Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 41 42 [43] 44 45 ... 55

Author Topic: Airship Combat: Rocket man.  (Read 73914 times)

Thearpox

  • Bay Watcher
  • Failure isn't allowed until it's mandatory.
    • View Profile
Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
« Reply #630 on: August 13, 2013, 03:56:30 am »

Quote
Problematically, this leads to massive and unweildly rules bloat. This thing is already complex without me drawing up another massive table of weapon interactions. Also, problematically, classification like that leads to fractal complexity problems. Rapier beats sword. Ok. Does a Foil beat a sword too? What  about an Estoc? What about an estoc vs a shotel? You have the potential to end up with infinitely nested categories all interacting. And even then it's still hard coded.
There's a solution to this problem. Don't have Foils and Estocs! Or rather, have the differences be cosmetic.

Also, technically speaking, the later era weapon beats an earlier one. So yes, Estoc beats "Longswords".

But seriously speaking, what is a foil? Besides being a highly stylized descendand of "real weapons."? Closer to Rapier than Longsword. Have it be identical to any other rapier.
Similarly, what is an Estoc? A cross between a longsword and a greatsword. I'd call it a Greatsword, because of it's grip. But whatever. Just have it listed as a longsword, and have it be identical to all longswords.

No need to go into sword porn (says me :-\). As for shotels... why would anyone have a bloody shotel? And following the above-stated philosophy, we can just classify it as a scimitar. And ya know... deal with these weapons as they come up. Because they probably won't. Unless you have all the NPC's wear Estocs for some reason.And honestly, looking at scimitars, they aren't that different from katanas, except for the fact that they were primarily a horseback weapons.
Logged
Why are 100% of my posts in ER? I already have another account. Created this one specifically for playing.

Not online every Friday evening till Saturday night. If I am listed as online, I am still not online, as my computer has an annoying habit of waking up to the tiniest distraction and then going off to sleep again.


List of links to charts and graphs here. Work in progress. Check it out?

Thearpox

  • Bay Watcher
  • Failure isn't allowed until it's mandatory.
    • View Profile
Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
« Reply #631 on: August 13, 2013, 04:47:48 am »

Okay, I finally sat down with the Manual and read it. Here's my notes. Note that I didn't spell-check it, so I probably have a lot of spelling mistakes in critical places, as I tend to do. Should be a bit better now.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
« Last Edit: August 13, 2013, 01:50:11 pm by Thearpox »
Logged
Why are 100% of my posts in ER? I already have another account. Created this one specifically for playing.

Not online every Friday evening till Saturday night. If I am listed as online, I am still not online, as my computer has an annoying habit of waking up to the tiniest distraction and then going off to sleep again.


List of links to charts and graphs here. Work in progress. Check it out?

miauw62

  • Bay Watcher
  • Every time you get ahead / it's just another hit
    • View Profile
Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
« Reply #632 on: August 13, 2013, 06:14:25 am »

The thing is, especially with medical, you need a point in the general skill before you can have the others, and the general skill already gives a +1 bonus. The sub-skills are mainly specialization. If somebody has 1 point in, say, clockwork, and one in repair, (s)he still knows how to operate mechanisms, but (s)he is just specialized in repairs instead of operating it.
Logged

Quote from: NW_Kohaku
they wouldn't be able to tell the difference between the raving confessions of a mass murdering cannibal from a recipe to bake a pie.
Knowing Belgium, everyone will vote for themselves out of mistrust for anyone else, and some kind of weird direct democracy coalition will need to be formed from 11 million or so individuals.

Toaster

  • Bay Watcher
  • Appliance
    • View Profile
Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
« Reply #633 on: August 13, 2013, 07:29:34 am »

Still waiting for toaster's post; He has 6 dice to use. 7 from dex, 1 from ranged, -2 from range.

Could have sworn I sent it...
Logged
HMR stands for Hazardous Materials Requisition, not Horrible Massive Ruination, though I can understand how one could get confused.
God help us if we have to agree on pizza toppings at some point. There will be no survivors.

piecewise

  • Bay Watcher
  • [TORTURE_FOR_FUN]
    • View Profile
    • Stuff
Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
« Reply #634 on: August 13, 2013, 09:24:23 am »

Okay, I finally sat down with the Manual and read it. Here's my notes. Note that I didn't spell-check it, so I probably have a lot of spelling mistakes in critical places, as I tend to do.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
You don't appear to like anything in the entire book.

Listen Thear, It's 6 am. I'm not feeling great and I've still got 3 pages of ER to respond to, plus those weapons to make and this combat stuff to run, then pages of explanation in the construction manual to write. If you've got such massive, overarching complaints about the entire system, from the way skills are handled to the very way they're arranged on the page and the cover image, then maybe this game isn't for you.
I'll look through the post and make changes where they seem good, but I don't think it's ever going to be what you want it to be. Thats fair, some games just aren't for some people. I would suggest that perhaps you create your own game; you've clearly got a lot of ideas for how you want things to work, you should put them into use.


How about the rest of you, do you have any of the same or similar concerns?

(combat stuff here after ER posts)
« Last Edit: August 13, 2013, 10:08:15 am by piecewise »
Logged

Remuthra

  • Bay Watcher
  • I live once more...
    • View Profile
Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
« Reply #635 on: August 13, 2013, 11:32:44 am »

If thrown weapons are allowed, I'll take a maul (Two-handed Sledgehammer) and throwing axes.

If not, I'll take grenades as a ranged weapon.

Thearpox

  • Bay Watcher
  • Failure isn't allowed until it's mandatory.
    • View Profile
Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
« Reply #636 on: August 13, 2013, 01:05:24 pm »

Quote
You don't appear to like anything in the entire book.

Listen Thear, It's 6 am. I'm not feeling great and I've still got 3 pages of ER to respond to, plus those weapons to make and this combat stuff to run, then pages of explanation in the construction manual to write. If you've got such massive, overarching complaints about the entire system, from the way skills are handled to the very way they're arranged on the page and the cover image, then maybe this game isn't for you.
I'll look through the post and make changes where they seem good, but I don't think it's ever going to be what you want it to be. Thats fair, some games just aren't for some people. I would suggest that perhaps you create your own game; you've clearly got a lot of ideas for how you want things to work, you should put them into use.
Nah, it's okay. It's just not ideal, and yes, I do have ideas for how to improve it. Whether you listen to those ideas is up to you.

I understand why you don't want to deal with such a long annotation, but I've got things from simple clarifications and confirmations, to cosmetics, to what I consider an actual design problem, to something that just didn't make sense for me like assasinations, to something that is functional but I just have thoughts about.

This is a test of a just created home-baked rule system. It's bound to have imperfections, and it's bound to cause misunderstandings. Do you want feedback? I gave you feedback. Do you have to change all of it to my tastes? Not unless you me. But I don't think, especially regarding some misunderstandings and questions, that they are going to go away, but rather that they will get asked by other people eventually. It's just that I have thrown them all at you at once.

Do you have to reply and read through all of this today? At 6 am? No, why would you do that?
But here's the thing regarding the statement that maybe this game is not for me. For me, DM'ing trumps Setting trumps Rules (unless they're very restrictive). Do I have any interest in Sci-Fi? No, not really. Steampunk? To heavens, I don't like Steampunk. I greatly prefer the Middle and earlier Ages, including traditional fantasy. Do I really care? No! Because a good author can still deliver something good, and that's what matters. (Unless he starts going into the designs of clocks and steam engines, the same way Moby Dick went into whaling and Le Miserables into... everything. Not really gonna enjoy a Moby Dick in Steampunk.)
Logged
Why are 100% of my posts in ER? I already have another account. Created this one specifically for playing.

Not online every Friday evening till Saturday night. If I am listed as online, I am still not online, as my computer has an annoying habit of waking up to the tiniest distraction and then going off to sleep again.


List of links to charts and graphs here. Work in progress. Check it out?

Remuthra

  • Bay Watcher
  • I live once more...
    • View Profile
Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
« Reply #637 on: August 13, 2013, 01:20:58 pm »

Okay, I finally sat down with the Manual and read it. Here's my notes. Note that I didn't spell-check it, so I probably have a lot of spelling mistakes in critical places, as I tend to do.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
You don't appear to like anything in the entire book.

Listen Thear, It's 6 am. I'm not feeling great and I've still got 3 pages of ER to respond to, plus those weapons to make and this combat stuff to run, then pages of explanation in the construction manual to write. If you've got such massive, overarching complaints about the entire system, from the way skills are handled to the very way they're arranged on the page and the cover image, then maybe this game isn't for you.
I'll look through the post and make changes where they seem good, but I don't think it's ever going to be what you want it to be. Thats fair, some games just aren't for some people. I would suggest that perhaps you create your own game; you've clearly got a lot of ideas for how you want things to work, you should put them into use.


How about the rest of you, do you have any of the same or similar concerns?

(combat stuff here after ER posts)
It's just constructive criticism. The players are pointing out anything they feel could be better, and how it could be better, to help you make the best possible game. It's unproductive and against the spirit of the effort to react in a hostile manner to it. It's not a disparagement of your work; it's a tool to help you in developing the game. You don't have to listen to or use it, but reacting negatively is simply an unwise move. We're just trying to help make the game, and the only way it will get better is if it is picked apart and the flaws carefully scrutinized and pointed out, which is the whole point of playtesting in the first place.

Caellath

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
« Reply #638 on: August 13, 2013, 01:49:56 pm »

While suggestions are good, do note I suppose it is less about the criticism itself and more about how it is presented.
Logged
"Hey steve." You speak into the air.
>Yes?
"Could you guys also make a hamburger out of this arm when they cut it off? I wanted to eat it just for the sake of tasting it."
>That is horrible and disgusting. It will no doubt set you apart and create fear in your team mates. So of course.

Thearpox

  • Bay Watcher
  • Failure isn't allowed until it's mandatory.
    • View Profile
Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
« Reply #639 on: August 13, 2013, 01:58:24 pm »

While suggestions are good, do note I suppose it is less about the criticism itself and more about how it is presented.
Care to elaborate? How was I supposed to present it?
Logged
Why are 100% of my posts in ER? I already have another account. Created this one specifically for playing.

Not online every Friday evening till Saturday night. If I am listed as online, I am still not online, as my computer has an annoying habit of waking up to the tiniest distraction and then going off to sleep again.


List of links to charts and graphs here. Work in progress. Check it out?

piecewise

  • Bay Watcher
  • [TORTURE_FOR_FUN]
    • View Profile
    • Stuff
Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
« Reply #640 on: August 13, 2013, 02:09:08 pm »

Okay, I finally sat down with the Manual and read it. Here's my notes. Note that I didn't spell-check it, so I probably have a lot of spelling mistakes in critical places, as I tend to do.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
You don't appear to like anything in the entire book.

Listen Thear, It's 6 am. I'm not feeling great and I've still got 3 pages of ER to respond to, plus those weapons to make and this combat stuff to run, then pages of explanation in the construction manual to write. If you've got such massive, overarching complaints about the entire system, from the way skills are handled to the very way they're arranged on the page and the cover image, then maybe this game isn't for you.
I'll look through the post and make changes where they seem good, but I don't think it's ever going to be what you want it to be. Thats fair, some games just aren't for some people. I would suggest that perhaps you create your own game; you've clearly got a lot of ideas for how you want things to work, you should put them into use.


How about the rest of you, do you have any of the same or similar concerns?

(combat stuff here after ER posts)
It's just constructive criticism. The players are pointing out anything they feel could be better, and how it could be better, to help you make the best possible game. It's unproductive and against the spirit of the effort to react in a hostile manner to it. It's not a disparagement of your work; it's a tool to help you in developing the game. You don't have to listen to or use it, but reacting negatively is simply an unwise move. We're just trying to help make the game, and the only way it will get better is if it is picked apart and the flaws carefully scrutinized and pointed out, which is the whole point of playtesting in the first place.
I have no problem with criticisms, and I do listen to them. I am reading through his post and thinking about what he's saying. If I came off as hostile, thats my fault and the fault of it being early and me not feeling great.  I was just saying that he seemed to dislike the mechanics on a very basic level, so if that's going to be a big annoyance to him, this might not be a game he'll enjoy. I mean, if you dislike generic fantasy and d20 rolls, then D&D isn't for you, plain and simple. If you want complex melee systems that lean toward the realistic and skill sets that have a whole lot of skill interplay, then this system is not the one to deliver it.  I don't want to give him the impression or false hope that things would change to be different enough as to address all the things he doesn't like. I'm not trying to be dismissive, I'm just trying to be honest: A lot of the things he's talking about aren't going to be "fixed" because I don't see them as broken; just as a different system from the one he's got in his head. If that makes sense.

And I suggested he create his own game not as some sort of "If you think you're so good, why don't you do it." sort of thing, though it may come off as such. I was telling him that he should create a system like the one he's talking about, because fully fleshed out I'm sure it would work great.

Quote
You don't appear to like anything in the entire book.

Listen Thear, It's 6 am. I'm not feeling great and I've still got 3 pages of ER to respond to, plus those weapons to make and this combat stuff to run, then pages of explanation in the construction manual to write. If you've got such massive, overarching complaints about the entire system, from the way skills are handled to the very way they're arranged on the page and the cover image, then maybe this game isn't for you.
I'll look through the post and make changes where they seem good, but I don't think it's ever going to be what you want it to be. Thats fair, some games just aren't for some people. I would suggest that perhaps you create your own game; you've clearly got a lot of ideas for how you want things to work, you should put them into use.
Nah, it's okay. It's just not ideal, and yes, I do have ideas for how to improve it. Whether you listen to those ideas is up to you.

I understand why you don't want to deal with such a long annotation, but I've got things from simple clarifications and confirmations, to cosmetics, to what I consider an actual design problem, to something that just didn't make sense for me like assasinations, to something that is functional but I just have thoughts about.

This is a test of a just created home-baked rule system. It's bound to have imperfections, and it's bound to cause misunderstandings. Do you want feedback? I gave you feedback. Do you have to change all of it to my tastes? Not unless you me. But I don't think, especially regarding some misunderstandings and questions, that they are going to go away, but rather that they will get asked by other people eventually. It's just that I have thrown them all at you at once.

Do you have to reply and read through all of this today? At 6 am? No, why would you do that?
But here's the thing regarding the statement that maybe this game is not for me. For me, DM'ing trumps Setting trumps Rules (unless they're very restrictive). Do I have any interest in Sci-Fi? No, not really. Steampunk? To heavens, I don't like Steampunk. I greatly prefer the Middle and earlier Ages, including traditional fantasy. Do I really care? No! Because a good author can still deliver something good, and that's what matters. (Unless he starts going into the designs of clocks and steam engines, the same way Moby Dick went into whaling and Le Miserables into... everything. Not really gonna enjoy a Moby Dick in Steampunk.)
Sorry if it came off angry or annoyed or anything. I didn't mean it to be.

piecewise

  • Bay Watcher
  • [TORTURE_FOR_FUN]
    • View Profile
    • Stuff
Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
« Reply #641 on: August 13, 2013, 02:33:52 pm »

I'm setting up the next characters right now. Turn soon. Also, example of possible ship soon, for giggles.

Thearpox

  • Bay Watcher
  • Failure isn't allowed until it's mandatory.
    • View Profile
Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
« Reply #642 on: August 13, 2013, 02:44:26 pm »

((Sorry to hijack your announcement, Piecewise. Kind of awkward to have both tests and discussions going on at the same time.))

Quote
I mean, if you dislike generic fantasy and d20 rolls, then D&D isn't for you, plain and simple.
Unless you are DM'ed by Chris Perkins.

Quote
If you want complex melee systems that lean toward the realistic and skill sets that have a whole lot of skill interplay, then this system is not the one to deliver it.
I am always pushing for skill interplay because that is the best way to deal with min-maxing. ER is actually pretty good at this.

Quote
And I suggested he create his own game not as some sort of "If you think you're so good, why don't you do it." sort of thing, though it may come off as such. I was telling him that he should create a system like the one he's talking about, because fully fleshed out I'm sure it would work great.
Maybe someday.

Quote
The thing is, especially with medical, you need a point in the general skill before you can have the others, and the general skill already gives a +1 bonus. The sub-skills are mainly specialization. If somebody has 1 point in, say, clockwork, and one in repair, (s)he still knows how to operate mechanisms, but (s)he is just specialized in repairs instead of operating it.
Still, if I take one point in general, and two in repair, I will end up with 5 rolls to repair something, and one to use it. It's just that generally, one has to know how to use something in order to repair it. Fundamentally, it's the same exact skillset. You have to know what a button does before you know it's broken.
Same with constructing. What is the best way to learn how to build watches? Take one apart and put it back together. Do that ten times, and you might be able to build one from scratch.

The issue is much less pronounced in Medical profession, where surgery and less intensive care are actually different things. And a surgeon is probably worse at First Aid than a nurse.

I just had another idea. Maybe for medical profession have each of the sub-skills add one half of a dice whenever rolling for that skillset? So if you have two in surgery, and one in first aid, you roll two dice whenever you do first aid, and 4 or 5 (depending if rounded up or down) when doing surgery. Plus the general.
Logged
Why are 100% of my posts in ER? I already have another account. Created this one specifically for playing.

Not online every Friday evening till Saturday night. If I am listed as online, I am still not online, as my computer has an annoying habit of waking up to the tiniest distraction and then going off to sleep again.


List of links to charts and graphs here. Work in progress. Check it out?

piecewise

  • Bay Watcher
  • [TORTURE_FOR_FUN]
    • View Profile
    • Stuff
Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
« Reply #643 on: August 13, 2013, 05:06:09 pm »

So here's a highly experimental ship body we've been working with for damage dealing tests It's called "Bathos".

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Yep. This is just an example of how you can basically have a ship body of any shape you want. Although, the larger it is, the more it costs.


Toaster vs Octo

Toastarrr: holds position, 4 attack, 2 defense.
Dave Atk 4 (Full Auto) Def 2
Toaster atk: 3 successes
Dave atk:2
Dave def:0
Location:1
Wound:6

Dave leaps up out of cover, ready to unleash a withering barrage of fire on Toastarrr. But Toastarrr is already standing, his weapon aimed and a smile on his face. He fires a single shot. It catches Dave in the palm of his outstretched right arm and proceeds to drill it's way through his hand, into his wrist and then up along the length of his arm until it clips his elbow and explodes into pieces of lead and metal jacket shrapnel that explode out of his upper arm. His ruined arm drops to his side, blood running freely from the horrible stigmata hole in his hand.
[end:T8 R6 S4]

Dave drops down back into cover, screaming in agony as his lifeblood drains out of the pulped sausage that used to be his arm.




Cromwell and Moe, you can both start. The character sheets for everyone, as well as the maps and templates are all here, in this folder:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/32eq50gnxyiubf9/ZAGDfDQc7v


« Last Edit: August 13, 2013, 07:18:00 pm by piecewise »
Logged

Dansmithers

  • Bay Watcher
  • [ETHIC:TUNNEL_SNAKES:RULE]
    • View Profile
Re: Airship Combat: Ouch.
« Reply #644 on: August 13, 2013, 08:35:50 pm »

Did you get my new sheet?
Logged
Siggy Siggy Hole!

Well, let's say you're going away from Earth on huge spaceship and suddenly shit goes wrong and you have Super Mutants. Social Experiments prepared them for this.
Pages: 1 ... 41 42 [43] 44 45 ... 55