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

Become a Patron!

/tg/ - Traditional Games


View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 22 KB, 640x512, rpg_rules_chart.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9333841 No.9333841 [Reply] [Original] [4plebs] [archived.moe]

I wish somebody made a good RPG ;_;

It's so embarrassing to spend all day bashing D&D, WoD, Spirit of the Century, etc. when someone asks what's a good game then and I can't come up with anything

>> No.9333854

You don't actually play RPGs, do you?

>> No.9333879

d&d long and complex? what edition are you playing?

>> No.9333898

by abstract bullshit i guess you mean things like "damage is represented by hit points, so at 1 hp when you have been severely wounded,you can still fight at full capacity"

>> No.9333906

>>9333841

Seriously there are none that are short and simple plus believable in simulation truthfully it's a contradiction since in order to be believable it needs to be a complex, which entails long and complex rules.

>>9333854

>> No.9333917

>>9333879
8th. None of the editions of D&D were seriously complicated on the level of, say, Riddle of fucking Steel.

>> No.9333933

short rules with believable simulation is called "writing a book"

>> No.9333937

>>9333879
2e had the whole thing with the THAC0. I guess that might confuse some people for a while.

>> No.9333967
File: 14 KB, 326x317, grandmofftarkin.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9333967

OP, I will help you. Now you will seem to have a truly well-informed and well-rounded opinion.

The correct answer when recommending a "good" RPG is.....

Paranoia.

Why? Because fun is mandatory, and there are no rules.

>> No.9333981

it's ua

>> No.9333986

LARPing should technically satisfy your Good RPGs box, but, well, it's LARPing...

>> No.9333987

THAC0 was genius and you young whipper-snappers don't know you were born.

>> No.9333990

>>9333933
Or playing pretend like you did when you were a kid, combat's a bitch though hope you aren't the bookworm class.

>> No.9333991
File: 13 KB, 267x238, fcblue.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9333991

>>9333967
>no rules

>> No.9334015

>>9333937
Actually not really, just took knowing how to subtract even with negatives... BAB is the exact same thing in reverse really.

>> No.9334027

D&D *is* good.

There's a saying about programming which I think applies to RPG games:
There are only two kinds of games: the ones people complain about and the ones nobody uses.

>> No.9334032

>>9333967
[Friend Computer blasted this poster for this post, get another clone]

>> No.9334034

>>9333967
yes, if by "no rules" you mean "there are a fuckton of rules including elaborate hit location damage tables"

why yes, I am ultraviolet clearance. why do you ask, citizen?

>> No.9334063

ROLE PLAYING WOULD BE SO MUCH BETTER IF EVERY RULEBOOK WAS CALLED A GUIDEBOOK INSTEAD, AND THE GM IS SUPPOSED TO FEEL MORE THAN 100% FREE TO FIX OR CHANGE ANYTHING IN HIS PRESENTED RULES OR AND ANYTHING TO THEM TO SUIT HIS NEEDS.

>> No.9334072

>>9334015
Subtracting wasn't hard. It was knowing when you were supposed to subtract, and when you were supposed to add, combined with the sometimes long equations that come up.

>> No.9334075

>>9333991
>no rules
from a player perspective? damn right there's no rules. there's a lot of rules for the character to follow, but that's a different matter.

>> No.9334089
File: 48 KB, 387x259, blank_facepalm_224.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9334089

>>9333841

It's like you're finally coming out and admitting what a pretentious shitfucker you are.

Except that it doesn't count because you don't realize that you are admitting to anything.

>> No.9334104

>>9334063
You should look up GURPS.

>> No.9334122

>>9334104

I Could never find GURPS on RS, its a bunch of bullshit splatbooks for different settings, isn't there one GURPS book like a players handbook or a core rulebook?

>> No.9334123

>>9334034
Fellow ultravioletfag here. /r/'ing that big chart which explains all the relationships between the various secret societies, high programmers, and other complexes which I am totally authorized to have.

Mine was, uh... eaten by a mutant..

>> No.9334135

Complicate rules eh? If only there were these magic boxes that could handle all the calculations and you could just put a game in and it beams all the information to some kind of screen.

tl;dr play vidya games

>> No.9334138

>>9334063
So almost every single RPG?

And GURPS.

>> No.9334144

>>9334122
Go to the Steve Jackson Games website and check..?

>> No.9334147

>>9334122
GURPS Basic Set - Characters and GURPS Basic Set - Campaigns. Or just get GURPS Lite

>> No.9334152

>>9334123

Another ultraviolet here. I second this motion. Mine was eaten too. Fukken' mutants are hungry.

>> No.9334154

>>9333841
Rifts.

>> No.9334161

>>9334122
4e

Characters, Campaigns

3e
Basic

and I think SJG actually has how to convert from 3e-4e.

>> No.9334164

>>9334122

Basic Set: Characters and Basic Set: Campaigns.

Powers is sometimes considered a third core book, too.

>> No.9334194

>>9334154
Needlessly complex and abstract to hell, I'll take it.

Seriously look at the fucking chart, Rifts is not believable simulation AND simple short rules.

believable simulation, yes.
short and simple rules, OHGODNO! >laughinggirls.jpg

>> No.9334196

The core rules of D&D have always been fairly simple, and have only got simpler as things have gone on. It's only complicated if you count trying to integrate and balance all of the race/class/feat/item/spell/equipment options that it rains like godamn candy.

>bashing D&D
we do this because we like arguing about our different preferences

>bashing WoD
Mostly vampires (dramafags) and werewolves (lolfurries). It doesn't happen that much

>Bashing Spirit of the Century
Are you high? Has this ever actually happened?

>I wish somebody made a good RPG ;_;
And I wish that we could get some decent trolls around here, but given the state of things I doubt it's going to happen. But hey, you might improve with time. We all get better at our stuff if we just practice at it more.

> I Could never find GURPS on RS
…I think I need a drink. No. I think I need two drinks.

>> No.9334213

>>9334122
Check out Isohunt.com
Search "GURPS"
Get the latest edition, 4th, and torrent the CHARACTERS, and CAMPAIGNS books, plus whatever splatbooks look interesting.

-High tech is from the industrial revolution to now, statting out every tool and gun you have ever heard of
-Ultra tech is everything from now until Mass effect statted out
-Bio tech explores biological developments, throughout time, and stats out frankensteins, chimeras and batch cloning procedures.
-Magic is self-explanatory and recommended if you want a expanded magic system.
-Thaumatology adapts magic into whatever system you want.

>> No.9334215

>>9334196
Here have my extra fifth, I doubt I'll need it one is enough for alcohol poisoning to help me forget the stupid.

>> No.9334229

What if I think D&D is a good RPG?

>> No.9334233

>>9334213
Forgot Fantasy, it finally came out.

>> No.9334242

>>9334164

Wow, I finally got the GURPS books(campaigns and characters), anything else you would suggest? you said something about powers?

>> No.9334255

>>9334213
So wanna use tham and fantasy (a little of it) and possibly port over some of the stuff they had in 3e to make a kick ass urban fantasy GURPS game.

>> No.9334257

>>9333879
>d&d long and complex? what edition are you playing?

The one with three 250+ page rulebooks, before we even get to the expansions.

D&D 3 and 4 are INSANELY complicated. I have no idea how people can deny that. I could play an entire adventure of Cthulhu in the time it takes to read the PHB.

>> No.9334260

Wait, WHAT? campaigns book starts at page ~340?

>> No.9334268

>>9334229
>What if I think D&D is a good RPG?
you are only entitled to that opinion if you have tried several others. Most have not. Hence, edition wars.

>> No.9334285

>>9334260

Yes.

>> No.9334293

Deadlands, niggerrrrrrrr

>> No.9334295

>>9333917
>None of the editions of D&D were seriously complicated on the level of, say, Riddle of fucking Steel.

That's like saying that an elephant doesn't weigh a lot because aircraft carriers are heavier.

All I want is a pet I can hold in my hands.

>> No.9334301

>>9334257
heh, seriously most every RPG that comes in book form is long and complex.

then again most of that comes from trying to make a believable skeleton for a world.

>> No.9334316

>>9334295
Keep dreaming... no wait I just thought of one.

Mouseguard... only good RPG by OP's standards.

>> No.9334319

>>9333917
FATAL was here, what is your anal cirumference again?

>> No.9334327

.>>9334257
But... CoC uses the same mechanics as D&D, unless you mean pre-d20 CoC, which was *more complicated*

>> No.9334338

>>9334257

Most of those rules contain options, not core mechanics.

There are much longer rulesets which present no where near the same level of options to GMs and players.

>> No.9334342

>>9334327
>implying anyone plays CoC D20.

>> No.9334347

>>9334316

Mouseguard is delightfully abstract, actually.

>> No.9334373

>>9334342
Sombody out there does, hell there might be someone out there who actually plays Wrathe...Werat..Wraeth...however you fucking spell it and FATAL,

>> No.9334375

>>9334342

CoC d20 is awesome. It took me forever to find a rulebook, and I didn't know that the old CoC existed until I went searching for adventures/advice online and wondered why people were talking about d100s.

>> No.9334376

>>9334327

Are you stupid or what? Everything in CoC is "roll under your skill with d100". And character progression is "roll over your skill with a d100".

That is so, so very much simpler than trying to figure out all the 28 things that can alter your chance to hit.

>> No.9334383

>>9334347
Well fuck, looks like nothing OP, aside from CRPGs.

>> No.9334397

>>9334316
>Mouseguard... only good RPG by OP's standards.
>downloads pdf from /rs/
>320 pages

Yeah... no.

>> No.9334425

>>9334338
>Most of those rules contain options, not core mechanics.

Most of them are feats, spells, classes, PRCs, races etc. are not optional things. You absolutely need to internalize them all to be able to even make a character.

>> No.9334427

>>9334397
320 pages of large font and lots of drawings.

in truth it's only about maybe 50 pages or so of rules you need as a player.

>> No.9334433

>>9334383

Expecting "short and simple rules" in a " believable simulation" is just retarded (nevermind the implication that "abstract" is the opposite of "believable", or that complex rules can't be good, or that abstract systems can't be good). I want to believe OP is a troll but I know I would just be comforting myself with the belief.

>> No.9334440

>>9334425
PRC's are entirely optional... seems like someone never actually read the DMG.

>> No.9334465

>>9334440
He means 'not optional if you don't want to suck'

>> No.9334467

>>9334196
>>Bashing Spirit of the Century
>Are you high? Has this ever actually happened?

It sure as fuck should. It's an abstract game that uses fudge-dice, advertised as "rules lite" yet has FOUR HUNDRED PAGES in its main book. If that's rules lite, then what the fuck is rules heavy?

I'll give you ten pages. That's me being generous: you really should be able to fit your entire system comfortably on one page, two or three max, but I'm willing to meet you partway and give you ten. That's how much room you have for a system that has to be extremely realistic and extremely fast to use and easy to learn.

After that, you can spend the rest of your pages - 12 of them, because your game should be a 22 page pamphlet - on background fluff and monster lists and shit like that.

>> No.9334476

>>9334425

That's a crock of shit. Most new players decide from the get-go (after a short introduction from the DM) that they want to play, say, an elf warrior. At which point they need to be familiar with one race and maybe two or three classes (to know their options), and then they're basically good to go. The biggest hurdle then is reviewing the feat or skill lists.

DMG has player-relevant rules, but they don't come up until your character physically has his hand on the magic item in question (or is afflicted by the status ailment in question).

Most of the DMG actually consists of GMing advice, (strictly optional) tables for brainstorming, and extended examples.

The Monster Manual is 100% optional. You could run a game without monsters if you wanted. They're there for variety.

>> No.9334478

>>9334433
>nevermind the implication that "abstract" is the opposite of "believable"

It absolutely is.

>> No.9334484

>>9334257
>DnD
>Complicated

Are you retarded, or just a shitty troll?

>> No.9334495

>>9334467
That'll happen when the RPG becomes a program you install which combined with voice recognition to know what you're trying to do provides you with results without any calculations.

>> No.9334496

>>9334476
>That's a crock of shit. Most new players decide from the get-go (after a short introduction from the DM) that they want to play, say, an elf warrior.

Yes.

At which point they need to learn every single skill, class, PRC, race and feat to see if they are helpful to elf warriors.

>> No.9334500

In most games, the PCs need to be able to do a whole lot of very different things: fight, cast spells, bake a cake, drown, buy a house, command a minion, whatever...

If you have different rules for most of these things, your rules are long and complex. But if you have the same resolution mechanic for all of these things, your rules are abstract bullshit.

You can sort of get around this by playing a game with a very narrow focus, in which case only a few rules will suffice for believable simulation provided the players don't do anything the game wasn't designed for, but I somehow don't think that's what the OP wants.

>> No.9334503

>>9334465
Take all of them out and you wont... ZOMG, I've actually played a straight character in 3.5 before, not a mage, a mother fucking ranger, no PRC, the no magic variant, and archery feat path.

was fun... of course I actually played it and didn't try to optimafag it either.

>> No.9334511

>>9334467
Then do it, cocksucker. Make a system that isn't shitty that takes up ten pages or less.

If you can't, you're nothing but a filthy little douche-nozzle.

>> No.9334515

>>9334496
Well usually they don't and proceed to suck, or somebody who knows the mess advised them.

>> No.9334521

>>9334467
Have you actually looked at those four hundred pages to see how much is rules and how much is flavor?

>> No.9334531

Well, I can understand OP.
I have some friends who repel all my attempts to play something /tg/-related with them with "what? how many pages? you really expect me to read them?" or "uh, all those numbers make me head hurted".
I'm gonna try "Kobolds Ate My Baby" next, probably.

>> No.9334534

>>9334521
Well it's like the MOUSEGUUARD IS 320 pages!!!!1111!!!

NO flavor, no pictures, no large font Final destination!

>> No.9334537

>>9334484

Your standards are fucked if you don't think D&D is incredibly hard to learn.

3.X has about five thousand pages of rules, counting the splats. Even if you only count the "core", it's over a thousand pages. 4e mercifully brings this down to about eight hundred.

I am a fucking gamemaster and I need to learn all of this shit by heart. And for players, ANY amount of work above zero is too much. Have these people ever played with actual people?

>> No.9334544

>>9334521

Do you think it matters? I still need to read it all.

>> No.9334545

>>9334537
Yes, and they do it by fucking playing not by read read read like a fucking autistic.

>> No.9334556

>>9334521

Of course not. He's a troll.

And I usually don't care about the distinction between "troll" and "idiot"- to me, a wrong statement is a wrong statement no matter how you slice it. But come on. Even I can tell when someone is being an ass on purpose; and I've never even played SotS.

>> No.9334561

>>9334545
You are just too fucking lazy to have a respectable opinion on RPGs.

>> No.9334564

>>9334537
People don't think D&D is complicated for the same reason they don't think learning English was complicated.

Both of them are actually totally fucked, but you know them already so you never realize it.

>> No.9334577

>>9334537
I'm also a GM, and I run games weekly with multiple groups/multiple systems (In person, no less). DnD 3.5 was one of the easiest systems I've ever encountered.

I think you're just a whiner.

>> No.9334583

>>9334561
soooo spending hours actually playing rather than sitting on my ass to read every damn rule is lazy, well fuck guess anyone who actually plays the games rather than just read the rule books and figure out how can I break the system is fucking lazy.

>> No.9334585

>>9334511

Actually I already did that. I combined the best parts of WoD and CoC systems into a system that took exactly one page, in a big font, and left out nothing important. It was so incredibly easy that I'm seriously wondering why it hasn't been done before.

But I think that's still aiming too low, so now I'm trying to make a ultra-realistic simulationist 8-page fantasy game that includes everything imaginable and can be learned in the time it takes to read this post. The one page Vampire can be a backup feature in it.

>> No.9334589

>>9334564
Naw, English is fucked up but but it's simpler than many other languages. I'm Spanish and i found English easier than Spanish.

>> No.9334604

maybe OP just hates RPGs and needs to Get Out

>> No.9334613

>>9334564
It took me all of two sessions to learn everything I needed to know about DnD 3.5 to be able to play it without a hitch. You guys are just retarded, apparently.

>> No.9334623

>>9334613
Aspies probably.

>> No.9334627

>Most of those rules contain options, not core mechanics.
THIS. If you took out all the feats and spells and equipmnet you could fit the DMG and PHB into one 40 page book.

>> No.9334632

>>9334613
How many session to learn how to run it?

>> No.9334644

>>9334537

Not my fault you and your group suck.

Also not my fault that you think splats are a part of the game that you 'have to know by heart'.

They are supposed to be fun. If they do not make the game more fun for you then you are start drooling idiot for even thinking of using them.

The combined pagecounts for the DMG, MM, and PHB is less than a thousand words. Less than half of that is actually necessary to read in order to have a thorough understanding of the system. And more than half of THAT is core mechanics (most of it consists of options which utilize existing core mechanics- feats which simply provide bonuses to things, for instance).

>> No.9334645

>>9334585
>I COMBINED TWO SYSTEMS. ORIGINAL CONTENT LOLOL

>> No.9334646

>>9334613

The only reason you are able to play it at all is that you ignore 90% or more of the rules.

This is apparently so common practice among RPG players that they think it's normal, even though it's a desperate mental shortcut that tries to compensate for the game itself being designed for Brainiac 5 instead of actual human beings who can only keep a limited amount of things in their heads at any given moment.

>> No.9334664
File: 174 KB, 650x764, lol.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9334664

>>9334646

I.. I'm really not sure how to respond to this.

>> No.9334665

>>9334632
Oddly it took me a couple, mainly on the keeping track of initiative, and on how to scale for the party, not really that hard, the hard part is making the game "real" at the table.

>> No.9334672

>>9334644
>>The combined pagecounts for the DMG, MM, and PHB is less than a thousand words. Less than half of that is actually necessary to read in order to have a thorough understanding of the system.

So... by your admission 500 pages is necessary?

And you don't think it should be less?

Like, maybe FIVE pages?

>> No.9334681

>>9334623
>YOU UNDERSTOOD THE RULES QUICKLY, YOU MUST BE MENTALLY DISABLED.

Cool story, Bro.

>>9334646
>YOU IGNORED THE RULES.

Nope. I played with a DM that was a total stickler for the rules.

>> No.9334686

>>9334665
or when the player says I attempt a grapple.

>> No.9334689

>>9334585

Why don't you freeform? Why do you use rules at all?

>> No.9334695

>>9334681
notyou, the retards who can't seem to do it.

>> No.9334696

>>9334665
Quick, my mage is grappled while attempting to cast. What to a roll to get out?

>> No.9334697

>>9334681
>Nope. I played with a DM that was a total stickler for the rules.

Then I can only assume that your adventure involved nothing more creative than wandering down square hallways and Full Attacking.

>> No.9334701

>>9334689
That's abstract bullshit!

>> No.9334707

>>9334686
true, also have the ability to pick apart the wordyness, was easy really.

>> No.9334716

>>9334701
Hell why even use dice, that's incredibly abstract.

>> No.9334719

>>9334632

>>9334613 here. It didn't take me very many from a rules perspective. From a "Being a good GM that knows how to make an interesting plot, balance encounters for the party, and keep things on track" perspective, however, took many sessions. That's something that's common to most RPGs, though.

>> No.9334733

>>9334689
>Why don't you freeform?

I do.

>Why do you use rules at all?

Rules can help when the gamemaster doesn't have enough information of his own to make a call on what should happen. Most people don't know what's the expected outcome when shooting at a man-sized target in the dark, or what should happen if there's a hit. This is the sort of thing rules are good for: being a tool that quickly patches over the GM's deficiencies. But they have to be light for that or else the weight of your toolkit is slowing you down more than they help you.

>> No.9334741

> you really should be able to fit your entire system comfortably on one page, two or three max, but I'm willing to meet you partway and give you ten.

I think that this is a lot harder than you think it is. I've seen a few one page RPGs. They suck. They can hardly DO anything. I've been working on a game with a fairly focused concept (galactic marital arts tournament) and the rules for that are starting to push 20 pages. And I'm just dealing with two dudes in a ring fighting each other. I’m not even bothering to do anything more involved that ‘freeform it’ for anything classed as ‘out of ring activities”.

>12 pages of fluff, including setting, history, races, adventure locations, etc

Because I’m all ready to enjoy either playing a game with an uninspired, poorly described setting or trying to read through 12 pages of ultra-dense size 4 font when I’m thinking about getting into a game.

>> No.9334745

>>9334697
>Implying that you can't have a fun game full of deep roleplay and intriguing plots while using all the rules.

I didn't know that those were mutually exclusive.

>> No.9334747

>>9334719
Exactly, being a GM is being three things at once, a Ref, a Storyteller and a Preschool teacher with kids hyped up on sugar and caffeine.

>> No.9334752

>>9333841
Just Play Mage. Though that may be too abstract for you.

>> No.9334763

>>9334752
>iseewhatyoudidther.jpg

>> No.9334768

>>9334741
>Because I’m all ready to enjoy either playing a game with an uninspired, poorly described setting or trying to read through 12 pages of ultra-dense size 4 font when I’m thinking about getting into a game.

Actually, the ideal setting would be just a big map with lots of unexplored terrain. The GM will always prefer his own work over any kind of a pre-made setting, so let's just give him a skeleton that he can turn into a real place.

>> No.9334771

>>9334672

Nope. I can honestly say that that thought never crossed my mind.

If I want to play an RPG, then I want something which gives me a wealth of fun options, and then models the consequences of those options in fun ways in the game world.

If I just want to play pretend or tell a story, then I don't want rules at all. I freeform.

Why would you ever want a five page ruleset? You can't possibly include enough options for it to be tactically or creatively fun. It sounds like having rules just for the sake of rules, even if they don't contribute positively to the experience of roleplaying.

>> No.9334774

>>9333841
GURPS

>> No.9334796

>>9334733
>Rules can help when the gamemaster doesn't have enough information of his own to make a call on what should happen. Most people don't know what's the expected outcome when shooting at a man-sized target in the dark, or what should happen if there's a hit. This is the sort of thing rules are good for: being a tool that quickly patches over the GM's deficiencies.

They do not do anything of the sort unless they model (a) reality in a believable way.

"Roll a shoot check" is not modeling reality in a believable way. The person who designed the 'shoot check' mechanic knew even less about the situation than the DM does, and is far less qualified to make a call.

>> No.9334802

>>9334768
Why are you limiting the GM's creativity with a map? The ideal setting is "Do it yourself", by this line of reasoning.

>> No.9334810

>>9334771
>You can't possibly include enough options [in 5 pages] for it to be tactically or creatively fun.

Options? Any RPG has infinite options by definition, or it's not a real RPG at all. The rules are not there to give the players options, the rules are there to give the gamemaster guidelines on how to rule tricky situations.

>> No.9334822

>>9334802

Seriously what's being asked for a "good" RPG is... fuck >>9333933 said it best.

>> No.9334825

>>9334802

"This line of reasoning" is that the rules exist to assist GM, but the GM has to do the real work. Giving a half-made world is consistent with that.

>> No.9334832

>>9334672
I think that's more formatting choices on their part. And they do need to toss in all that art and pretty it up. Blocks of black and white text with a few illustrations here and there might have cut it back in the early 80s, but people have some seriously higher standards these days when it comes to layout and design. Also, if you're cynical, there's always WotC bloating the page count to get you to buy more books.

So if you wanted you could shrink D&D down into a small quick-play pamphlet, but no one...
...actually, scratch that. I'd probably buy it. I'd be good for learning the rules if you don't already know them, would be hella cheap to produce, and you would still need the core books to get your character togeather as far as feats and gear and stuff. Why aren't they doing this?

>> No.9334866

>>9334696

Escape artist opposed by grapple.

That's not a hard rule to memorize. The hard rule is the way that being pinned vs grappled works, the way that grappling without your whole body (as with improve grab) works, and the way that grapplers interact with people outside the grapple.

This is what bookmarks are for.
(Or, if you don't like looking things up mid-session, that's what "make a call and move on" is for. Or at least, that's what the designers thought. http://www.montecook.com/arch_dmonly33.html )

>> No.9334890

>>9334768

I'm not sure if you actually realize what a pretentious cunt you are, or how antithetical your ideas actually are to what most players think constitutes fun.

>> No.9334891
File: 131 KB, 180x135, 1134964748879.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9334891

>Long and complex rules
>D&D

Man... if that mundane entry-level shit is too much for you to hack, you need to get the fuck out of the hobby.

>> No.9334901

>>9334810

This sort of thing, by the way, is why I despise 4E D&D so much. The whole game is geared towards "you shall have preCISEly these legal actions and you shall pick eXACTly one of them each turn" playing, to the point that "try to be creative" is codified into just another "legal action" that does exactly level-appropriate damage. That's like... why wouldn't you just play a computer game instead? The POINT of RPGs is constant improvisation and thinking outside the box.

>> No.9334915

>>9334890

Fuck "most players". Most players are dipshits who think armor and agility affecting the same stat is okay. I'm thinking what would be the ideal game for ME.

>> No.9334922

>>9334890
not the same guy, but an open-world map sounds totally fun if there's an objective attached to it

better than GO DOWN LINEAR CORRIDOR TALK TO ESTABLISHED NPC, which i can already do with fuckin computer rpgs anyways

>> No.9334926

>>9334802
...I might just take a look at that. Because you never know what system might be good for running a bunch of PCs ganging up on Vegita to prove they are the best in space.

>>9334752
Then why the hell are things like the eberon campaign setting so popular? OR campaign settings in general? We might hate to admit it, but there are a lot of people who just suck dicks when it comes to making a good setting to run a game in. The "Just use your imagination Butterfly in the sky I can go twice as high" method often nets you a pile of things not even final fantasy would want to be associated with. Everyone thinks that they can make a good setting that’s all super special awesome. A lot can manage something that’s at least passable for a dozen sessions or so. Only a few can really shine, and all the rest are just crap.

>> No.9334932

>>9334901
That sums it up for me. It's why I like GURPS. Sure, theres a 'rule for everything', but only because the designers wanted you to try everything and play what you like.

You can try anything, and most likely, even without the specific skill, it will end up as a reasonable if not plausible number to roll 3d6 under.

>> No.9334935

>>9334901
also yes this is what people mean when they say 4E is an mmo on paper

you're not emulating real actions, you're just pressing hotkeys based on your class abilities

>> No.9334965

>>9334810
>Options? Any RPG has infinite options by definition, or it's not a real RPG at all. The rules are not there to give the players options, the rules are there to give the gamemaster guidelines on how to rule tricky situations.

Rules are not meaningful or useful unless they respond to decisions made by PCs in fun and meaningful ways. Narratively, your game might have infinite options, but mechanically, it probably only has one option. And that makes it a very boring system.

Any twelve year old with a strong imagination can tell a wonderful collaborative story with his friends. I pity you if you feel that rules are necessary for this; or even that they help.

The "game" part of roleplaying games should be just as much fun as the "roleplaying" part. Games are supposed to be fun. If the rules don't contribute to the experience they they should not exist.

>> No.9334984

I started on 3E. D&D is kind of complicated, but 95% of the rules are things only the DM really needs to know.

Once you've made a character sheet, you can play the rest of the game by pretty much just describing actions. All the hard part is in determining DCs, which players don't need to give a shit about.

>> No.9334995

>>9334965
The rules are there to prevent the experience from turning into Super Saiyan Wish Fulfillment. That's why a lot of people hate the stupid HEALING SURGE bullshit in 4th Edition - because the whole point of a game is that you can lose.

>> No.9335012

>>9334915

Nevermind, you realize it and just don't care.

Have fun playing with yourself. I'm going to be playing a real game and having fun with my friends.

>> No.9335039
File: 23 KB, 300x392, 1265618262935.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9335039

>>9334995
>>9334935

UNSUBTLE ATTEMPT AT EDITION WAR WAS OFFENSIVELY UNSUBTLE.

>> No.9335046

>>9334995
You do realize that Healing Surges are a limiting/resource mechanic, not a 'free healing' thing right?

>> No.9335069

>>9335046

You do realize that 5e will have vita chambers and save points after every ecounter, right?

>> No.9335075

>>9335046
Wizards really couldnt 'balance the game' without their inclusion, and now its a clusterfuck. Glad I changed games completely.

>> No.9335078

>>9335069

6E will have quicksave and quickload bound to your f5 and f9 keys.

>> No.9335084

>>9334995
>The rules are there to prevent the experience from turning into Super Saiyan Wish Fulfillment.
What's wrong with Super Saiyan Wish Fulfillment, if that's what the group enjoys?

That's not a rhetorical question. You actually have to answer it.

I mean, it still won't save your argument (barebones rules such as you are describing do NOTHING to prevent Super Saiyan Wish Fulfillment, they merely create an illusion of authority which should not be necessary for a competent storyteller). But I still expect you to answer the question.

>That's why a lot of people hate the stupid HEALING SURGE bullshit in 4th Edition - because the whole point of a game is that you can lose.

I don't even play 4e, and this is funny to me.

That said, I don't even play 4e, so I'll let someone else get this.

>> No.9335090

Maybe I'm just fucked in the head, but I really prefer having some level of complexity in my games. I like there to be a certain level of comprehensiveness.

>> No.9335134

>>9334965
>Narratively, your game might have infinite options, but mechanically, it probably only has one option.

This is my beef with D&D's "you can refluff the basic attack in a hundred ways!!" thing.

The whole point of making the GM do the real work is to put the game back where it belongs - into the GM's head. When the gamemaster is all-powerful and not bound by the whims of petty game designers, the game truly has infinite options.

4E tried to fix the "refluff your full attack" problem by giving you seven or eight other types of full attack. That's doesn't do SHIT. They went entirely the wrong way.

All the rules should be allowed to do is help the GM, rub his shoulders, give him pointers on how to rule adversarial or otherwise complicated situations.

(In fact, how about an RPG system based entirely around that? Instead of rules, there's just advice for the GM. The first step would be telling the GM to invent his own character system and give sheets to the players. Hold on, gotta write this down.)

>> No.9335142

>>9335084
>That said, I don't even play 4e, so I'll let someone else get this.
Healing surges aren't Win Buttons. Much like the daily allotment of cure spells in previous editions, you can run out of them. Anyone who has actually played 4th Edition would know this.

>> No.9335151

>>9335134

Have you ever played a game that was not a roleplaying game?

Magic? Yu-Gi-Oh? Settlers?
.. Chess?

>> No.9335166

>That's why a lot of people hate the stupid HEALING SURGE bullshit in 4th Edition - because the whole point of a game is that you can lose.

Oddly, this is an issue I have with 4E (and D&D in general with its tendency towards the slow upward grind of 'level appropriate combat') but it's not an issue I have with healing surges. Not that I like healing surges, but I chose to dislike them just as a matter of personal taste as well as on thematic grounds.

But yes, I can them as a contributor to the whole “you may be in danger but you never will risk death unless you’re stupid” problem, but I can see that as a DM issue as much as it is a system issue.

>> No.9335186

>>9335166

D&D 4e was designed to not scare noobs away. The challenge guidelines are total kitty-gloves stuff.

Treat the party as being three or four levels higher and it's actually a remarkably fun and robust tactical wargame.

>> No.9335189

>>9335151

Thousands.

I assume you want to argue that you need rules to have a game. That's correct. But even freeform has rules:

Rules of freeform
-----------------------------------
1. Player decides what he attempts to do
2. GM describes the results of the attempt
3. Continue until win/loss condition reached or too bored to go on

>> No.9335199

>>9335189
Freeform roleplay has absolutely no place around a table.

>> No.9335208

>>9335199

Sofas are indeed more comfortable.

>> No.9335230

>>9333841
uh, reality is complicated, the closer you simulate reality, the more rules you have. there isn't any way around it.

>> No.9335245

>>9335134
>In fact, how about an RPG system based entirely around that? Instead of rules, there's just advice for the GM.

You're ten (and by "ten" I mean "thirty") years late. This was explicitly the intent of 3rd edition D&D (to say nothing of, say, OD&D).

http://www.montecook.com/arch_dmonly33.html

I wish I had that great "how to run 0e D&D" article (the one that talks about the "ming vase principle"), but unfortunately I seem to have lost it.

>> No.9335259

>>9335245
I have a billion back issues, was it an old article?

>> No.9335263

>>9335189

No, that's not my point at all.

My real question is, when playing these other games (which did NOT have infinite options), did you have fun?

>> No.9335272

WoD is a good game.

>> No.9335278

>>9335259

It's actually an online essay that someone linked to in a discussion much like this one (when I was going on about how "the game has improves", and not really recognizing the validity of oldschool gaming philosophy. When, really, the whole "It's the DMs job to make shit awesome" principle is how I've been running 3e since I started in early highschool).

>> No.9335281

>>9335208
>HURR HURR

>> No.9335295

>>9335281

He's just agreeing with your point. Sitting around a table is silly if you don't have character sheets or grids or dice to roll.

>> No.9335307

I know it sounds silly, but..

Rolling dice is fun

>> No.9335311

>>9335186
Yeah, that's probably what I'd end up doing if I ran it. Or was telling someone how to run it for me as a player. Maybe I'm just a masochist, but I liked the feeling of constant impending doom that seemed to come boxed with the more gygax editions. Give me problems that I need to do some hard strategy planning to have a chance of surviving, damn it! I get really annoyed when all we need for a plan is ‘we use our dailies on the goblins and they lose’. Give me ‘The dragon better fall for that trap we set, otherwise we’re going to be in some serious trouble. I can’t wait until we’re not level 3 anymore’.
It makes for better stories when the plan actually works. No one wants to hear about the time you took out Tiamat as a party of level 50s. Everyone wants to hear about the time your wizard and evil necromancer battled to the death with 1d4 daggers in the middle of an antimagic field after the rest of the party got killed.

>> No.9335318
File: 10 KB, 512x640, 1201634034421.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9335318

>>9335272
>WoD is a good game
>Good game
>Believable simulation
>Short and simple rules

>> No.9335338

>>9335295
>Sitting around a table is silly if you don't have character sheets or grids or dice to roll.
Man I hate to break it to you, but normal people can do this and enjoy themselves.

>> No.9335343

>>9335318
Attribute + Skill + Bonus with a fixed success is pretty simple.

The most shit anyone has to deal with is modifiers for called shots.

>> No.9335346

>>9334511
You don't need to be a cook to complain about the food.

>> No.9335349

>>9335338
What? No. Fuck your shit.
Couches all the way.

>> No.9335392

>>9335311

Ha ha, oh man. This has happened with my group in low-level games (due to exhaustion, though, not antimagic). Even better when they each take a moment to spend their last cantrips on melee buffs (and wipe the blood out of their eyes).

When the battle boils down to a knife-fight between casters, you know your shit has just been rammed about as far up as it will go.

>> No.9335401

>>9335084
What's wrong with Super Saiyan Wish Fulfillment is that ultimately there's no drama to it, and you're not developing anything. There's, in fact, no reason to get multiple people involved - since all you're doing is stating what you want to happen, and there's no inter-personal moderation in place. Role-Playing Games aren't "productive" or anything of the sort, but there is at least a sort of regularity to their character and to their content. You might as well be writing Mary-Sue Fanfics if you're just going to have Wish Fulfillment.
>>9335142
So what's wrong with actually having a cleric, instead of every character needing a bonus PRESS X TO REVIVE mechanic?

>> No.9335413

This is why I fucking love homebrew. My group has a sweet ass system going which includes HP and damage. Everytime you take a hit, depending on the amount of damage done, you roll on a chart, there's a chart for 1-10 damage, one fo 11-20, one for 21-30, ect.
Going to 0 HP represents your body going 'Fuck this, I've had enough', taking wounds represents massive gashes, ect.
On another note >>9335039 who is that in the picture?

>> No.9335430

>>9335401

BECAUSE YOU CAN'T SPEND HEALING SURGES FREELY.

A CHARACTER, ON HIS OWN, CAN SPEND *ONE* HEALING SURGE IN A FIGHT. ONE.

WITH A CLERIC'S HELP, HE CAN SPEND MORE.

>> No.9335442

>>9335430
One per fight? That's still a lot of fucking healing to do compared to "you just got stabbed and now you're dying"

>> No.9335447

>>9335401
To be fair, divine healing in D&D is pretty stupid as well.

>> No.9335457

>>9335430
OH SHIT IS THIS A YELLING THREAD?

>> No.9335466

>>9335401
>There's, in fact, no reason to get multiple people involved - since all you're doing is stating what you want to happen, and there's no inter-personal moderation in place.

Says who? You can totally be interacting and patting eachother on the back and trying to out-awesome the other guy. Telling crappy fanfics together is way more fun than writing crappy fanfics alone.

I know because that's how I started roleplaying. Online freeform. When I was 13. It was totally an I'm-the-coolest-archewizard-ever circlejerk. And there were times when it was totally fucking awesome.

Fun is the bottom line.
If you don't think that Super Saiyan power trips are fun, you shouldn't do them.
If your group is on the same wavelength (which is always important for good RP), they won't want to do them anyway.
If there IS any agreement concerning the level of power-wankery that should take place, then it is incredibly easy for an all-powerful DM to reconcile this and keep things under control. The only rules which will help him here are the three you've already listed.

Now, you still need to tell me whether or not you had fun playing any of these thousands of non-roleplaying games.

>> No.9335475

>>9335442

I DON'T RECALL D&D EVER CALLING ITSELF PARTICULARLY GRIM AND LETHAL.

IF YOU WANT "YOU GOT STABBED NOW YOU'RE DYING" MAYBE YOU SHOULDN'T PLAY A GAME ABOUT HEROIC FANTASY?

OF COURSE IF WHAT YOU *MEANT* WAS 4E WAS TOO EASY, YOU'RE COMPLAINING ABOUT SOMETHING THAT'S COMPLETELY, 100%, ABSOLUTELY UP TO THE DM. THE DM CAN MAKE ANY GAME AS HARD OR AS EASY AS HE LIKES.

>> No.9335494
File: 6 KB, 252x175, 125019433077.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9335494

>>9335457

New internet user, I'd like to introduce you to Mr Rage.

Mr Rage, here is another new internet user for you.

>> No.9335511

>>9335457

you must be new around here

>> No.9335522

>>9335494
YOU MEAN IF I PUT ON CAPS LOCK, PEOPLE WILL READ MY POSTS? FUCKING BRILLIANT!

YOU READ THAT POST, DIDN'T YOU?! HA HA HA HA HA

>> No.9335529
File: 134 KB, 465x640, exaltedalchemicalsbyudo.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9335529

>>9335413
That is fanart of Lissome Avid Engineer, from Exalted: Alchemicals.

I dunno who the artist is though.

>> No.9335531

>>9335475
I guess I still associate "D&D" more with "AD&D" rather than 3E. And AD&D was pretty grimdark.
>>9335466
Technically, you can have fun doing anything if you put it like that. But reward is sweeter when there is risk involved - what value is it for you to be a super-powerful wizard when everyone else is just as powerful? What pride can you take in surviving when there is absolutely no chance of you dying? What joy can you take in veterancy when your advancement is guaranteed? Why bother succeeding if there's absolutely no chance that you will fail?

>> No.9335538
File: 26 KB, 420x586, savage worlds explorers.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9335538

Savage Worlds. Play it. Entire rulebook with a whole bunch of baddies already statted up is 10$. Setting/genre books are also good value and allow you to expand, but the base book has more than enough to run anything.

>> No.9335550

>>9335466

Been there, done that. The only thing that made for even remotely interesting "play" was intercharacter drama. The only thing a given player could not influence was another characters emotions (in the case of full on god mode play). And that's what everyone did. They tried to interact with other characters to achieve some sort of end result. There was zero interest or play involving things were they could just say it was done.

>> No.9335574

>And AD&D was pretty grimdark

Roll saving throw vs whatever...

You lost?

New character time.

>> No.9335580

>>9335531
>Technically, you can have fun doing anything if you put it like that. But reward is sweeter when there is risk involved - what value is it for you to be a super-powerful wizard when everyone else is just as powerful? What pride can you take in surviving when there is absolutely no chance of you dying? What joy can you take in veterancy when your advancement is guaranteed? Why bother succeeding if there's absolutely no chance that you will fail?

Because wish fulfillment and power fantasies are enjoyable in their own right.

Any other silly questions I can help you with?

I do agree with you that challenge is MORE fun that wish fulfillment. But that doesn't change the fact that fun is fun is fun, and if a group has fun with their Super Saiyan fantasies, then kick ass.

Judging some kinds of fun as "right" or "good" and others as "wrong" or "bad" (wrongbadfun) is the, and I mean THE, defining characteristic of a sophmoric game designer.

>> No.9335582

>>9335531

THAT'S FAIR ENOUGH.

>what value is it for you to be a super-powerful wizard when everyone else is just as powerful? What pride can you take in surviving when there is absolutely no chance of you dying? What joy can you take in veterancy when your advancement is guaranteed? Why bother succeeding if there's absolutely no chance that you will fail?

HINT: JUST BECAUSE THESE ARE WHAT COMPOSE FUN FOR YOU, DOES NOT MEAN THESE ARE THE COMPONENTS OF FUN FOR OTHERS.

SOMEONE ELSE WITH DIFFERENT COMPONENTS OF FUN WOULD WONDER HOW YOU CAN POSSIBLY ENJOY YOURSELF WITHOUT A CERTAIN LEVEL OF POWER, OR WHERE THE FUN OF ANYTHING IS IF COMBAT DOESN'T RESULT IN AT LEAST 5 PLAYER DEATHS (PLAYER, NOT CHARACTER) AND A WELL-COOKED DOG.

THESE ARE CLEARLY VERY EXTREME EXAMPLES, BUT YOU SEE WHAT I'M GETTING AT.

FUN IS SUBJECTIVE. SOMETHING THAT YOU MAY NOT ENJOY CAN STILL BE ENJOYED BY OTHERS, AND NEITHER OF YOU IS (GENERALLY) IN THE WRONG OR THE RIGHT.

>> No.9335611

>>9335582

He has already admitted that he thinks other players are stupid and he doesn't care what they think is fun.

The trick now is getting him to realize how far that worldview puts his head up his ass. I'm working on it.

>> No.9335618

>>9335346
If you bothered to read his post, you'd see that he claims that he CAN make said RPG, so I challenged him to do so.

Then again, you're probably him and are trying to puss out.

>> No.9335628

>>9335582
Fun is subjective, but if that's the case why even bother with an elaborate masquerade? Why not just reach the lowest common denominator and become happy with twiddling your thumbs?

>> No.9335639

>>9335611
I'm not the same guy who said that, you're confusing your Anonymouses.

>> No.9335664

>>9335628

PRECISELY *BECAUSE* FUN IS SUBJECTIVE.

JUST BECAUSE NO ONE IS RIGHT OR WRONG ABOUT WHAT IS MORE OR LESS FUN DOESN'T MEAN NOBODY ENJOYS ANYTHING.

I PERSONALLY WOULD PREFER TO PLAY TABLETOPPAN THAN TWIDDLE MY THUMBS. SO I DO.

OTHERS WOULD PREFER TWIDDLING THEIR THUMBS TO TABLETOPPAN. SO THEY DO.

NEITHER OF US IS RIGHT OR WRONG, BOTH OF US ARE ENJOYING OURSELVES, EVERYONE IS HAPPY.

THIS IS, OF COURSE, TO SAY NOTHING OF BROADENING ONE'S HORIZONS AND GROWING AS A PERSON, THIS IS MERELY A STATEMENT ON THE SUBJECTIVITY OF FUN.

>> No.9335670

>>9335628

Why do so many people think that "subjective" means you throw your hands in the air and walk away?

"Subjective" means that there is no goodrightfun or wrongbadfun. Just "fun" and "not fun". But some things are still more fun for more people than others, and a designer's job is to try to make a fun game.

It's just stupid to say that players "shouldn't" do something, without tying your argument back to the greater (and only) goal, which is fun.

>> No.9335679

>>9335582
I agree with the esteemed Mr. Rage. I can't stand financial matters, but my wife will often work out the lastest car dealership offer to see how long it would take to pay a given vehicle off. She does this for fun.

And yeah, when we play RPGs she's the one who does all the math in her head. Because that's fun for her.

>> No.9335683

5/10. Had to doubletake before I realized what you were doing, but it didn't really make me rage.

>> No.9335691

>>9335670
The point is that if "fun" is the only goal, what possible reason would someone have to actually find "fun" in a process that still has requirements? Wouldn't it be best to find the easiest, most expedient source of "fun"? Ergo, wouldn't it be the best course of action to lower one's standards until they are perfectly happy with doing something that requires absolutely zero effort?

>> No.9335693

>>9335628
That isn't what "lowest common denominator" means. It means the factors which apply to the largest possible number of potential customers. It does not mean "what the ignorant masses like, which is inherently inferior to what I like".

>> No.9335695

>>9335639

That's probably for the better.

You are the guy who said that the increased number of mechanical options for attacks in 4e accomplished nothing, right? And also the same guy who has played 'thousands' of non-roleplaying games?

Have you made up your mind whether or not any of them were fun, even though they did not have infinite options?

>> No.9335711

>>9335695
ugggh no

I wrote:
>>9334995
>>9335401
>>9335531

please don't try to maintain a two-way conversation on fucking 4chan

>> No.9335715

>>9335691

No. That's not the case at all. For most healthy adults, doing absolutely nothing is an anxious and irritating experience. And training yourself out of that response, even if it were possible, would be a lot of work. It wouldn't be fun.

The reason that most of us play challenging games is because being challenged is fun.

>> No.9335723

>>9335691
>what possible reason would someone have to actually find "fun" in a process that still has requirements?

BECAUSE THEY ENJOY IT.

I WOULD NOT ENJOY REDUCING MY STANDARDS UNTIL TWIDDLING MY THUMBS WAS FUN. THEREFORE I WOULD NOT.

I DO ENJOY JUMPING THROUGH MECHANICAL HOOPS, SO I PLAY COMPLEX SYSTEMS.

I ALSO ENJOY KICKING BACK AND JUST TOSSING SOME NUMBERS ON A SHEET, SO I PLAY SIMPLE SYSTEMS.

IT ISN'T A MATTER OF THE SHORTEST PATH, IT'S A MATTER OF THE PATH YOU ENJOY MOST, WHETHER IT'S A STRAIGHT LINE OR A FUCKED UP NON-EUCLIDIAN SPIRAL THAT TAKES YOU THROUGH EIGHT SPLATBOOKS, TWO EXTRA DIMENSIONS AND SOMETHING CALLED THE COLA ZONE.

>> No.9335752

>>9335711

I wasn't trying to do anything of the sort; you directly responded to a direct response. Not to blame you for it or anything.

It IS at least refreshing to find that the "rules shouldn't be more than 8 pages" guy isn't the same as the "healing surges are dumb" guy. I mean, the views that you alone have expressed are kind of stupid, but not THAT stupid.

>> No.9335760

>>9334063
0/10

>> No.9335762

>>9335715
Most people enjoy being challenged, yes. But if that's the case then there's no argument, since no-rule roleplaying isn't a challenge at all.
>>9335723
Perhaps you should consider changing your interests now so that the long-term portfolio investment will reap greater returns of "Fun" in the future than you would normally acquire.

>> No.9335778

>>9335752
Why are you even in /tg/ if you think rule-less roleplaying is okay? You don't need a fucking book for that. That's not a "game". That's sitting around with friends making shit up, and yeah it can be fine in its own right, but what is there to discuss about it?

>> No.9335795

Unknown Armies
Over The Edge
Cyberpunk 2020
ORE (One Roll Engine)

>> No.9335808

>>9335762
>Most people enjoy being challenged, yes. But if that's the case then there's no argument, since no-rule roleplaying isn't a challenge at all.

Wrong on several levels. You lose sight of the ball twice that I can see, from the beginning of this statement to the end.

1.) "Most people" are not "all people". Some people enjoy being challenged. Other people enjoy other things moreso than they enjoy being challenged. That's the point.
2.) Freeform roleplay absolutely can be challenging, in much the same way that any creative endeavor can be challenging. "Challenging" in that it calls for consideration and creativity, at least in some measure, even if it IS just a demigod circlejerk.

>> No.9335814

>>9335808
lol yeah "creativity"

>> No.9335845

>>9335762
>since no-rule roleplaying isn't a challenge at all.
NOT NECESSARILY TRUE.

>Perhaps you should consider changing your interests now so that the long-term portfolio investment will reap greater returns of "Fun" in the future than you would normally acquire.

YOU'RE WANDERING INTO BROADENING ONE'S HORIZONS AND GROWING AS A PERSON, WHICH CARRIES AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT WEIGHT TO IT AND IS JUST AS SUBJECTIVE, TO THE POINT THAT MY STATEMENTS ON THE MATTER CAN AND SHOULD CHANGE ON A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS.

THAT SAID, I DO HAPPILY READ ANY NEW SYSTEM SHOWN TO ME. I'M EAGER TO SEE MORE GAMES, BUT WHAT GAME I PLAY SPECIFICALLY HAS MINIMAL IMPACT ON HOW MUCH I ENJOY THE GAME, SO CHANGING MY INTERESTS IN TABLETOPPAN WON'T DO MUCH.

>> No.9335852

more play less bithing

>> No.9335857

>>9335778

There's a lot to discuss about it. Just look at how much discussion it has generated in this thread.

I come here for the Pathfinder, the 4e, the MtG and the homebrewing, by the way. But when I see someone claim that rules aren't fun and that the best possible RPG system is the shortest possible RPG system- someone who clearly derives no pleasure from 'games' in the traditional sense- I have to wonder why they bother with systems at all, and why they don't just play freeform.

(although it should be repeated that even freeform has 'rules' and is a game: see >>9335189 )

>> No.9335867
File: 145 KB, 800x876, Cultist + Dranon.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9335867

Fuck this shit. I'm gonna dump some cultist.

>> No.9335873
File: 112 KB, 1000x1000, Cultist + Lolicron.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9335873

>> No.9335881

>>9335857
So of these three rules:
1. Player decides what he attempts to do
2. GM describes the results of the attempt
3. Continue until win/loss condition reached or too bored to go on
Which of them determines whether someone succeeds or fails?

>> No.9335883
File: 55 KB, 600x800, Cultist - dancing bullets.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9335883

>> No.9335894

>>9335881

The second one.

>> No.9335900

>>9335881

2. GM arbitration. Some systems prefer to let GM's set a certain probability.

>> No.9335910
File: 125 KB, 928x943, Cultist - face.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9335910

>> No.9335918

>>9335894
So rather than being a simple, impartial lawyer representing the skeins of fate, the GM is elevated to literal in-universe Godhood and is placed in charge of determining the success or failure of every conceivable action?

>> No.9335921
File: 221 KB, 1000x982, Cultist Flag.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9335921

>> No.9335933

>>9335918

There's a reason some GM's prefer to roll behind the screen. They may leave things to chance but only within a certain envelope of what they want to have happen.

>> No.9335940
File: 166 KB, 828x786, Hwee Liek Pahladeens.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9335940

>> No.9335950

>>9335918

THE GM HAS ALWAYS BEEN ABLE TO DECIDE WHETHER ANY GIVEN ACTION SUCCEEDS OR FAILS. ALWAYS. NO MATTER WHAT WAS ROLLED, HE ULTIMATELY HAS ALWAYS BEEN THAT DECIDER.

RULE #2 JUST MAKES SUCH A FACT OBVIOUS RATHER THAN HIDING BEHIND GM-SET DIFFICULTIES AND PENALTIES.

>> No.9335968

>>9335918

Ayup, that's about the size of it.

All RPGs cast the DM's throne as some mix of "fairness-oriented judge" and "fun-oriented storyteller". Freeform is just flicking the bar all the way to the left. There is no system for him to share power with, so it's all in his hands.

>> No.9335973
File: 1.02 MB, 900x1500, Cultist - Empty Box.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9335973

>> No.9335974

What do you mean by believable simulation?

Because fuck real science.

>> No.9335984

>>9335950
>>9335968
generally such dms are considered "railroaders" and are looked down upon rather than embraced and given more power

>> No.9335987
File: 62 KB, 450x619, Cultist Kaptoor Eet.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9335987

>> No.9335989

>>9334467
Most of that is flavor, samples/examples, or a fucking campaign. You wanna know how to do something? Look in the table of contents or index and you'll get a nice 2-3 page explanation that, while can be summed up easily in a paragraph or two, takes that extra space to inspire creativity and reduce confusion. If you really wanted SotC in compact form, I bet you could get it down to less than 10 pages if you removed all the fluff/otherwise interesting stuff. Down to 3 or less if you removed that giant list of stunts, those useful tables, and that character sheet.

>> No.9335993

Brace for DD13

>> No.9335995

>>9335950
>THE GM HAS ALWAYS BEEN ABLE TO DECIDE WHETHER ANY GIVEN ACTION SUCCEEDS OR FAILS. ALWAYS. NO MATTER WHAT WAS ROLLED, HE ULTIMATELY HAS ALWAYS BEEN THAT DECIDER.

That's a matter of the game's particular philosophy.

Most games set the rules up as a sort of steward, only there to make the GM's job easier, but then remind the GM that he can seize the scepter back at any time. Some games really DO believe in the "impartial judge" bit, though (particularly as you wander into the fuzzy ground between "roleplaying game" and "game").

>> No.9335996

anyways id love to stay and chat about gay rpg bullshit but im goku now so uh fuck off *launches energy beam in the shape of a middle finger*

>> No.9336017

>>9335984

No, this is wrong. Listen carefully because I'm going to tell you what that word actually means.

A railroader is a DM who does not respect the PCs decisions or abilities.

A non-railroading DM is still exercising ultimate power whenever he decides what happens, whether it gets a roll, etc. He is simply exercising that power to respond to the PCs in a flexible way which respects their ability to make decisions.

A railroader is someone who does not give the PCs meaningful decisions. It has nothing to do with how much power they have and everything to do with how they use it.

>> No.9336024
File: 31 KB, 714x513, Player Choice - Illusionsim and Bangs.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9336024

>>9335984

Well a railroader is one that makes it blatantly obvious and jars the players with the direction that he forces them to go. That's why I like the term. You think you're heading towards that mountain in the distance when WHAM!, the rails went another direction and your momentum slammed you into the side of the train car. Like some of those old disney land rides. But a GM doing it right will carefully lay his track in such a way that the players never notice that they are in fact riding the rails. Assuming you have linear gameplay.

>> No.9336037
File: 212 KB, 600x481, Cultist Sister Kiss.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9336037

>> No.9336044

>>9335996
Did the middle schools get out already?

>> No.9336050
File: 166 KB, 388x689, Cultist-chan kaptoored :tg:.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9336050

>> No.9336053

>>9335984

NOT NECESSARILY. RAILROADING IS MORE ABOUT THE REMOVAL OF CHOICE. AT LEAST BLATANT RAILROADING.

"SKILLED" RAILROADING INVOLVES AN ILLUSION OF CHOICE, WHILE STILL TRIMMING OUTLIER RESULTS.

EXAMPLE:
"THERE'S A TOWN IN THE EAST, I HEAR THEY'RE HAVING SOME PROBLEMS WITH BEASTS IN THE NIGHT."
"FUUUUCK THAT SHIT, WE'RE GOING TO THE NORTH FOR ALE AND WHORES!"

RAILROAD: SO YOU'RE GOING EAST...

SKILLED RAILROAD: YOU ARRIVE IN THE WHORETOWN AND PARTY 'TILL NIGHT FALLS. UNDER THE PALE MOONLIGHT, SCREAMS BREAK OUT.

SOME WOULD CALL THAT IMPROVISING AND REUSING YOU'RE OTHERWISE "LOST" MATERIAL, BUT IT'S ALL THE SAME.

ARBITRATING DICEROLLS, WHEN USED FOR GOOD, IS ABOUT TRIMMING UNFUN DICEROLLS.

EXAMPLE:
NAMELESS, UNIMPORTANT KOBOLD ROLLS A RIDICULOUS CRIT THAT WILL GIB THE WARRIOR IN A NAMELESS, UNDRAMATIC FIGHT. THE GM ISN'T RUNNING A PARTICULARLY GRITTY GAME, SO HE TRIMS IT DOWN TO A BAD HIT, BUT NONLETHAL. VICE VERSA, THE CHARACTER REACHES ACROSS THE TABLE AND SCORES A RIDICULOUSLY GOOD ROLL ON THE BBEG. HE GAVE A DRAMATIC SPEECH AND EVERYTHING. WHILE THE HIT WOULDN'T HAVE NORMALLY HIT OR EVEN KILLED THE BBEG, IT'S COOLER TO HAVE HIM AT LEAST GET MAIMED.

YOU'LL NOTICE MY EXAMPLES WERE ALL, TECHNICALLY, IN PLAYER FAVOR, BUT IT CAN ALSO GO THE OTHER WAY IF PLAYERS ARE ROLLING *TOO* WELL AND NEED A SWIFT KICK IN THE JUNK, OR THE STORY NEEDS SOME TRAGEDY.

>> No.9336056

>>9336024

I really appreciate that image's summation, if only that it acknowledges that some DMs actually DO provide real choice.

>> No.9336057
File: 9 KB, 200x200, Cultist-chan face.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9336057

>> No.9336081
File: 80 KB, 1024x659, 1256859939293.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9336081

>> No.9336088
File: 148 KB, 1023x1041, 1256860081579.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9336088

>> No.9336089

Nemesis is good.

>> No.9336092

>>9336044
They let out earlier, when the first people showed up to defend being a super-powerful demigod with no rules or regulations to control themselves.

>> No.9336117

>>9336092
Ah, of course.

>> No.9336121

>>9336024

Could you perhaps use a Bang in an in-game example? I'm having trouble understanding it.

>> No.9336135
File: 180 KB, 494x640, chaos-luv.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9336135

>>9336081
waffles?! awesome.

>> No.9336141
File: 102 KB, 374x659, 1256861871230.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9336141

>> No.9336142

>>9336024
I typically find that a healthy balance of these two make for the best campaigns, in terms of progression.

>> No.9336143

>>9336092
>They let out earlier, when the first people showed up to defend being a super-powerful demigod with no rules or regulations to control themselves.

Follow the post train and you'll find I've been on here for hours (yea, I know).

When I was in middleschool I thought pretending to be a demigod was awesome. When I was in highschool I decided that it was wrong of me to think that the first thing was fun. By the time I was in college I realize that there was no such thing as 'wrong' fun.

I think a lot of posters here are still in highschool.

>> No.9336148

>>9336121
It represents a crossroads or point of divergence. "You can either go here and save your comrades, or go here and save the villagers".

>> No.9336167

>>9336143
If there's no such thing as "wrong" fun, then surely Matt Ward is the best of us - since he does, after all, have a job fulfilling his own desires and playing to his own preferences, and he gets paid to do so. Surely he has the greatest Fun possible.

>> No.9336172

>>9336143
>yea

You're clearly still in middle school. GTFO.

>> No.9336174

>>9336121

I'M AN OUTSIDER, BUT THE WAY I INTERPRETED IT WAS:

AN ILLUSORY CHOICE IS ANALOGOUS TO MY "DOES THOU GO EAST OR NORTH?" IT WAS IRRELEVANT, BECAUSE IT WAS AN EVEN THAT'S GOING TO CHASE THE PC'S ANYWAY.

IF THE EAST/NORTH CHOICE HAD BEEN A BANG, IT WOULD'VE BEEN LEFT TO ITS OWN DEVICES AND SOMETHING DIFFERENT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED IN THE NORTH.

PERHAPS I'M MISUNDERSTANDING.

>> No.9336183

>>9336148

Ah I see, thank you sir or madam.

>> No.9336194

>>9336121

The simplest one I can think of is choosing not to do a certain quest and that having effects later on. For example doing X might unlock an arc about Y. While choosing to not do X would instead unlock a different arc Z with completely different elements and focus. Y is lost completely and never used. There's probably other ways of doing it as well.

>> No.9336208

>>9336167

I'M SURE HE IS ENJOYING HIMSELF, QUITE A BIT.

THAT DOESN'T MEAN HIS FUN ISN'T INTERFERING WITH OTHERS' FUN IN A DIRECT, EGREGIOUS WAY, HOWEVER.

MUCH THE SAME WAY SOMEONE MIGHT FIND SHITTING ON TABLES FUN, BUT HE'S IN THE WRONG FOR SHITTING ON SOMEONE ELSE'S PARCHEESI GAME.

...I COULDN'T FIND A WAY TO PUT SPIRITUAL LIEGE INTO THIS POST.

>> No.9336214
File: 34 KB, 797x398, Cultist Prom.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9336214

>> No.9336238

>>9336121

PCs see a poster on the wall asking for armed me to help the writer fight goblins. The DM has made up an NPC fighter whose children were kidnapped by said goblins. He needs to go kick some ass, and he needs help doing it.

In an illusion of choice, the PCs would find themselves maneuvered (perhaps by their on decisions) into a situation where they are fighting goblins, and would happen to meet up with said fighter along the way.

In a "Bang", they would go about their business and do some other thing. The fighter would try to charge in alone and become maimed, he would retreat, and his children would get eaten (all of which happens off screen, because the PCs 'missed' the event). They may or may not find a scarred-up, burly, drunken, one-armed beggar asking them for change the next time they pass through that town a few months later.

>> No.9336239
File: 220 KB, 970x631, Cultist + Dread.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9336239

>> No.9336246

>>9336208
But he's also supporting others who find his work to be of good quality, and there are a lot of Ultramarines fans who like him. Removing him from power would ultimately destroy their fun, or at least lessen it. Who's to say that their "fun" is less worthy than what most fans would consider to be enjoyable?

the answer is: its me. matt ward is a piece of shit and his fans are retards. there

>> No.9336274

>>9336246

YOU'RE RIGHT. IT IS HARD TO WEIGH ONE GROUP'S FUN AGAINST ANOTHER GROUP'S WHEN THEIR DEFINITIONS OF FUN ARE CONTRADICTORY (BARRING EXTREMES, SUCH AS PEDOPHILE "FUN").

AND YOU HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO SAY THAT.

THE SAFEST SOLUTION, HOWEVER, WOULD BE TO CREATE MATT WARD EDITION.

MATT WARD CAN WRITE EVERY CODEX AS HE PLEASES. THOSE WHO ENJOY MATT WARD'S CODICES CAN PLAY MATT WARD EDITION. EVERYONE ELSE CAN PLAY...WHAT ARE WE ON NOW, 5TH EDITION 40K, 8TH EDITION FANTASY?

WHATEVER, YOU GET MY POINT.

>> No.9336293
File: 78 KB, 285x657, Cultist - Dat Ass.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9336293

>> No.9336302

>>9336246

I think you're intentionally missing the point here.

He's not "wrong" for having fun, he's "wrong" for disrupting the fun of others (presumably including yourself).

>> No.9336347
File: 92 KB, 336x446, Cultist - thinking.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9336347

>> No.9336356
File: 217 KB, 600x572, Cultist + Loli D - Shame.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9336356

>> No.9336369
File: 153 KB, 712x516, Cultist + SoBchan + Plush marine.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9336369

>> No.9336375
File: 498 KB, 800x876, Cultist butt rape Angry Marine.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9336375

>> No.9336385
File: 83 KB, 600x600, Cultist Capture Spleen.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9336385

>> No.9336401

>>9336302
Actually, he's just trying his best to have "fun" himself, and there are a lot of people who like him and respect the idea that he's advancing or changing the 40k universe. Even making a "Matt Ward Edition" would give him less legitimacy, and who's to say he has less "claim" to 40k than any other writer?

At some point, everything intersects with everything else. Any creative property with multiple official writers is going to be subject to different levels of intensity, and because there's only one uniting universe (which people like because of the fact that it's overarching and can be shared with other people) there's going to be a lot of conflict between those writers - between the people who paint space marines as world-conquering supersoldiers and the people who paint them as barely above normal, or between the people who paint the guard as specialized super-veterans and the people who paint them as cannon fodder. The unity, and therefore contradictions, of the setting are simultaneously why people can enjoy it (it's fleshed out with a lot of different perspectives) and hate it (author x is terrible and everything he says is awkwardly canon now).

>> No.9336411
File: 112 KB, 1000x1000, Cultist huggin plague marine.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9336411

>> No.9336425
File: 208 KB, 580x775, Cultist has a question.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9336425

>> No.9336436
File: 47 KB, 450x450, Kiss My Gun.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9336436

>>9336401

I LIKE THE CUT OF YOUR JIB.

>> No.9336437
File: 604 KB, 700x1050, Cultist Warrior of Chaos.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9336437

>> No.9336448

>>9336425
I like the idea of that pic but the arm proportions are off just enough that it bugs me,

>> No.9336462
File: 452 KB, 900x600, Cultist-chan - Bible Fight.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9336462

>> No.9336487
File: 88 KB, 1000x1000, Cultist-chan - Purity.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9336487

>> No.9336500
File: 109 KB, 500x2260, shivering cultist comic.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9336500

>> No.9336523

Just homebrew your own game. Like I have a homebrew RPG called Ghost Blowjob. Basically you have your players and one of them is the ghost. It's like a game of clue, only you have to determine who's getting the ghost blowjob. I have only one player, myself, and so I have to play both roles. I always win because I know who's the player getting the ghost blowjob is.

>> No.9336539
File: 213 KB, 1026x474, Dead Cultist Storage.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9336539

>> No.9336594

>>9336401

This is all very true, but it in no way contradicts the thing that I said and that you were responding to. Namely, that (IF he is wrong) he is wrong for disrupting the fun of others, not for having fun himself.

I think that he IS wrong, and that he is putting his personal preferences before his job as a game designer (which is to ensure the most fun for the most people in his franchise's fanbase), but that's my judgment of a complex situation.

My point is, enjoyment is never 'right' or 'wrong', even when the things done to bring about said enjoyment ARE right or wrong. There is no such thing as wrongbadfun.

>> No.9336899

>>9336523
I laughed way harder than I should have.

>> No.9336918

>>9336539
IT'S OKAY. SHE'LL GROW IT BACK IN A MINUTE. JUST WAIT FOR IT.

>> No.9336963

>>9336523
BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!

>> No.9337729
File: 395 KB, 914x1210, Bisley_062z.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9337729

The simplest way to do an rpg is to go with an ability-based system: one where you roll directly against you abilities to see if you succeed. Maybe there are some skills to enhance your abilities, but only a few.

>> No.9337769

An ability based system might work something like this:

STRENGTH
---melee damage (also what size weapon you can effectively wield)
---heroic feat (bend bars, break down doors, carry wounded comrade)
---bear load (encumbrance, how heavy your armor can be)
CONSTITUTION
---hit points
---health (resist poison and disease)
---stamina (resist exhaustion, unconsciousness or bleeding to death)
REFLEXES
---dodge (ranged attack)
---defend (vs. melee attack)
---initiative
AGILITY
---athletics (climb, jump, tumble)
---melee attack
---speed (how fast you run)
DEXTERITY
---sneak
---manual coordination (first aid, disarm trap, palm item)
---aim (ranged attack)
INTELLECT
---alertness (hear noise, spot hidden person, find concealed thing)
---knowledge (know lore, recall something, figure out puzzle)
---empathy (detect lie, read people)
CHARISMA
---presence (leadership, intimidate)
---bluff (hide emotions, tell convincing lie)
---personality (make friends, bargain, seduce)
MANA
---luck points (spending a point of luck to add +1 to any roll, cannot add more than 1 to a roll)
---magical aptitude (learn magic, perform magic, recognize magic)
---willpower (resist magic, torture and mind control)

>> No.9337781

>>9337769
Each of the 8 abilities starts off with a value of 6. You have 12 points to add. You can reduce an ability by a point in order to gain a point to put somewhere else, but all scores must ultimately fall in the range of 4–10. By spending a point, you can get a focus in one of the three subcategories of an ability. This operates like a skill, adding 2 to your chance of success.

>> No.9337789

>>9337781
To succeed at an action, you must roll your ability score or less on a d12. When performing an opposed action (most anything that involves somebody else), they get a save using the appropriate ability, but must roll it on a d20. So, if I try to hit you with my sword, I roll vs. my Agility on a d12 and, if I succeed, you roll vs. your Reflexes on a d20 to escape the blow. My blow lands only if I succeed and you fail.

>> No.9337801

>>9336594
Everything anyone does has the possibility of reducing someone else's fun. Nobody said you had to play 5e, you dumb cunt. What, you think you're, like, required to play it now? Why don't you just stick with whatever edition you want, you lazy faggot.

>> No.9337828

>>9337789
>d12 centered mechanics

I finally have a use for the fucking thing!

>> No.9337916

>>9337789
A roll of 1 always succeeds, while a roll of 12 (12 or over on a d20) always fails. Maybe a 1 is a critical and means you execute your task perfectly (doing double damage, or giving you a strike vs. the person you were defending against or whatever). Because the system is simple, GMs are encouraged to improvise a lot. Difficulty on a task can be increased by giving a minor (-1), moderate (-2), or major (-3 or more) penalty. Obviously, things can be made easier by giving a similar bonus.

>> No.9337950
File: 291 KB, 670x978, cca-Al_Rio_EdenPinupz.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9337950

>>9337828
>I finally have a use for the fucking thing!
You're welcome.

>> No.9338149

>>9337916
>A roll of 1 always succeeds, while a roll of 12 (12 or over on a d20) always fails
>(12 or over on a d20) always fails

Crippled Idiot Child: The Roleplaying Game?

>> No.9338202

>>9337916
Your hit points equal twice your Constitution score. You are incapacitated at 0 hp and dead when your negative hp exceed your constitution score.

Sample weapon damages and the minimum strength needed to wield them:
d6 dagger, club (any str)
d8 hand axe, short sword, shortbow (5 str)
d10 spear, battle axe, longsword, longbow (7 str)
d12 great axe, greatsword (9 str)

Your strength also gives you a damage modifier:
4-5 none
6-7 +1
8-9 +2
10 +3

>> No.9338257

>>9338149
>Crippled Idiot Child: The Roleplaying Game?
If you're referring to the 12 or over failing on a d20, you aren't supposed to succeed most of the time. Really, your save just makes it a little harder for your enemy to succeed against you.

>> No.9338501

>>9337769
>>9337781
>>9337789
>>9337916
>>9338202

If anyone's interested, this is currently at 1.5 pages of rules.

>> No.9338668

>>9338501
For an ability-only game it's stupidly overcomplicated.

>> No.9338810

Spells are a bit trickier. You'd obviously have to make up a list. In general, you can figure that having a better mana just lets you learn better spells (or maybe just do the same spells more effectively). A damage guideline for spells that automatically hit is given below based on mana. The first number is for minor spells that you can freely cast. The second number is for major spells that require a point of luck (if play reveals the fact that this is too little then up it to 2 points of luck), and have some limitation on being cast (like only 1 major spell per battle). If your spells don't automatically hit (you make a Mana roll, enemy makes save vs. Reflexes or possibly Mana), then shift your damage to the right one column (so that minor spells use the second number, and major spells use the number way out to the right).

Mana:
4 d4 (d8) [2d6]
5 d6 (d10) [2d8]
7 d8 (2d6) [2d10]
9 d10 (2d8) [3d8]

>> No.9339008

>>9338668
Let me just pause a moment here and address your concerns. Much of the apparent complication is in the presentation. I could, for instance, have framed the abilities as follows, dropping part of the descriptions (though probably also doing away with the focuses in the process).

Strength (melee damage, bend bars, encumbrance)
Constitution (hit points, health, stamina)
Reflexes (dodge, defend, initiative)
Agility (melee attack, athletics, speed)
Dexterity (ranged attack, sneak, manual coordination)
Intellect (alertness, knowledge, read people)
Charisma (leadership, bluff, personality)
Mana (luck points, cast spells, resist spells and hardship)

That's a lot shorter, and maybe a little easier to digest the first time through, but not really that much less complex.

>> No.9339113

>>9338668
So if you want to make things simpler, frame the abilities as I just did, drop focuses, and just have strength modify the weapon size you can wield and not give a damage bonus. If you do that, you'd want to reconfigure weapon damage something like this:

d6 dagger, club (any str)
d8 hand axe, short sword, shortbow (5 str)
d12 spear, longsword, longbow (7 str)
2d6 battle axe, bastard sword (8 str)
2d8 great axe, greatsword (10 str)

>> No.9339170

Returning to the original rules:

Mana would also probably affect the number of spells you could know, like follows.

Mana
4-5 6 minor, 2 major
6-7 6 minor, 3 major
8-9 8 minor, 3 major
10 8 minor, 4 major

This gives you a relatively small list of spells so that you don't have to spend a lifetime creating them.

>> No.9339602

Now, you'll probably want to add skill sets of some sort. These would cost ability points but allow you to do things you couldn't otherwise do (like cast spells). What's the proper cost? This depends heavily on how powerful you make them through your improvisation. Just eyeballing it, 4 ability points seems reasonable.

If a skill set covers stuff other people can do just fine, it just lets you do it better (maybe giving you a +2 bonus, or even letting you automatically succeed on occasion). Some examples of skill sets follow:

--Thief (pick locks, find and remove traps, sleight of hand, etc.)
--Acrobat (flip over people, tumble, tightrope walk, climb walls, etc.)
--Ranger (track, animal lore, plant lore, find path, wilderness survival, etc.)
--Divine Spells
--Magic Spells
--Natural Spells

>> No.9339818

And then there's armor, the amount of which you can wear is determined by your strength.

Strength:
4 no armor +1 damage taken per blow
5 light armor (leather) no modifier
7 moderate armor (mail), -1 damage taken per blow
9 heavy armor (plate), -2 damage taken per blow

Even after modifiers, the minimum damage you can take on a blow is 1. The GM should apply modifiers to your actions based on the armor you are wearing. If you want to jump across a pit, plate armor is going to slow you down a bit. One easy way to do it is to just use your armor's modifier to damage as your penalty (thus jumping across a pit in plate armor would give you a -2 penalty). If you wish, you can rule that certain skill sets (or individual skills under those sets) don't work with armor. Maybe thieves can't wear more than light armor or they lose their abilities. Maybe wizards can't wear armor at all.

>> No.9339976

And that's basically it. The game needs to be filled out with extra skill sets, but that shouldn't be too hard. Spells are more of a challenge and will take longer, but you could easily play a magic-less game until you get the hang of things (or at least a game in which the players don't have magic). Alternately, you could avoid detailing specific spells and just let players buy into magic skill sets, collaborate on the general types of things they can do, and then just wing it. I'd provide you with spells, myself, but that would take far longer than the couple of hours I've devoted to making this game so far.

>> No.9340076

Oh, a few more things!

You should limit the focuses and skill sets any one character can get to avoid confusion and abuse. I'd say 2 of either is plenty.

This game doesn't provide much room for progression. You can occasionally give them an extra ability point to add, but once you've doled out a dozen, they're going to be hitting their heads pretty hard on the ceiling. You might want to allow them increase an ability from 10 to 11 by spending 2 ability points.

>> No.9340209

And lastly, remember this game is about improvisation. If things seem unbalanced, play them differently or change the rules. If armor is getting in your way, for instance, you could always just drop armor entirely (it would still exist in the fluff, but not the crunch). Or if you feel strength is too powerful an ability, you could remove armor from it and make people buy into armor proficiency by itself:
gain 1 point = none (+1 damage taken)
no cost = light armor
1 point cost = moderate (-1 damage)
2 point cost = heavy (-2 damage)

>> No.9340241
File: 30 KB, 305x415, 1237183261002.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9340241

Any questions, comments or criticisms?

>> No.9340922

>>9340241
You forgot the part where hitpoints are determined, I think. That seems like a pretty big issue.

Mostly, though, this isn't any simpler than other games. Just arbitrarily different. We try to roll under our stat w/ a d12 instead of d%, there are eight stats instead of six, &c...

You've, like.. re-crunched a standard fantasy game without seriously simplifying anything (except due to lack of content, such as spell lists or archetype abilities). It's not seriously *wrong*, but there's no compelling reason to use this system over any other.

>> No.9341108

>>9340922
>You forgot the part where hitpoints are determined, I think.
See >>9338202, hp = twice your constitution.

>Mostly, though, this isn't any simpler than other games. Just arbitrarily different.
Actually, the basics of many games are fairly... basic. It's all the details that kill you. My presentation here sucks because I was creating the game as I typed, and I'm not very happy with the number of modifier charts (something I could probably easily fix), but other than that, there's not much complexity to the game. Sure skill sets and spell lists would take up some room, but this still falls far short of many rpgs. The sheer complexity of making up a character in 3e/3.5 is pretty daunting if you've never been exposed to D&D before.

>> No.9341772

>>9341108
Exactly. Creating a 3.5 character can take a while, but that's not because the core mechanics are complicated. At it's heart, D&D is 'you have six stats which modify different types of rolls. to perform an action, roll d20 + modifiers and see if you beat the DC'.

The complexity comes from the huge list of classes, feats, and spells. If you took out all but the most basic options there, 3.5 would fit on maybe four pages, certainly no more than six.

Which is the case with almost every game when you strip it down to its core mechanics. Most of the pages in a rulebook are character options (feats, powers, spells, contracts, charms, stunts...) and tables for things like carrying capacity and falling damage - not pages and pages of text describing some horribly convoluted core mechanic.


So my point, I guess, is why present a different core mechanic? Often, it's because you have a nifty new idea that lets you do something that can't be done with d20 or d% or dicepools (Madness/Exhaustion/Discipline in Don't Rest Your Head, for example. Or fate points, or diceless things like Polaris, and I guess roll and keep maybe).

But (and correct me if I'm wrong. Obviously I've missed some things already), it seems to me that this system is just changing some of the numbers around on established mechanics, and I'm not sure what the value of that is compared to, say, getting rid of rules and options you feel are superfluous from your favorite d20 game.

>>
Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.
Captcha
Action