Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[notquitethere]

Roll to Dodge, in general, is a simple and versatile framework - but it doesn't work for a lot of things. Having a mechanically 'crunchy' game with RTD goes against the spirit of the system, and while you can beat it into submission with enough house rules (1d6 is very swingy, for instance, so a better dice system would go a long way) at that point why not just do something custom instead of killing the RTD framework, stuffing it, and nailing it on display?

Yeah I definitely agree here. It's best to pick mechanics which best express what you want the game to be about and don't make action processing a nightmare.

With mine, what I'd do is parse someone's action into a skill roll, and if it sounded like they did more than one different thing, then I'd do more rolls. This was fine because action economy only matters for strictly turn based or PVP games; in a PVE game, if an enemy can have an impact on you based on rolls failing, and the world state can change based on actions, then it doesn't matter how many actions a player submits in a row.

[RoseHeart]

I've definitely seen this problem in RTD. I was adding a debuff for how many subactions there were. But it made my head spin. I just said fuck it, and drew a line at one action.

Roll to Dodge, in general, is a simple and versatile framework - but it doesn't work for a lot of things. Having a mechanically 'crunchy' game with RTD goes against the spirit of the system, and while you can beat it into submission with enough house rules (1d6 is very swingy, for instance, so a better dice system would go a long way) at that point why not just do something custom instead of killing the RTD framework, stuffing it, and nailing it on display?

What would be the "proper way" then? (multi-part actions)

As far as "swingy-dice" (stolen!) I've been trying Arms Race dice for something more like a bell curve. I've found the middle number should be a success state, a lesser one but a success, to keep the game moving forward.

Call it a 'glass half-full' approach.

I wanted more consistency for my high consequence game. But you definitely need plenty of player access to roll modifiers, or it feels too boring.

[Man of Paper]

Yeah just conveniently leave out the times you said you actually would provide evidence or discuss the issue, or other people asking you to back up your claims. You can reframe the conversation as much as you want but anyone can just go back a couple pages and see you’re full of shit here.

There's no purpose to continuing to argue about this. I can understand your frustration, but the best thing for everyone here would be to just stop.

While you aren’t wrong, I don’t think you’re entirely right either. It would definitely be better for most of our mental healths if we didn’t play into rosehearts complexes, but at the same time he always tends to push things until more reasonable people convince everyone involved to just move on. This has led to roseheart pulling the same shit over and over with no accountability for himself. The big issue with just letting it go is we’re largely a self regulating community, and most of us know better than to bother this sites glorious administration with petty lower board bullshit.

This dude has to stop at some point, and just letting him go off with unsubstantiated claims feeds into him just as much as trying to hold him accountable.

I don’t think there is a singular healthy response to this guy anymore. In the past I gladly dropped issues once cooler heads showed up and chilled my composure. At this point though it’s clear he’s just toxic, but again, I don’t think he’s worth the administration’s effort.

In two months he’s just going to start the bullshit claims cycle anew. Do we just let that be a staple of our community? Someone actively saying the community itself is shitty?

I don’t want to feed into his crap, but he really needs to quit making shit up/blowing things out of proportion. I’d much rather he figure things out through his peers than a time out or ban.

[Iris]

Yeah I definitely agree here. It's best to pick mechanics which best express what you want the game to be about and don't make action processing a nightmare.

Some games use dissonance between the system and premise very skillfully. For instance, a Discord game I'm fond of uses an RTD-inspired 2d6 system, yet the game gets very dramatic at times. Of course, it's also pure chaos at times - someone the other day compared it to a sixty-car pileup that keeps getting added to - but the chaos makes it fun!

[RoseHeart]

bullshit claims

Fortunately, someone else provided one of the instances.

Not sure why you really want to beat the dead horse of me slandering people.

I did present it as a general unsubstantiated claim, which can be countered or supported by others' experience.


I disagree, Paper. And you should try to be ok with that. I did feel there was an issue. Now? That depends if anyone else feels that way, in a month in a half, seems like, not.

[Maximum Spin]

I disagree, Paper. And you should try to be ok with that. I did feel there was an issue. Now? That depends if anyone else feels that way, in a month in a half, seems like, not.

The problem with this is that you haven't actually said "I was wrong and I'm sorry for accusing people", you've essentially just said "well I still think it's bullying but I don't want to listen to anyone else disagree anymore". Naturally, that's going to make people disagree harder because they want to be heard, and it contributes to the sense that you will just do this all over again the next time.

[RoseHeart]

For instance, a Discord game I'm fond of uses an RTD-inspired 2d6 system, yet the game gets very dramatic at times. Of course, it's also pure chaos at times - someone the other day compared it to a sixty-car pileup that keeps getting added to - but the chaos makes it fun!

From 2d6?

[Man of Paper]

See? He continuously ignores anyones point but his own. He actively goes out of his way to cherry-pick peoples posts in order to look like the good guy facing down slobbering, rabid hordes. There’s a severe disconnect between things he says and he is riddled with hypocrisies.

I think that above all is cancerous behavior and we really shouldn’t just let him propagate it. Dude can’t even keep his own arguments in line, so how can we really take what he does as anything but intentionally divisive?

[RoseHeart]

intentionally divisive

I'm sorry if you feel that way Paper. That's not my intention.

Paper, you're the one in my threads. You're the one who calls my games "minimal effort".

But how else do I take this? As your "cooler head" stepping in?

Dude can’t even keep his own arguments in line

If they're brought up a month later.

[IamanElfCollaborator]

-snip-

I disagree, but for a different reason.

As he just made clear, he doesn't respect our opinions (at least opinions that point out his mistakes when he opens the door to their discussion), nor is he willing to take any advice that places any responsibility on himself. We are a community here on FGRP, and if we want to self-moderate instead of asking the moderation team to deal with this, that's fine. But if that means we have to just shut him out entirely because of the negative influence he has on the community's members, so be it. Better we entirely ignore his input until he is either prepared to engage in good faith without blatantly disrespecting everyone else in the discussion or leaves to find another community that is more amenable to his needs. Or does something egregious enough to call down the moderation and get himself removed, though I have the impression he has done this already.

I see no loss to us either way; we either gain a valuable member of the community who is willing to engage us in good faith and equal ground, or we lose someone has contributed nothing of import and the forum moves on.
That being said, my own contribution to the discussion will be that I'm frankly surprised we've stopped running PbP DnD campaigns here.

[Man of Paper]

I’ve considered something like a PbP DnD, or some FEF-like that uses DnD as a basis instead, but I’ve found myself preferring to run team-based games when the medium is a forum. It’s neat and not something I’d looked into enough to see if it’d been done here, but I think I’ve found my niche.

[Maximum Spin]

Paper, you're the one in my threads.

That's what a clique is, going into a public space and forming segregated groups.

hmmmm
I would love to be in a PbP D&D game, but my attempts at running D&D have not been successful heretofore.

[Iris]

Okay, since we're apparently not moving on from this as I'd hoped:

I did present it as a general unsubstantiated claim, which can be countered or supported by others' experience.

Did you really expect to make an unsubstantiated claim about the board's character and have nobody take issue with it? In general, you just... shouldn't make those sorts of claims without evidence to back them up. Making an assertation like that just looks bad, and not backing down when presented with evidence looks worse. It makes it look like you're just trying to be bellergent.

I would make a suggestion that you should cool off for a bit, but I don't presume to know your situation, so I can't make any such recommendations. In lieu of that, MoP's suggestion seems reasonable - you should probably take some time off, find new spaces, and try to connect with yourself.

From 2d6?

Well, it's really a combination of factors. I'd say that the major ones are the GM's willingness to roll with pretty much anything, as well as the roleplay of the players (I am probably the biggest culprit here since I love torturing my characters ) and premise of the game itself (which also gets pretty dark at times). Although fighting used to be central, it's not so much anymore, and sometimes fights are even resolved narratively.

There's actually two components to any game system: How the dice resolve mechanics (which I will call "hard task resolution") and how whoever is in charge - usually the GM - resolves actions ("soft task resolution"). The balance between each of these resolution mechanics does a great deal in determining how gritty and "crunchy" the game feels. In this case, I would say it is this game's reliance on soft resolution in addition to the fairly minimal hard resolution (2d6 et al) that creates the authentic brand of chaos that is the game's trademark.

[RoseHeart]

As he just made clear, he doesn't respect our opinions

When it's the same 3 or 4 people objecting to every opinion I make, it does kind of begin to sound like white noise.

I dare you to try to find anything you agreed with me on. No matter the topic.

[notquitethere]

That being said, my own contribution to the discussion will be that I'm frankly surprised we've stopped running PbP DnD campaigns here.

I've never seen a PBP D&D game last. The reasons as I see them:
- High effort to make a character and level them up
- Wrangling both free form out-of-combat player actions and crunchy turn based combat actions is very labour intensive for the GM
- Live conversations between players can easily be disrupted if someone doesn't post, leaving everyone hanging

D&D is popular but both its mechanics and its game flow are not well suited to forum play. Any given game can try to fix some of these problems but it's fighting against the rule-set as it already exists.