the culture of entitlement. And bring back the term "thought provoking" to character creation, and get rid of the cookie cutters.

>> No.24953534

"Jack and Shit, he's got nothing above a six."

>> No.24953543


when I character like this I always name them Skippy, the Luckiest [Profession]

>> No.24953552


There are better ways of doing that, e.g. to start with the character concept and assign abilities based on that.

>> No.24953571


>Once upon a time, DMs made that stat rolling the first part of character creation, and hopefully were pretty up front about it.

>It made people pick classes and races based on thinking.Fleshing them out by adding stats onto ideas that had to work around who they actually were; instead of assigning tropes onto stats that are taken for granted.

>I think that's the phrase I'm looking for, "taken for granted"

That's an ass-backwards way of doing shit. I don't want my character dictated to me by random chance, I want to create a solid concept of my character and base his/her/its abilities on that.

>> No.24953588


No it isn't. Intelligence always has primarily been how good you are at casting spells and wisdom has been how good you are at getting the gods to cast spells for you. Everything else is just arbitrary bullshit thrown in under one of the categories ostensibly for game balance, but more like at random.

>> No.24953590


but the numbers help define the character real quick and easy

numbers go in, personality comes out

also numbers provide a nice baseline to compare your character to the rest of the game's world making them more real

>> No.24953596


you're ass-backwards I love rollin dice and seeing what i get

>> No.24953602

Games where some crucial elements are so inextricably tied to fluff removing even one iota of it starts a cascade effect of making it unplayable past "level three" without massive amounts of careful surgery for all the rest of the shit it effects. We get it you have made the most awesome setting known to man, and all should bask in your glory. That being said, why the fuck did you make a game and not a goddamn novel.

>> No.24953613


and the fluff is that you need book learnin to cast magic good and insight into the world gets you closer to your god or some shit like that. Hell even the skills that are assigned to wisdom and intelligence do a good job of following the knowledge v comprehension stuff

>> No.24953622


Oh L5R

>> No.24953623

In order to get rid of the culture of entitlement you'd have to get rid of the idea of the players as gods. In order to do that, you'd have to make decent fantasy/sci-fi/supers become popular once again.

>> No.24953677


>and the fluff is that you need book learnin to cast magic good and insight into the world gets you closer to your god or some shit like that

Which is completely arbitrary. Hell, leaving aside that both concepts are ridiculously vague in the first place, if anything insight into the world should make it easier to manipulate the world with spells, and clerics should need an absurd amount of book learning and studies in theology to be able to worship his god right.

>> No.24953699

Then go play the lottery and leave us alone.

>> No.24953701

>I wonder how fast it would get rid of the That Guys, the munchkins, and the culture of entitlement

Would also get rid of people who actually want to choose their character.

>> No.24953705


who is us?

>> No.24953717


depends on fluff now don't it? they decided that in this world you need book learnin to cast good and insight to pray right

hell there may even be Arcane classes that use Wis and Divine that use Int in D&D for maximum flexibility

>> No.24953721

>And bring back the term "thought provoking" to character creation
What's thought-provoking about having to work around stats? Is it any more valid than starting with a concept and then PROVOKING THOUGHT as to how to design and build a character to match that design?

>> No.24953740


forces people out of comfort zones

>> No.24953748


Which again runs into the problem that there is no reasonable and exact definition to what INT and WIS actually mean.

>> No.24953755

It does tend to have an effect on encouragement against build over character-sheet over table style play that seems to have become common in the past 10 years.

>> No.24953763


Alternatively it forces people to play shit they don't want to play.

>> No.24953768

>You simply can't take some dude and say that he has 16 STR and that's it.
With sword path glory you sort of can.
With the size and str you find among other things, the char weight (using a table).
Just select your size and checking the weight on the batle you can find his strenght.

Also with the strenght, height and weight of stuff he is carring and his speed, you can find his max speed. So use height, weight, weight of the stuff someone carring and the max speed he can run and you find his speed

>> No.24953775

They are exactly what they sound like. Intelligence is more about academic knowledge and higher-level thinking, while wisdom is common sense and presence of mind. The commonly-cited example of a high-INT low-WIS character is the addle-minded professor.

>> No.24953781


yeah, forcing them out of comfort zones getting them to try new things and broaden their horizons, see things from new perspectives

>> No.24953786

Wait, what? You lost me.

>> No.24953809

Roll for stats seems to keep people from doing the absolutely retarded build is more important than character and the Character sheet is god, and when it says you don't have Skill: Swashbucking Stunts, you "can't" do it, regardless of the goddamn chandelier in front of you. Which truth be told is a relatively recent thing in RPGs.

>> No.24953811


Please. When was the last time you ever had to play a character with a few sixes?

Or for that matter, when was the last time you played a character who had a 3 in anything?

I'd be willing to bet money that most gamers today don't have any idea what that's like or had to accommodate a character with actual flaws.


See above, most point buys are designed around "8" being your low stats, if I can speak generally. Its a joke. Oh my, a big scary "-1".

In fact I know plenty of people who even whine about having to deal with 8's, because unless they have +2 or +4 to multiple things, they just don't feel entitled enough.

The only thing backwards about it is the way people take how "good" they are supposed to be in their chosen field for granted.

When was the last time you saw a 12 int Wizard? One that actually had to try a little to work up his ability to get bonus spells and higher DCs and meet the requirements for his next level spell list?

Or a battle cleric with only 13 wisdom, who had to actually try to keep his cleric spells from lagging?

The problem in my eyes isn't people wanting to play something, its that people want to play what they want to play and have 16's or 18's handed to them.

>> No.24953828


It's especially weird because the Gods are grecoroman-egyptian type of gods in most settings, who aren't omnipresent and "found in all things" - Druids getting better nature spells because they pay attention to their surroundings, that makes sense, wizards... well maybe as a bonus to some more elemental types of spells (nobody learns counterspell or improved magic missile by observing nature), but Clerics believe and pray to gods who explicitly sit above and beyond the plane the clerics spend most of their time on - it'd make sense if clerics were experts in planar physics and other book learning as a result of their theological learning (bearing in mind that in D&D theology IS metaphysics and cosmology in a literal sense of those terms), that'd make more sense than anything else, a cleric is the one type of caster who really DOESN'T care about HOW the lightning comes down to smite his foes, only that it DOES, Thor be praised.

>> No.24953829


Played a guy with a 3 once. Fascinating experience to say the least

>> No.24953830

Considering that 10 is the universal baseline, I'd imagine that being a character that is literally retarded in various aspects would have difficulties being a successful adventurer. D&D is not one of those games where you can get away with being exceptionlly suboptimal.

>> No.24953831


The fuck they are. What kind of intelligence are we talking about? What kind od presence of mind+ What does that even mean? Why wouldn't book learning require that? Why are we assuming that there's some sort of objective common sense?

It's a mess of arbitrary stuff grouped together under two categories because they wanted to be a bit more ambitious than Wizard=high INT, Cleric=high WIS.

>> No.24953840

And the problem he was thinking on is whether it would get rid of the entitlement, muh build bullshit that's popular. It does seem to actually have an impact.

>> No.24953842


>See above, most point buys are designed around "8" being your low stats, if I can speak generally. Its a joke. Oh my, a big scary "-1".

That's why you don't use statbased systems.

>> No.24953849


>Or a battle cleric with only 13 wisdom, who had to actually try to keep his cleric spells from lagging?

I think the problem with this though comes from how the system is balanced around the PCs. 3.5 /Pathfinder liked classes to at least be rocking a 16 in their primaries or they were gonna be eating dirt.

>> No.24953850

You're still kinda babbling, but I think what you're trying to say is that roll-for-stats discourages the notion that creating a god build overrides actually creating a character. It's a mostly unjustified concept and is not wholly universal, but it's understandable.

>> No.24953859


you're missin the point of the statement, homie

>> No.24953861


Why would you play a character again if it just died, as opposed to trying something else that might not die?

>> No.24953864


Um, hate to break it to you, man, but if you take some guy from the street, measure his size and check his strength you won't necessarily find how fast he can run.

That's the point, really, the stats are too unfocused and broad in a bad way. They group together things that don't necessarily correlate.

>> No.24953869

Maybe some idea:
1-Guy roll for father, mother, brothers and stuff.
2-Then he roll for how he is when born
3-Then he has some amount max amount of points to spend. He continue to create his char but instead of fully creating his char from there, he create (the story of) the next five years of the char (or less if it has less than 5 years) and spend points. then he do the same for the next 5 years and this go on...

>> No.24953877


And you're missing the point that handing a guy some dice and telling him to design his character around the vagaries of said dice doesn't really make for compelling character creation.

>> No.24953888


Exactly. The entire thing is somewhat poorly thought out.

>> No.24953890


>then PROVOKING THOUGHT as to how to design and build a character

The definition of rollplaying.

People today want "builds" that make them good, or even the best in their field.

And they want those "Builds" to be based on decent stats.

That isn't thought provoking in the least, your just following charts and writing down what they tell you.

Now having a 3 strength Wizard, that has to ask the party fighter to carry his backpack for camping, because it will fatigue the wizard to hike like that for too long, who is also basically denied from using any melee spells; that's thought provoking.

You have to -change- your build to accommodate a real problem.

As opposed to, picking weenie "-2" flaws (which are actually chosen because they give you an extra feat, that's not a flaw at all!) or "8 str, -1 is my weakness", and then pretending like your character has depth. No, he's not "well rounded". Your just pretending to say that in his backstory while through the course of real gameplay none of their shortcomings actually bite them in the ass.

Not directed specifically at you, but you understand the context.

>> No.24953892

It at least retards the progress of build over character.

Just like choosing what you want isn't going to make him different than the last M Elf you made.

>> No.24953897


may not get the specific number but unless the guy is crippled in a hidden way then you can get a good idea of his speed.

Also they aren't broad in a bad way at all. They group together like enough things that small details can be covered by shit like feats, perks, or skills

>> No.24953906


speak for yourself homie, I find it plenty compelling

hell I game with a bunch of people that don't even know what they want to play until they start rolling dice and the character takes shape

>> No.24953916

I wasn't talking about "god builds." I was talking about "a build that makes sense for the character." I'm not trying to make a god build that just so happens to match my character; I'm try to fit numbers that match my concept.

You shouldn't automatically assume that when someone comes into a game with an idea ahead of time, the idea only extends to how they're going to break the game. Maybe they ACTUALLY HAVE A CHARACTER they want to try.

>> No.24953940

This is why I will never play a roll stat game, its just interferes with playing the character you want to try.

>> No.24953949


>may not get the specific number but unless the guy is crippled in a hidden way then you can get a good idea of his speed

No you fucking won't. What if the guy is a trained athlete? What if he runs a lot in his free time? What if his musculature just isn't condictive to running? What if he just doesn't like running? Your system just slaps a number on that and calls it a day without accounting for individual differences. Why not just say that you can run this or that fast in the first place? Why do you need a stat involved at all?

And yes, they are broad in a bad way. See the INT/WIS debate that's been going on for a while. If people can't even agree on what the stats mean, that's pretty darn bad.

>> No.24953959


>Just like choosing what you want isn't going to make him different than the last M Elf you made.

What the fuck kinda unimaginative shits have you been playing with when you can't even imagine that people will try new things?

>> No.24953962

>Um, hate to break it to you, man, but if you take some guy from the street, measure his size and check his strength you won't necessarily find how fast he can run.

On sword path glory...
With his strenght, sex, and how tall he is (its a atribute there) you can find sort of his real strenght and size. Using this real strenght and the amount of weight he carry you can find his really real strenght.

With his real strenght (not the really real one) and weight he is carring, you find some speed, Then you multiply with your speed attribute to find your max speed.

The game was made by the phoenix command developer and it is more realistic, its their first rpgs, (the ones were less realistic because he was trying to build a audience to his first one). And he is a rocket scientist.

Yes, I found it strange, with if you get stronger you will actually get fatter, or you cant get fatter unless you get stronger

>> No.24953974

Considering I've played D&D in the last 7 years, every single faggot.

>> No.24953976


Why would I want to go through a convoluted and arbitrary system like that in the first place?

>> No.24953991


>I'd imagine that being a character that is literally retarded in various aspects would have difficulties being a successful adventurer.

Actually my old man and the gamers of his era used to do it all the time, low stats made for intriguing quirks; and many a story about 2e adventurers (many of which were successful, or hilariously not) had people with real tangible and fundamental flaws in their stats. Made for good stories, as opposed to wank-fests.

I followed that way for a year or two I think and then ditched it all for 3e.


>3.5 /Pathfinder liked classes to at least be rocking a 16 in their primaries or they were gonna be eating dirt.

Not at all, many suboptimal stats can be successful, and many absolutely abysmal stats can still survive and claw through truley harrowing adventure.

People today just take it for granted that they "need" 16's, and that they deserve to be handed them.

But no actually the 3.5 system is based around junk stats for NPCs and monsters, and it recommends the "elite array" as an upgrade. The "elite array" by the way is worse than player point buy. So I have no idea what kind of stats you think you have to compete against.

Most intro monsters have 12-16 AC and +2-+6 saves, not really demanding...

>> No.24954003


Then stop playing D&D and find an actually good gaming group that uses a system that's not designed for maximum breakability.

>> No.24954006


yes you will cuz there are a bunch of ways to test out strength homie

also all those things you just listed can be covered by feats/skills so you could have a person with low Str but really high Skill: Running with Feat: Runner's Musculature.

And they aren't broad in a bad way. Int/Wis is murky at times (out of all my time roleplaying I have never had this distinction amount to anything significant but you may have a really traumatic experience) but stuff like Str/Con is pretty cut and dry. You never see people mix up Dex/Cha

>> No.24954012


Not strictly true, but generally true.

>> No.24954024


Then cap the player stats in some way or force them to take actual flaws. Don't make people have to suffer through random chance dictating their characters to them.

>> No.24954038

I already tried that, ended up being the same sort of wankfest since the not D&D options are pretty much either, superpowered fantasy, fantasy, but oh no I need your permission to kill your character fantasy, or never got off the ground because chargen took five hours.

Face it entitlement culture in gaming is a thing, and rolled stats tend to fuck up entitlement like a pimp fucks up a smart mouthed ho.

>> No.24954041


Why would I want to go through the hassle of bringing in all that extra baggage with feats and shit just to patch up a fundamentally illogical system?

>> No.24954046


Intro monsters aren't the bad ones. Also seeing as player AC isn't spectacular either things can get dicey in a hurry. I think the big problem with low stats when it comes to D&D is that I approached it at first as the game of "you get to be an awesome hero!" and not "kobolds are gonna beat you to death with clubs!" Like, it's not that I don't like playing Dark Souls but I'd like to know that I'm playing Dark Souls beforehand.

>> No.24954053

Is entitlement bad?

>> No.24954054


Try HeroQuest. It's described pretty well earlier in this thread. I've played it for three years and so far I haven't figured out any way to break it.

>> No.24954060


>talking about 16's and 18's
>thinks I'm implying they're trying to break the game if I oppose handing them out.

I actually don't care about the higher stats, I'm just musing about how rare it is for anyone to ever have to be burdened with a 6 or a 3.

I think maybe the word I'm looking for is Mary-Sue.

The "average" DnD character today, never really has any glaring flaws (as far as stats go, and how those stats interact with their abilities).

>> No.24954062


but the system isn't illogical. It's streamlined and efficient for people who don't care about all the minutia and technicality, and the guys who do care about the minutia and technicality have a system in place for them to tinker with to their heart's content.

>> No.24954071

>Take actual flaws
There have never been actual flaws, it's always flaw, but you get more from it because heaven forbid your characters shouldn't be the textbook definition of a mary sue.

Are you seriously asking that question?

Will it keep people from Melfing along?

>> No.24954076

>Be half of a dynamic duo
>Number-running is my gig, knowing either the exact details or where to find them and throwing together mechanically viable sheets from piles of numbers
>Storyman is just that
>He can make sense of convoluted masses of numbers, but can barely handle character creation and lashing together murder machines on his own
>I throw together his stats after hearing what he wants
>He looks over my sheet to figure out what he can do for a backstory and motivation
>We provide feedback for each other

>'I wanna be able to carry more junk than this.'
>'Okay, get rid of that Quaal's Feather Token and talk the DM into letting me make a magic carry harness. Bull's Strength casting requirement, should cost about the same as the feather token because it doesn't add combat bonuses... What's this about baking on my sheet?'
>'Your uncle was slain by an incomplete cake golem, and you ended up fighting it as a teenager in his burning manor estate. Now you know the importance of thoroughly cooking your food and why culiomancers are assholes that must be murdered to the last man.'
>'That's ridiculous.'
>'I know.'
>'I love it. I'm spending some of my spare cash on masterwork cookware tools.'
>'Thought you might, included it in your character description. Which is the next index card. Not that one, that's motivation for adventure.'

I wish we fought crime, but it usually boils down to fighting the other players.


>> No.24954082

I did the test with this system yesterday and, to calculate the speed, the min amount of weight you carry that is on the table to do it is 10.
I sort of tested with usain bolt.
A guy that has the weight and size usain bolt, and that the his max speed is the same of usain bolt (per 100 meters) when he is using 10 pounds of stuff, is 5 point something out of 3-18

>> No.24954086


>Will it keep people from Melfing along?

I'm afraind you'll have to explain the concept to me.

>> No.24954088


I tried making a subpar character in L5R once. Was pretty fun roleplay wise but really sucked when it came to the fighting part of the game.

And then the GM dropped the ball on the roleplay aspect.

It's just a lot smoother to have a bunch of people who are really good at their job and not good at stuff outside their job.

>> No.24954099


>There have never been actual flaws, it's always flaw, but you get more from it because heaven forbid your characters shouldn't be the textbook definition of a mary sue.

Then make up your own. If you're the DM, you get to do that shit.

>> No.24954103

Liked this idea, any system like that?

>> No.24954106

>calling characters Mary Sues for not having cripplingly low stats

Fuck off you idiot, there is a reason many RPG books say stats that low are unsuitable for active professional adventurers.

>> No.24954124

Comes from where Melf's Acid Arrow comes from. Will it keep them from.

M Elf
F Elf
M Hin
F Dwarf

and so on.

He means today's have flaws that don't matter, and holy crap an 8 trash it.

>> No.24954125

So, where do you get abilities from?
I see what you mean, stats are arbitrary and abstract, but I'm not sure if you can quantify an ability or a "thing that your character does that needs mechanical interpretation" any better.

>> No.24954128

>I think maybe the word I'm looking for is Mary-Sue.
No you're not. A Mary Sue is an author self-insert (which, technically, a PC is by definition) who has a tendency to draw attention of the narrative to them, usually in a negative respect. A character is not a Mary Sue because all their stats are minimally decent.

>> No.24954131


No, it really isn't. There are far simpler and better systems for the people who don't care about all the minutia and technicality and far better thought out and tactical systems for the people care about all the minutia and technicality.

See, the dirty little secret here is that D&D has never actually been a good game mechanicswise.

>> No.24954133


When is the last time you saw somebody voluntarily pick a flaw that made their primary theme worse?

There's a difference between "lulz I'm murky eyed" and "your an int 12 Wizard". one I roll my eyes at, the other I respect.

>> No.24954160

You forgot that they may have flaws that have no bearing and are never really brought up.

>> No.24954166


Do you mean minmaxing? I haven't really found a way to do so yet, and the rules are pretty robustly designed to keep the game challenging.

>> No.24954168


I'm not talking about D&D I'm talking about using numbers to represent stats. D&D is the convenient example because everyone knows it.

>> No.24954177

It's a common symptom, yes, but it's not a central theme of the Mary Sue

>> No.24954196

No basically it's not a character it's M Elf, and that's all the person plays.

True, just thought it got added on since it's such a common symptom.

>> No.24954206


Well, to use HeroQuest as an example, your abilities are part of your character description. If you make a big bad mobster guy, you could have the abilities "Tough as nails", "Mafioso" and "Streetwise" as abilities that can be used in situations where the DM agrees it makes sense. You don't need to tie yourself to arbitrary chosen stats at all, just make up your own as long as they make sense.

>> No.24954232

>Narrative system
Oh shit never fucking mind, I bearly trust them with D&D what makes you think I'd trust them with that.

>> No.24954262


But I can't deny my feels.

When I listen to the stories of 2e gen characters, I know exactly what they had to go through and you can share a feeling of pride.

I don't know why but doing stats that way, form the very beginning, makes you feel like you "earned" your gaming experience from beginning to end, that nobody handed you any freebies.

When I listen to the stories of a 3e character, you walk in knowing that the guy had his high stats handed to him on a silver platter.

>> No.24954263


>No basically it's not a character it's M Elf, and that's all the person plays.

Don't think so since your abilities actually are part of your character description, and at least I would judge that just "Male Elf" is much too broad to apply.

>> No.24954280

>When I listen to the stories of a 3e character, you walk in knowing that the guy had his high stats handed to him on a silver platter.
Ooooor maybe he still rolled his stats, yet he had the opportunity to place those numbers where they make sense for the character. An INT 6 wizard would be an exercise in futility, don'tcha think?

>> No.24954281


but that so lifeless

your character is part of the story but not part of the world, you know?

>> No.24954286


So get better players. Or play RuneQuest if you have a hankering for rules about nearly fucking everything if you want a game that isn't as easy to break as a chopstick.

>> No.24954296


>but that so lifeless

Wut. You'll have to elaborate on this one.

>> No.24954301

I can see that, and it's a valid design. But one could argue that even those descriptions can be ambiguous. (For example, my ability is "Gardener". Now, I want to apply that to lifting something heavy, because I know there's a lot of lifting to do in greenhouses. It would fly with one GM, but maybe not the other).

>> No.24954303

You people need to stop being so smug and self satisfied. There is absolutely nothing wrong with playing a character who does not have life cripplingly shitty stats or is seriously flawed in some manner. That is just as unrealistic and unfun as a character who excels at everything. Lots of people just want to be able to choose their own character, that in no way implies they are 'entitled' or whatever over stupid stuff you want to pin on people who play point buy.

>> No.24954305


I agree that the game has definitely moved to increase the power of the player but different players want different things when they walk into a game.

>> No.24954306

Okay lets just use Melf there.

Always does the following
Quick wits
Fast hands
Weak lungs.

>> No.24954336


That's called a stretch, and it'd give you -6 on your roll.

>> No.24954361

>Assuming I want rules for everything
Sorry did I piss you off by saying never fucking mind to something I distrust due to the vast majority of narrative games making it where I have to have permission to allow death.

We're not exactly smug and self satisfied when it's a growing trend across petty much all games, and you can blame the I want 16s I want 18s crowd for it.

>> No.24954365


Like, say a wizard has Knowledge Arcana. It doesn't mean he knows everything, the points he puts into that combined with his own intelligence says there is a chance he knows it. So him failing the check could be he never read this particular book or maybe he did but forgot it.

Then there is a guy who has a high Int but no Knowledge Arcana. He makes the roll so while he doesn't know much about Arcana, he is able to piece together different visual cues and such to get an understanding of what is going on, or maybe he (being a smart guy) read a book on this exact subject one time. Hell the barbarian with no Int but decided to take a rank in Arcana makes a the random roll and it is because the one book he read on the subject works out.

Functionally they are identically to the "Tough as Nails" stuff but the idea of numbers makes it seem less like this is a person in a story but a person who is part of a world that is controlled by numbers and probability.

>> No.24954368


You still need to define your cultural and social background, your occupation and at least about 6-10 additional abilities to describe your character as well as two or three character flaws before I'd let you play.

Alternatively you could let the player open up new abilities during play as the character develops, or you as a DM could just make suggestions.

>> No.24954384


>the vast majority of narrative games making it where I have to have permission to allow death

Well, you don't in HeroQuest. Dead is dead.

>> No.24954410


I don't follow. You do have numbers for your abilities in HeroQuest as well. In fact, there's a quick description of the entire system earlier in this thread if you're interested.

>> No.24954423

Just using examples here, what I'm saying is does it let them just change the name from.

M Elf to F Elf to F Hin to M Dwarf.

>> No.24954442


so what's the difference between numbers and the heroquest system then?

>> No.24954444


What, you mean play the same character with a different name or what? I still don't really follow what you mean here.

>> No.24954447

Vancian spellcasting. Magic is better as being mostly longer and complex rituals and enchanting, then a small group of flexible, easy to cast spells for emergencies.

>> No.24954468

Also, what is F hin.

What the heck is hin?

>> No.24954475


Heroquest allows you a greater flexibility in making a character because you're not tied to predefined stats or skills. Also all abilities follow the same scale and the same rules. In practise I've found that it works really well.

>> No.24954503

Pretty much, it's what I've seen as a problem that point buy tends to create.

The D&D Halflings between being called hobbits and being called halflings, stayed on as their name in BECMI and Mystara.

>> No.24954520


but you are tied to pre defined traits and abilities

You just replace numbers with words

>> No.24954541


>Pretty much, it's what I've seen as a problem that point buy tends to create.

No, screw that. If someone tried to recycle a character I wouldn't allow it. Technically the rules do allow for it, but I haven't heard of any DM who would let it slide.

Or when in doubt, use Glorantha as the setting. There the elves are a semi-hivemind of walking trees, let the fucker try to play that and see how far he gets.

>> No.24954551


How are they predefined if you make them up yourself? This makes no sense whatsoever.

>> No.24954612

Thanks but no thanks, it's part of why I've been a DM for a while.
But from what I remember seeing 2e of Heroquest was easy enough to rip the crunch out of the system and not fuck it up.

>> No.24954621


They are predefined by you, the player.

Also the fact that they are made up is really worrisome. Instead of minmaxers looking for solid numbers in the system to exploit the game revolves on vague wording and trying to make things descriptive enough to fly by the DM but vague enough to be applied to multiple scenarios.

>> No.24954692


>They are predefined by you, the player.

Do you, like, know what the word "predefined" means? I means that somebody else has made something up and you get to choose between those alternatives.

>Also the fact that they are made up is really worrisome. Instead of minmaxers looking for solid numbers in the system to exploit the game revolves on vague wording and trying to make things descriptive enough to fly by the DM but vague enough to be applied to multiple scenarios.

You get bonuses for using more specific abilities in situations they are especially suited for. For example, if you have an arm wrestling contest and one player uses the ability "buff muscles" and the other uses "Arm wrasslin' champ" the second player would get a bonus to his roll.

It all pretty much evens out in the end. The more vague abilities are meant to let you at least try something, while the specific abilities are the ones that define what your character is especially good at.

>> No.24955166

I've read up some more on HeroQuest, and it sounds really interesting. I'd love to try it, if I can ever find a game.

>> No.24955189


There's the e-version on Moon Design Publications' website. It's also like 15 bucks or something like that.

>> No.24955198


An INT 6 wizard with 16 DEX would be Rincewind.

But notice the 16 DEX - I'm assuming Rincewind would function as basically the utility thief for the group with lots of points in dex skills, while the Rogue is average dex, high str and more like Conina and has all her skills in weapon proficiencies to maximise DPS and to hit chance.

>> No.24955234

Rincewind has a pretty good INT actually. He just ha flaw of being completely unable to do magic.

Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.