Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 14

Author Topic: Tabletop Roleplaying Games  (Read 19572 times)

nenjin

  • Bay Watcher
  • Inscrubtable Exhortations of the Soul
    • View Profile
Re: Tabletop Roleplaying Games
« Reply #45 on: May 21, 2014, 11:20:35 pm »

This include home brews?

Just got done playing my friend's. We affectionately call it "Don't roll a 1."

It's heavier on the narrative than the dice rolling, but it goes like this. You get three stats, strength/willpower, reflexes/agility, perception/cunning. Each stat gets a die, d4 to d20 (you up a skill group a die "step" when you level and get a few steps at character creation.) Anything/everything you do is basically attempted with one of these stat groups. There's no charisma stat, every interaction with NPCs are 90% roleplaying.

When attempting stuff, you can roll 1 stat, 2 stats or all stats, representing going all out. The target numbers are basically "the more higher totals you get, the better." When you roll max on a die, it open ends and you roll it again, adding it to your total. Anything less than open ended but not a 1 is just a basic success, you achieve your goal (although sometimes with a lot of GM caveats.)

When you roll a 1, things turn against you. Not only did you miss, but the guy kicks you in the stomach, or parries and counter attacks. That evil monk you were interrogating by chanting prayers at him just hooked up with his lord and master spiritually and manifested a demon.

When you take a wound, it's the same story. You roll one of the stats, corresponding to the type of threat. Anything but a 1, it's a flesh wound, essentially. If you roll a 1, you're pretty grievously wounded. And then you roll again. Roll another 1, now you're felled, basically crawling across the ground in a wreck and unable to do most things. Roll again. Get another 1 and you're dead. If you survive, then next time you roll a 1, you're testing at the wound level you're currently at. So when you roll a 1 while wounded, and then roll another 1, you're now felled.

It's kind of shocking how effective it is. 1s happen a lot. So while it's a system that lends itself to big ballsing PC actions (because it's so free form and the margin for success is pretty broad), there's a lot of inherent risk in doing pretty much anything. It's a game where dramatic things happen a lot, and where it pays to go over the top rather than play super conservatively (read as: hide in combat.) And yet there's a lot of room for subtly as well. A lot of how it plays out has to do with the GM's personality, but the rules are free enough to allow a GM to express their preferences by how granular they choose to make things.

In terms of wizardry, it's kinda broken. I assume magic might get another revision, but basically wizards can do mostly anything. They used to have spell lists, and power points, but none of that anymore. Now they all they have to do is create a fake-ass sounding latin name (think Harry Potter), and write it down on a notecard with a brief description of what it does so it can be added to the Tome of Spells. No one has ever really pushed the boundaries yet, but I assume doing something incredible or expansive requires multiple rolls, and a 1 pretty much blows the whole deal. The GM keeps his target numbers in his head so we never hear what we're shooting for, and the thresholds are generally pretty low. (You succeed, you kill a minor enemy. Important guys usually several successes. But a number of important baddies have gone down in a heap to open-ended rolls.)

There are a couple basic class templates. Wizard/Thief/Paladin or Cleric/Fighter. What class you pick basically defines whether or not you cast spells, a handful of special abilities and some kit choices. Wizards get their spells, Fighters get Exceptional Strength, Thieves get thieves tools and Stealth, Clerics or Paladins get Miracles. These are only templates. For example, in an older sort of build, I made a Pirate Captain. I have abilities like "Knows about a secret island" and "Skullduggery" and "Has a ship". These are very loose "powers", but basically it means I know about a secret island that I can at any point decide to go to and fill out the details of. I've got a ship, one way or another.

My last ship, the Blind Zonka, ended up in mud up to the mast when the harbor she was berthed in mysteriously drained out. But whether by stealing one, or appropriating it by more legitimate methods, I'll have a ship. Skullduggery is new and like most abilities, sort of nebulous. But it basically means in areas of piracy, I can say what I want to do and it generally happens. Sort of how Wizards can invent any spell effect they want, thieves can vanish into the shadows, can cast miracles and call on their gods, and fighters can apply their strength in any way they can argue for. Most of the time, you don't have to roll, except when it's really dramatic. So when someone is like "I wanna play a Ninja...." we basically cook up the Ninja class on the fly. Classes end up tailored to the thing people have envisioned, rather than trying to cleave religiously to a list of stuff.

There's gear which is basically special ability based, basically. He tries to keep it pretty light on that stuff because it starts to weigh the game down, or becomes broken in application quickly.

Been playing this system in its various forms for a while, and I'm starting to dig it. You can really focus on what's going on and what you want to do when you're not belabored by modifiers, traits, situational rules, long and tedious combat sequences. Granted, the pace of the game ends up being pretty quick and it can feel a little shallow compared to a combat that takes 45 minutes to resolve, or the level of gamesmanship that comes with most RPG systems. But a good GM with fun ideas and a taste for freestyle can make a lot out of it, and so can the players. Just don't roll a 1.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2014, 04:09:44 pm by nenjin »
Logged
Cautivo del Milagro seamos, Penitente.
Quote from: Viktor Frankl
When we are no longer able to change a situation, we are challenged to change ourselves.
Quote from: Sindain
Its kinda silly to complain that a friendly NPC isn't a well designed boss fight.
Quote from: Eric Blank
How will I cheese now assholes?
Quote from: MrRoboto75
Always spaghetti, never forghetti

puke

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Tabletop Roleplaying Games
« Reply #46 on: May 22, 2014, 12:13:30 am »

sounds a little like Cortex Plus.  (by MWP:  smallville, leverage, marvel, firefly... also a 'Hackers Guide')

In short, you have two stats (this and that, different in each implementation.  maybe skill and stat, maybe nature and motivation, maybe role and ability... different in each implementation) and you pick a relevant one from each of the two sets and roll the relevant die type.  so maybe D8 for Hacker and a D6 for Brains.  Or maybe D10 for Jock and D12 for Truth.  or whatever.

Then you add in some extra dice for stuff like relationships, equipment, special abilities, whatever.

Ones are bad, in that they give the GM stuff to use against you.  But they're also good in that they usually give you some sort of bonus you can use later.  Essentially, you get paid later to be inconvenienced now.

Or sometimes the 1's get saved in a pool to be used against you in mass at some later time.

It's clever.  Plays fast.  sort of froo-froo and collaborative, so pathfinder fans might not dig it too much.  Worth looking through the Hackers Guide even if you dont like any of their licensed properties.
Logged

nenjin

  • Bay Watcher
  • Inscrubtable Exhortations of the Soul
    • View Profile
Re: Tabletop Roleplaying Games
« Reply #47 on: May 22, 2014, 12:23:23 am »

Yeah, does sound a lot like it. "Froo froo and collaborative" is maybe not quite the right description. In this group it plays out a little more like a power fantasy at times. It can almost seem like wholly indulgent wankery until someone rolls a 1. In the end it's all about getting the big cheer, the drama of a critical dice roll, roleplaying to earn the group extra XP. (Tonight I shoved one of the King's guard into front of a fireball that was about to decimate his liege lord. Vaporized the guy. Got a nice little XP reward for playing my pirate to the hilt.)
Logged
Cautivo del Milagro seamos, Penitente.
Quote from: Viktor Frankl
When we are no longer able to change a situation, we are challenged to change ourselves.
Quote from: Sindain
Its kinda silly to complain that a friendly NPC isn't a well designed boss fight.
Quote from: Eric Blank
How will I cheese now assholes?
Quote from: MrRoboto75
Always spaghetti, never forghetti

Neonivek

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Tabletop Roleplaying Games
« Reply #48 on: May 22, 2014, 01:02:31 am »

Quote
so pathfinder fans might not dig it too much

I find that most pathfinder fans actually like a large variety of games.

It just depends if the player likes Ultrahard (MechWarrior), hard (Dungeons and dragons), medium (Call of Cthulhu... sort of), soft (FateRPG), or supersoft (Freeform) rulesets. (Note I am making up terminology)

For example I like hard-soft... But I find Ultrahard too difficult and find supersoft pointless.

As for collaborative. Dear goodness do I wish that was more popular. I have the Dresdan RPG books not because I like the system... but because I love the world creation system.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2014, 01:13:15 am by Neonivek »
Logged

Mephisto

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Tabletop Roleplaying Games
« Reply #49 on: May 22, 2014, 08:07:45 am »

Now that this was dredged up a few days ago, I have a new place to post bundles that is not the existing bundles thread.

You can pick up several Numenera books for ~$20 in the latest Bundle of Holding. There is roughly one day left.

Someone described it as Monte Cook's Shadowrun, but honestly it looks to basically be medieval fantasy with magic fluffed to be technology from ancient civilizations.

Anyway, Monte Cook - creator of Ptolus, Arcana Unearthed, and Dark Matter, among others. It's probably worth it.
Logged

sjm9876

  • Bay Watcher
  • Did not so much Fall as Saunter Vaguely Downwards
    • View Profile
Re: Tabletop Roleplaying Games
« Reply #50 on: May 22, 2014, 08:31:27 am »

-snip-
This actually sounds like the perfect anime-esque RPG, for a group that way inclined.
Logged
My dreams are not unlike yours - they long for the safety, and break like a glass chandelier.
But there's laughter and oh there is love, just past the edge of our fears.
And there's chaos when push comes to shove, but it's music to my ears.

Sigtext

Yoink

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Tabletop Roleplaying Games
« Reply #51 on: May 22, 2014, 09:08:50 am »

Ahhh, Bundle of Holding. I so very much wish they did that with physical copies of the books. :(
Logged
Booze is Life for Yoink

To deprive him of Drink is to steal divinity from God.
you need to reconsider your life
If there's any cause worth dying for, it's memes.

Silfurdreki

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Tabletop Roleplaying Games
« Reply #52 on: May 22, 2014, 12:05:46 pm »

I realised that I'm wondering about something when reading this thread, and partially when I GM'd Shadowrun (4th ed.) a few months ago.

The whole game ended up being a bit awkward and stilted for a multitude of reasons, including Shadowrun's aforementioned fiddlyness and my newness as a GM but primarily, I've come to realise, since the players didn't want to play the type of game that I did.

What I mean is that when I read the rulebooks, I didn't focus exclusively on the mechanics. Sure, I read them, but I also read a lot of the lore and world building. I then built an adventure that was to filled with mysteries for the players to solve about the places they went to, the people employing them and so on. However, the players built as min-maxed characters as they could, didn't much care who their employer was as long as they got money to get new gear. Essentially, they cared little for the stories behind the world and wanted a lot of getting stronger and fighting dudes.

Of course, I'm generalising a bit here, there were varying degrees of caring between the players in the group and it was a bit more nuanced than what I describe, as real life tends to be. My point is, though, that I'm wondering what most players want from a good PnP RP game. Do you want deep mechanical systems that you can bend and break, carefully planning out his various numbers to create the most powerful character ever? Do you want a story with rich and nuanced characters that you can interact with and create an amazing story? Do you want a world filled with intrigue and wonder, where you slowly discover what's happening behind the scenes? Something else?

Personally, my ideal game would be one where you explore an interesting world, with secrets gradually being uncovered by the players, not very focused on character growth. I very often feel that I'm somehow done with a character after generation and that gameplay should determine how it evolves. I've found that all other people I've met make their characters with detailed plans for how they should grow, down to a long list of 'feats to take this level'. I really want to think of playing an RPG as exploring the world the GM made up, but I get the impression that many don't.
Logged
Quote
Entropy is not what it used to be.

Fniff

  • Bay Watcher
  • if you must die, die spectacularly
    • View Profile
Re: Tabletop Roleplaying Games
« Reply #53 on: May 22, 2014, 12:16:28 pm »

Speaking as a frequent GM, a big part of being a GM is knowing what your players want and compromising on your own vision. Players are far from universal. Some players do want deep mechanical systems, others want stories, others want good worldbuilding, and some just want to screw around. Same with GMs. There is a reason why many books put emphasis on asking your players what they're looking for in this game. I don't do this nearly enough myself.

The good news is that there is always a way to include your player's wants with your ideas. It just requires a little compromise. Let's take your party. You could compromise completely and make the game a complete "leveling up and getting stronger" experience... but that wouldn't be good for yourself, would it? So make the idea of exploring the world and character growth mingle. Reward the players when they solve a problem creatively, or use information that they learned from the world-building and put into play in the game. For example, if you mention a corporation known as Brooks Enterprises specializes in selling industrial explosives and occasionally makes shady deals with Shadowrunners in need of some boom-boom, then if the players are in need of some explosives and one of them suggests Brooks Enterprises, reward them for making the connection.

Remember, the GM is not above the players and the players are not above the GM. You can all have fun together without feeling you're being forced into a particular path.

Silfurdreki

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Tabletop Roleplaying Games
« Reply #54 on: May 22, 2014, 12:29:05 pm »

Your advice is sound, especially the part about talking to your players, and I do believe that the main reason that the game slowly fizzled out is my own inexperience as a GM. I was simply unable to detect and react to this happening fast enough.

Still, I'm curious as to what most people want from their games, mostly due to my tiny inner statistics nerd I think.
Logged
Quote
Entropy is not what it used to be.

Girlinhat

  • Bay Watcher
  • [PREFSTRING:large ears]
    • View Profile
Re: Tabletop Roleplaying Games
« Reply #55 on: May 22, 2014, 12:48:27 pm »

Wow, that question really shows exactly what your take is...  "What do you want out of a game?  Do you want a number-cruncher you can abuse and be a broken as shit character, or do you want a rich world full or nuances and politics?"  There's nothing wrong with a game by numbers.  Sometimes it's really fun to just hack your way through some goblin caves without a deep history of goblin encounters and local farms being piled on top.  That's not to say it has to be simple.  The goblins can build fortifications, murder holes, pots of oil, and deceive and trick and play all SORTS of goblin traps.

A proper "dungeon crawl" type scenario shouldn't be a series of dice rolls and straight up combat.  It should be just as exciting as and diplomacy or roleplaying situation, except it's exciting to the fighter and the cleric, not just for the bard and the paladin.  Don't make straight fights, make puzzle fights.  For shadowrun, have them deal with a sniper, or a hacker who's on the other side of the city.  For Pathfinder/D&D include soldiers in phalanx or traps that take effect during combat, not just on the doors and chests.  Make them THINK about how they're going to get into melee.

puke

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Tabletop Roleplaying Games
« Reply #56 on: May 22, 2014, 01:11:41 pm »

I think it's a legit question.  People want different things out of games.

Someone mentioned above that their group like the power fantasy.  Other people like cinematic action.  Others like meticulous investigation.  Girlinhat is describing a rich tactical exercise.  Other times, folks go for exploration.  Some for dramatic social interactions, others just like to be immersed in their favorite genre: fantasy, sci-fi, noir, whatever.

None of it is right or wrong or better or worse, but it's worth knowing what people expect and what they want before you get started.

Fniff pretty much nails it.  Understand your audience, and then figure out how to pitch to them while still keeping it interesting for you.  Maybe handle your plot in a series of reveals, rather than expecting them to go digging for it proactively.
Logged

Neonivek

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Tabletop Roleplaying Games
« Reply #57 on: May 22, 2014, 01:41:10 pm »

The real issue is that both players and DMs don't know this aspect.

But then again that isn't a large problem.

A DM who is accommodating to the point where games are entirely constructed around the players with absolutely no self-input or style versus a DM who has a very narrow vision of their game and the players are just in it...

Are both perfectly valid ways of running games that require different techniques.

And yes I am saying that the DM who makes his game and you better like it is... perfectly valid. The trick is that, that style of game needs to be rather transparent. For example one of my favorite games I played in had a very stringent story path and it really punished you if you deviated from it, however it laid down everything at the very start so when we made a mistake we knew why. It was punishing but fair. For example at one point the main villain cheats at a competition and gets a few people injured and killed, if you accuse him of this you lose on the spot with no hope of getting back in crippling you because you have no evidence, but this is fair because the DM explained more then once on how things worked and you know getting into this that accusing the villain would get you in trouble.

But to go back to it. The real issue is that both players and DMs sometimes don't know that they have to find a compromise, or try to explore different methods. In all my years of gaming the vast majority of good DMs are further on the "take it or leave it side" yet while also compromising allowing games with a strong narrative drive that also adjusts slightly to the protagonists. Yet without experience to back it up, I fully believe the correct balance changes from DM to DM and player to player.
Logged

Silfurdreki

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Tabletop Roleplaying Games
« Reply #58 on: May 22, 2014, 04:13:43 pm »

Wow, that question really shows exactly what your take is...  "What do you want out of a game?  Do you want a number-cruncher you can abuse and be a broken as shit character, or do you want a rich world full or nuances and politics?"  There's nothing wrong with a game by numbers.  Sometimes it's really fun to just hack your way through some goblin caves without a deep history of goblin encounters and local farms being piled on top.  That's not to say it has to be simple.  The goblins can build fortifications, murder holes, pots of oil, and deceive and trick and play all SORTS of goblin traps.

Well, yes, I realise that the question betrays my own opinion of things, but why can't it? There's no requirement for objectivity here. I don't see why you're being hostile about this, I was merely wondering about what most people want out of a game, I'm not saying that min-maxing is inherently unfun and trying to push my own opinion on people. I apologise if it came off that way, I'm just wondering what people think is fun.

A proper "dungeon crawl" type scenario shouldn't be a series of dice rolls and straight up combat.  It should be just as exciting as and diplomacy or roleplaying situation, except it's exciting to the fighter and the cleric, not just for the bard and the paladin.  Don't make straight fights, make puzzle fights.  For shadowrun, have them deal with a sniper, or a hacker who's on the other side of the city.  For Pathfinder/D&D include soldiers in phalanx or traps that take effect during combat, not just on the doors and chests.  Make them THINK about how they're going to get into melee.

This is good stuff, one of my problems I think is that sessions became series of dice rolls to some degree in my games and I hope to avoid it in any future DMing I do.
Logged
Quote
Entropy is not what it used to be.

Girlinhat

  • Bay Watcher
  • [PREFSTRING:large ears]
    • View Profile
Re: Tabletop Roleplaying Games
« Reply #59 on: May 22, 2014, 09:22:38 pm »

There's an old saying, are you "role-playing" or "roll-playing"?  What a lot of people thinks this means is "are you doing talk and roleplaying your discussions, or are you in combat?" but what it means more is "are your characters treated as people, or as a container for stats?"  Combat can be played in your role.  You can definitely have interesting, compelling combat.  Not everyone is good at talking or forming arguments, but they may be good at treating D&D as a tactical combat game, and that in itself can be loads of fun.

I see a lot of people trying to discourage combat, not just here but other places, people seem to misguidedly think that combat is 'too simple' and diplomacy and talking are 'the true game.'  The real problem always boils down to players who make broken or minmaxed characters.  Let them fight, but make them be functional in society while doing so.  If someone's got a traditional super barbarian with 7 in charisma and intelligence, remind him of this by having people swindle him in town.  If you catch this at low level, then let them restat themselves slightly more balanced and make sure they understand that there will be combat, but there's also going to be taverns and towns, and if you're so maxed for combat, don't be surprised when your minimum social skills pay you back.
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 14