Print

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

[Xantalos]

Small queries about RTDs, if players have joined a game and it resumes after hiatus in..about months or so, is it still practical to continue the game even if the GM is willing or...Err, don't know how to word this right. It goes along the lines of me asking if time destroys the interests of players in any game set up by others.

Also, a fair amount of confusion in one of the ideas I'm helping someone out with - loot. Say, running an archaeological-RTD-type. If fame or popularity isn't a factor in returning artifacts, then what kind of reward would be given out? Meaning: How to handle (legitimately gotten) loot?

Cash? Also loot isn't the point of archeology, (unless this is 19th century archeology) its the area around loot and what the loot and the area tells us about the civilization. If a real archeologist was with Indiana Jones at the opening of Raiders, he'd be more interested in why the civilization had all the elaborate death traps and if they were symbolic than the idol at the end. If you already know this, then sorry.

Indiana was an adventurer, not an archeologist. However, he was only mid-level, as seen by his lack of all-consuming greed.

[Persus13]

Small queries about RTDs, if players have joined a game and it resumes after hiatus in..about months or so, is it still practical to continue the game even if the GM is willing or...Err, don't know how to word this right. It goes along the lines of me asking if time destroys the interests of players in any game set up by others.

Also, a fair amount of confusion in one of the ideas I'm helping someone out with - loot. Say, running an archaeological-RTD-type. If fame or popularity isn't a factor in returning artifacts, then what kind of reward would be given out? Meaning: How to handle (legitimately gotten) loot?

Cash? Also loot isn't the point of archeology, (unless this is 19th century archeology) its the area around loot and what the loot and the area tells us about the civilization. If a real archeologist was with Indiana Jones at the opening of Raiders, he'd be more interested in why the civilization had all the elaborate death traps and if they were symbolic than the idol at the end. If you already know this, then sorry.

Indiana was an adventurer, not an archeologist. However, he was only mid-level, as seen by his lack of all-consuming greed.

He was a professor of Archeology. He tried to get all the artifacts in museums. i'd call that an archeologists.

[Tarran]

Small queries about RTDs, if players have joined a game and it resumes after hiatus in..about months or so, is it still practical to continue the game even if the GM is willing or...Err, don't know how to word this right. It goes along the lines of me asking if time destroys the interests of players in any game set up by others.

Time does damage interest. I suspect even more so if the players have a less concrete grip on where everything is and what everyone and everything was supposed to be doing. It doesn't necessarily kill interest entirely, but just don't let a game lie in pause for a month, do a couple of turns, then let it pause again and come back again afterwards and expect people to be very enthusiastic unless you had a damn good game.

...Well, that's my opinion, of course.

[IronyOwl]

Small queries about RTDs, if players have joined a game and it resumes after hiatus in..about months or so, is it still practical to continue the game even if the GM is willing or...Err, don't know how to word this right. It goes along the lines of me asking if time destroys the interests of players in any game set up by others.

Time does damage interest. I suspect even more so if the players have a less concrete grip on where everything is and what everyone and everything was supposed to be doing. It doesn't necessarily kill interest entirely, but just don't let a game lie in pause for a month, do a couple of turns, then let it pause again and come back again afterwards and expect people to be very enthusiastic unless you had a damn good game.

...Well, that's my opinion, of course.

I'd say this depends mainly on how interested players were originally. You can get away with a surprising amount of necromancy if your players are willing and remember vaguely what's going on.

You're right that less interested or involved players may need to be PM'd or replaced, however.


As for loot, I'm not sure what the question is. Are you saying:

-There are items the players can acquire through adventuring.
-These items have no practical use, or you don't want the players using them in the long run.
-Donating these items has no innate value, ie they don't like the curators enough to dungeon delve for free on their behalf.
-You want the players to care about these items, but also not just pawn them.

If so, it's highly dependent on the game. Obviously you generally want their rewards to be loot substitutes or at least potential loot substitutes (some players might put up with not knowing how valuable an item is until they turn it in, for instance), but since loot is highly dependent on the game, it's hard to be more specific.

I would also add, however, that tying the rewards to the artifacts' natures is helpful. Otherwise they'll look at everything as another faceless loot token, or possibly a guessing game about how many coins it's worth. If ancient weapons give them new revolvers or whip training, while grain pots give them stat-increasing whisky flasks, suddenly they'll be fascinated with an item's history and function, since that's how they know what loot it'll generate.

[Tarran]

I'd say this depends mainly on how interested players were originally. You can get away with a surprising amount of necromancy if your players are willing and remember vaguely what's going on.

Problem is, how do you know the players are actually enthusiastic or just doing it because they're already in? Yes, you can get away with necromancy, but are the players actually enthusiastic?



On an unrelated note, is it me or are we severely lacking in the generic, non-minimalist fantasy medieval RTD department as of late?

[freeformschooler]

On an unrelated note, is it me or are we severely lacking in the generic, non-minimalist fantasy medieval RTD department as of late?

I was going to say that's what I'm running, but it's more Zelda adventure-y and less generic elves dwarves and such.

[Tiruin]

As for loot, I'm not sure what the question is. Are you saying:

-There are items the players can acquire through adventuring.
-These items have no practical use, or you don't want the players using them in the long run.
-Donating these items has no innate value, ie they don't like the curators enough to dungeon delve for free on their behalf.
-You want the players to care about these items, but also not just pawn them.

If so, it's highly dependent on the game. Obviously you generally want their rewards to be loot substitutes or at least potential loot substitutes (some players might put up with not knowing how valuable an item is until they turn it in, for instance), but since loot is highly dependent on the game, it's hard to be more specific.

I would also add, however, that tying the rewards to the artifacts' natures is helpful. Otherwise they'll look at everything as another faceless loot token, or possibly a guessing game about how many coins it's worth. If ancient weapons give them new revolvers or whip training, while grain pots give them stat-increasing whisky flasks, suddenly they'll be fascinated with an item's history and function, since that's how they know what loot it'll generate.

That's all that I'm saying and you've answered it all and thanks @ Persus and the rest for those detailed answers! I asked that because the only thought I've seen in a common notion regarding loot is either: Sell; Use it for technology; Recycle; Discard.

Which...mostly points to the idea of progress. Anyway, thanks!

On an unrelated note, is it me or are we severely lacking in the generic, non-minimalist fantasy medieval RTD department as of late?

I think its a lull in the GMs, focusing more on technology and futuristic design for most.

TBH, I'm really missing those "generic non-minimalist fantasy" types. They were always unique in the ways they were presented despite being generic in the common theme.

[Dermonster]

Same here, for obvious reasons.

Dammit, I want an ancient prophecy. I want four to six heroes of legend versus the evil hordes of darkness. I want the ancient artefacts of the gods and precursors. I want sprawling cities with peasants and kings and towers with cooky old men and their magic staves. Caves with dragons and piles of gold. Forests with elves that are actually kinda okay guys and Mountains where horrors were dug by greedy dwarves.

I want an epic adventure and I want to blow it all right the fuck up.

[Xantalos]

Same here, for obvious reasons.

Dammit, I want an ancient prophecy. I want four to six heroes of legend versus the evil hordes of darkness. I want the ancient artefacts of the gods and precursors. I want sprawling cities with peasants and kings and towers with cooky old men and their magic staves. Caves with dragons and piles of gold. Forests with elves that are actually kinda okay guys and Mountains where horrors were dug by greedy dwarves.

I want an epic adventure and I want to blow it all right the fuck up.

There are a few that I've seen, but they're either god games or just move slowly.

[Dermonster]

I wan't actually, you know, intending that to be responded to.

And what do you mean 'a few'? Gatleos had Rtrtd on the fantasy side. Roll to Progress was an excellent one. Multiworld had kinda shades of it but Sean is having trouble. I can vaguely recall one called GeneRTD where I was a necromancer and that was good.

(Hell just put down everything Gat did here. Lazy bastard but one hell of a GM.)

[Xantalos]

I wan't actually, you know, intending that to be responded to.

And what do you mean 'a few'? Gatleos had Rtrtd on the fantasy side. Roll to Progress was an excellent one. Multiworld had kinda shades of it but Sean is having trouble. I can vaguely recall one called GeneRTD where I was a necromancer and that was good.

(Hell just put down everything Gat did here. Lazy bastard but one hell of a GM.)

Pretty much what you pointed out, plus Deviation-22.

[Dermonster]

Wait, Digital had that series I remember.

I got killed by a bunch of dogs and he never finished the novilization.

[anailater]

A generic fantasy RTD may be completely in my grasps, seems like it would be good to help new GM's sink their teeth in, one question though how do people feel about transformations in games?

[Tarran]

What kind of transformations and what is transforming?

[Harry Baldman]

He means physical changes - often the complete change of somebody's form. For instance, you start out as a human, but you become something else in the process of the game, say, a metallic giant or the old favorite, a dragon. Or maybe just have extra arms or eyes added.