TRPG General Chat - 2014-10-24 (page 1 of 2)

« first day (1485 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (3483 days later) »

12:00 AM

@gomad hey man, they're just looking to find out which classes are fun and can be played well together. If "nimble rogue" and "eldritch warock" are on that list, and the players both find those super fun, they'll probably pick them. Now, if the nimble rogue and eldritch warlock aren't on the list together, and aren't compatible, and can't really work well together, that's going to result in the players not having much fun as they mutually regularly enter situations the other is useless in.

Assuming their value of fun is "they get to cooperate and help each other and be useful to each other", which it is, in this case.

(Also - thanks iPad, that is a whole bunch of extra punctuation there)

So what kind of fun is there if both get to play what they want but they can't actually cooperate and end up having no fun?

Ok. Imma go sleep now and try to find other questions to answer in the morning. Questions that don't make me say,"you're having badwrongfun"

Consider this: the guy doesn't say he'll act on the information without considering what the players like.

He's asking for information that will let him make an informed decision which also incorporates other elements of his context.

@gomad Goodnight.

Night, everyone. Thank you for letting me spout a little. Error of ways noted. :)

12:05 AM

Sleep well :D

(@BESW psst by the way, you should probably post your bounty first)

I'm unlikely to do it until Sunday.

oh! well. i might be first then.

12:36 AM

Would the question 'Is blasting still a suboptimal choice for Wizards?' (D&D 5e) be too broad?

@Miniman no, I don't think so. It can be answered objectively.

@doppelgreener Cool cos I'm really curious about it

blasting was a suboptimal choice before because blasting has no effect until the target is dead, and in 3e and before Wizards had quicker and easier ways of taking enemies out, or had spells which could have an immediate debilitating impact on the targets.

a good answer will be able to succinctly demonstrate that this is or is not still the case, or that something else has changed which alters the situation

not opinion based, good question, clear and not too broad

@doppelgreener Ok if I steal this line?

12:54 AM

@Miniman totally ok

1:08 AM

@doppelgreener, you are amazing! Thank you for editing my question the way you did, it is exactly what I meant to say. You sir are awesome. — GizmoAGM 2 mins ago

:')

that is always a nice thing to hear

i saw that typo

you burninator you

XD

hypocrite, I suppose no one should ever edit anything?

no i just found the typo funny considering who made it ;)

I know, but I made a joke based off of your earlier post

:P

1:16 AM

@Miniman Re-Phrasing Man to the rescue!

@BESW Yep, I was just reading through your changes

@doppelgreener everything is a nice thing to heat,... not all of it will work the way it is supposed to afterwards

@BESW Seems good to me, maintains the comparison between the 2 while getting rid of the 'passage of time' that people are objecting to for some reason

Well, it's a legit concern because it trivialises the older editions and the people who play them now.

And it's really easy to fix, just by focusing on "these things are different."

@BESW I play 3.5 now, but I'm perfectly willing to admit that it's been 14 years since 3.5 came out.

That said, I'm happy with your changes. I'm just confused as to why this whole thing is an issue

1:25 AM

@trogdor trogdorian philosophy

indeed

Trogdor's First Law of Metaphysics: Nothing flammable is unreal.

lol using the Robo RPG for its secret true purpose: story bible.

Tweeted by bclevinger on October 24, 2014 at 1:25 AM

@devlin1 @bclevinger I'm usin' it all wrong! It wasn't helping deflect shivs much anyway

Tweeted by squideye on October 24, 2014 at 1:30 AM in reply to devlin1

hahaha

1:40 AM

I'll say this for old-school style RPG books: they're better at deflecting shivs.

[hefts Call of Cthulhu evaluatively]

[note to self: Cindy Mayweather might do well as inspiration for an ARRPG plot]

@BESW oh snap, shots fired

@BESW How so?

@BESW I do not get this

@doppelgreener Augh! My 300-page hardcover manuals are no use against bullets!

@BESW well if they're 1800's lead rounds you'll be fine

@doppelgreener @trogdor I don't have any specific idea right now, but the Metropolis Suite concept of a time-travelling soul/R&B android seems like the kind of thing which would fit right into the Atomic Robo universe--not least because it also makes no sense in the Atomic Robo universe.

Time travel is supposed to be impossible, and artificial intelligence basically only happens by accident, so Cindy Mayweather rapidly approaches Dr. Dinosaur levels of "Get out, there must be a more reasonable explanation for this--if we could only figure out what that might be."

1:55 AM

Now that you mention it that does sound like it'd be an excellent fit

ok

The basic formula for Atomic Robo plotting seems to be: present something impossible which requires urgent action, and then watch your players flounder about competently, dramtically, and proactively.

Since you explain it that way, I think I understand

To make a Mayweather plot, I'd have to put Cindy at the centre of something which urgently requires action--but that shouldn't be hard. She's a time-travelling android superstar. She practically drips plot hooks.

Paranoia KS starts tomorrow morning folks

2:09 AM

Give a good link and I'll pin it.

mongoosepublishing.com/rpgs/paranoia.html

that one for now, I'll post up the link to the KS in the morning

might as well wait til it goes up on KS

Aight.

@BESW Before I go to exercise the POWER (ohgod), what precisely does it mean when you drop a vote to re-open a question?

"drop"?

@Lord_Gareth like you remove one? or you add one?

2:12 AM

Bestow, grant, utilize, add

@Lord_Gareth ah, you're just one of 5 needed.

It means that if four other folks also think it should be re-opened, it gets re-opened.

its saying "I think this should be open, do you agree?"

[Exercises THE POWER]

(caveats apply. moderator close/reopen is binding and unlimited. gold tag badge close/reopen is binding on duplicates, and can only be used once each direction)

2:14 AM

Etc so forth. Wait...hellfire, a mod closed this one.

Eh, I'll leave the vote.

@Lord_Gareth you can overrule them

(well, you and four friends)

rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/49928/… <-The question, incidentally. It's eminently answerable and deals in a very small list of classes - we're talking maybe 12 in 500 supplements, or less than 1% of published classes.

@Lord_Gareth It might be worth a meta, particularly if you can rally support on reopen and it gets reclosed

(though our mods generally don't reclose unless it's teribad)

From what I've been hearing there actually was a re-open attempt but it got unintentionally blocked by a function of the system.

That is, it got closed, then edited, and then there were votes to re-open

It got mod opened, wiping out the previous votes

And now those voters cannot vote again.

@BESW all we really need is: some goons are doing evil science. Our group dives into stop them.

Out of nowhere, Cindy Mayweather and her sidekicks go VWOOP through a portal and kick people in the face.

"We've been tracking these guys for years." "Really? Our sources say only formed together three months ago." "Yeah, that's true, but we're time travellers, so." "... You're what now?"

2:21 AM

Which, I want to be clear, I'm not accusing anyone involved of cheating the system or maliciousness.

It just seems to be a...hole? Consequence? Thing, in the program.

@Lord_Gareth did we read all the comments, because I just caught this one

> After further reflection, could you two please edit the question with the constraints articulated here in the comments? Let's make it a good question and then open it

it looks like it's held pending further instructions from OP

which is completely different from initial close reasons

@waxeagle That did happen; that's where the examples of Thayan Knight and Red Wizard came from.

@Lord_Gareth revision history - it seems brian agreed it was worth reopening, then an hour later changed his mind

The OP is looking for classes whose lore calls them out as being paired and/or whose abilities explicitly pair them. This is a fairly narrow requirement.

@Lord_Gareth no, that was posted after that edit

2:24 AM

Which, again, brings it down to about 12-16 classes out of thousands

(you can hover over timestamps to see the exactly time and date at UTC+0, aka Zulu time, hence the Z)

@doppelgreener "Oh, nothing. Keep the beat alive!" [waves cheerily, moonwalks back through portal]

(Off the top of my head: the Daggerspells, the Nightsongs, Thayan/Red Wizard)

@BESW LOL. Yes. And then have them appear again later.

to the potential outcry by frustrated scientists of "HOW ARE YOU DOING THIS"

@Lord_Gareth probably worth a meta then

2:25 AM

@JoshuaAslanSmith Basic Player rules = basic PHB. Basic DM Rules = basic MM/DMG

@Lord_Gareth yeah this is a thing the mods have to be careful about. it exists to prevent close/reopen wars: imagine if the same people could just keep casting close and reopen votes.

@doppelgreener "Man, you square cats aren't hip to the Power of Soul, are you?"

@BESW oh god

stellata alone would be totally confused

Ok, I now have on my desk "How to survive a sharknado"

"... what is she saying? i understand these words but not in this combination"

2:26 AM

...if my players are okay with this, I think we've found our campaign's Dr. Dinosaur.

(Although in my head she's fast becoming a fusion of Cindy Mayweather and Dr. Tigerlily Jones.)

("You know who wants me to be sane? The Man, that's who!")

@BESW I am so okay with this

@waxeagle Another gentleman of my acquaintance is working on the Meta question, danke for the advice.

@BESW I have a FATE modeling question for you

(And maybe some Angel Dynamite.)

@Lord_Gareth Shoot, though I have to leave soon.

@BESW Characters like Pinkie Pie and Deadpool ignore or even manipulate the fourth wall, sometimes to the extent of affecting a scene or even the plot. How would you model this for a FATE game where such silliness is appropriate?

Jan 19 at 2:51, by BESW

@Lord_Gareth Meta Awareness: Because I am Deadpool, I can spend a Fate point to know something that my player knows, whether it makes sense for me to know it in game or not.

2:31 AM

Okay, but what about stuff like the Party Cannon and its "I always keep it off-screen"?

Similar, but think about how you want it to work.

Like, if Pinkie can fail to have a stash of balloons nearby, that means it's probably a skill roll.

Maybe a stunt that lets her roll Resources without narrative justification for access.

If she does it once a session, that's just a "once per session I can bend the rules" stunt.

If she can do it regularly and reliably, then it's a stunt that lets her spend a Fate point to declare an unreasonable story detail.

There are also more complicated extras and mechanics to model more specific things, but part of the point of an ability like this is that it should be unpredictable and unlimited in its potential--although probably limited in its frequency.

@BESW <- This can be seen as a stunt that basically says: "I can always break the rules about what story details fate points can declare, as long as it's within this constraint."

Right.

e.g. "Because I am Pinky Pie, I can spend a Fate point to declare a story aspect on the scene related to party equipment, whether it makes sense for that equipment to be there or not."

Where "this constraint" is "related to parties," or "drawing on my knowledge of the medium in which I exist," or "makes someone at the table laugh," and so forth.

2:42 AM

Alternately you could give Pinky Pie Craft, and a stunt like...
Because I'm always ready to party, I can use Craft to produce equipment related to parties, even if it's not clear where it came from.

@Magician Howdy!

Greetings

@Miniman Microsoft is doing its best to ignore Vista... and maybe Win8, once 10 is released...

@Adeptus also the reasons why 9 was off limits

2:58 AM

@waxeagle "We're not numbering consecutively, we're going straight from ~~eight~~ seven to ten!"

IIRC 9 is off-limits because of Windows '98 and some weird numbering bugs, right?

@Adeptus winamp did the same thing a few years ago: I think they went from 7 to 9. The tagline was: "So good we skipped a number!"

@Lord_Gareth In terms of "actual version number" rather than marketing name, 98 is 4.1 or 4.2 or something. Then 2000 and XP are both 5.x (and based on Windows NT, not "standard" Windows). Vista is 6, 7 is 7, 8 is 8, and 10 is... umm... next

@Adeptus they had a nice logical thing going there for about two versions

@doppelgreener Wow, I haven't used Winamp for years! When it came out, it was one of the few mp3 player programs (and most others cost big money). Once Windows Media Player could play them, it was an adequate solution, so there was no real motivation to download something else that did the same thing. Unlike IE...

3:12 AM

@Adeptus I never liked WMP c(:

so I stuck with Winamp until I found VLC

Eh, it works. I did download a codec pack to let it play other formats. VLC is more powerful, but the interface is less friendly

It does! I'm not saying it's bad.

3:32 AM

I may be having too much fun with these Traditions for Path of War: Expanded.

Did a cult of demon hunters whose essential core motivation can be summarized as 'screw demons, seriously'. They worry good-aligned churches.

Which is not entirely unfounded as the organization has no quality control beyond, "Do you really hate demons?"

For every two that are genuinely good people there's one more who's staking out orphans as bait.

@Lord_Gareth excuse me while I laugh

@Metool Mrr?

it's perfect

@Lord_Gareth I'd like to take advantage of your Pathfinder knowledge for a minute -- is Hunter a good class?

@doppelgreener Depends. Is it a wizard, a druid or a cleric?

3:38 AM

I'm asking because, well, Arcanist is insane (and so is the author, probably), and Gunslingers have a decent chance of having been deliberately sabotaged by its authors.

@doppelgreener Hunter suffers from some identity issues. In terms of play, Hunter is not a bad class and is a rock solid T3 that requires moderate resource management and relies on its animal companion to deal damage.

In terms of design, Hunter never should have happened. It has no niche

That is, every bit of ground Hunter is trying to cover is already thoroughly covered.

@Magician I am not sure. Ranger is not a class I understand well.

But if you'd like a companion-based druid without worrying about how broken druid is, Hunter's great.

Like, you could describe the class as "if Druid was balanced, it would be this class," and you would not be wrong.

@Lord_Gareth That sounds like "If you would like to play a druid, play this class (or just druid), also if you pick this one it has some ranger bits"

@doppelgreener Pretty much yes. The limited spell list and lack of shapeshifting keep its power level in check while keeping it relevant at its own CRs.

The only real worry is A. selecting the correct companion(s) and then B. keeping them alive in the fight.

Since without yours you're missing half your damage (literally) and quite a bit of your utility (flanking, increased threat, combat maneuvers)

3:42 AM

by increased threat, do you just mean as in my character is now more threatening?

@doppelgreener No, I mean specifically threatened squares, as in your companion is the center of another ring of them.

Which helps define favorable battlefield terrain for you, and unfavorable for the enemy.

Oh right

But an animal companion druid has that stuff anyway, doesn't it? So it is a druid without shapeshifting, and it goes from a Druid prepared casting model to a Sorcerer-ish casting model

@doppelgreener Also 6-level casting, which is important to note.

Oh nuts I didn't notice that!!

Remember: druid is too strong. Hunter being a balanced druid is a good thing from the perspective of a DM with a player or players interested in it.

It's a weird thing in terms of overall design though.

Especially since Ranger is sitting pretty at the same tier, squatting in the same niche.

Hunters are casty rangers; rangers are fighty hunters.

3:46 AM

@Lord_Gareth Hrm. I'll talk to my GM about it. (Who might actually be watching this conversation in fact!)

@doppelgreener I'd be happy to talk with him if he wants to chat ^_^

Her actually!

My bad.

(also recall that you can always just tone the dials down on druid to make it play at a lower tier than its potential)

Given my lack of experience actually playing Pathfinder or D&D 3.x I'm pretty sure I'll have a hard time making a druid super strong, so the fact Hunter has a lower upper limit is... a little scary to me

@doppelgreener Druid has this problem where it's easy to be strong on accident.

There's a companion to the idea of an op ceiling, which is the op floor; the minimum at which a class functions.

Even a really crappy hunter is going to be the equal of a barbarian or a gunslinger. There's a lower limit to how much you can possibly suck.

For a 3.5 comparison, the Tome of Battle classes had high op floors but relatively low ceilings; hard to screw up, difficult to break.

3:50 AM

so Druids have a much higher op floor?

They can, yes. Druids bottom out at about T3, T4 if you're actively trying to suck.

But even just flailing at the class in drunken desperation normally lands you in T2; about sorcerer level.

Druids are a very safe class. They don't have to worry about permanent resource choices because they barely require any permanent resources.

Feat selection, skill point selection, those are nearly meaningless.

You know all of your spells so fixing a bad spell list is as simple as taking a nap.

Animal companions can be replaced in 24 hours with a minimum of ritual sacrifice (feel free to indulge for evil druids) so a bad choice there won't hurt you.

Wild shape refreshes per day so you can experiment with new forms.

@Lord_Gareth That's actually something that really attracts me to picking a Druid. The Sorcerer model of "you only know these spells ever" is something I don't like, because it makes me way too worried about screwing myself up. And it means I don't get access to as much Fun Stuff: I don't get to have a level-1 lightning spell tomorrow, I have to earn that thing, and usually it won't be worth earning to have forever and ever.

And as a new player, I want to try all sorts of different new things, so having my class spell list available in choices each morning is advantageous.

@doppelgreener Hunter's native list helps with that, as it remains a very safe spell list and is full of options that synergize with its companion-focused style. Druid has those options too, of course.

(I'm just now articulating this stuff; this hadn't clicked into words for me before, or I hadn't realised it was something that attracted me.)

No worries, I exist to help.

For a classic Hunter idea, try looking at a mix of battlefield control and buffs. The share spells feature on animal companions (ranger and druid have this too) lets you double up on buffs.

Which is really action-efficient.

Especially if you can quicken low-level utility buffs, or use rods of quicken for others.

Oh hey now

> In addition to the spells gained by hunters as they gain levels, each hunter also automatically adds all summon nature's ally spells to her list of spells known. These spells are added as soon as the hunter is capable of casting them.

Safe list just got safer.

Free summons.

3:57 AM

:O Neat.

Oh god minionmancy.

Run while you still can.

So that's auto-access to summon nature's ally of any level; Druids get that too right? (except they sacrifice prepared spells)

Correct. Hunters don't need to sac spells because they're spontaneous casters to begin with.

So simply knowing the spell has the same effect.

God damn but I know too much about this system >.< Helpful for my career, bad for my soul.

Maybe more importantly, free summons relieves some pressure from your spell selection.

Because you can, to an extent, summon things to cast druid spells for you.

So anything in SNA from 1-6 that can cast a spell? You don't need that spell.

With possibly the exception of certain useful buffs.

Anyway @doppelgreener, my concern with going Druid would be not having enough experience to ratchet back.

@Lord_Gareth \o/

@Tritium21 Do you consider spear-tips and the like to be the only real points?

4:03 AM

@Lord_Gareth My GM's favoured classes are Druid and Rogue (from D&D 3.5e, i.e. prior to Rogue's nerfs), so I'm kinda trusting my GM to give me pokes in the power level department

@Lord_Gareth Oh hey, speaking of 3.PF and Rangerish classes... the DM in my "core only" 3.5 game approved my ACFs. So, now I'm a spell-less ranger with a modified familiar... which ironically has better chance of being effective in combat than a regular Animal Companion of the same species (hawk)

@doppelgreener Then I'll defer to your judgment on that matter and only re-iterate my statement that Hunter rests in a safer power level re: optimization potential.

@Adeptus Awesome.

@Lord_Gareth Thank you. :) I appreciate the help.

@doppelgreener PF nerfed Rogue?

@doppelgreener Incidentally the easiest way to keep power down as a druid is to be a T-rex or shoot lasers, but not be a laser-shooting t-rex

5

@Adeptus Stealth-nerfed; PF got rid of a ton of options that helped rogues out, half-installed some of them back, and then have failed to support rogue since.

And the new stuff they gave Rogue is actually so shamefully bad that by RAW it nerfs base mechanics of the game.

3

Such as a rogue talent that, 1/day, lets you make a Bluff check to spread a rumor.

Thus containing the implication that all characters without this talent cannot spread rumors ever.

4:08 AM

@Lord_Gareth That was too amusing not to star it.

There's lots of support for the niche rogue is supposed to occupy, all of it in the form of classes that entirely replace rogue in all of its particulars.

Want a combat rogue? Slayer, vivisectionist, ranger, and bard are available.

Want a skill rogue? Investigator, bard, ranger (see a theme?) and ninja are ready

And these are just the easy ones, there's some niche stuff you can do to create some really out-there 'rogues'.

But the sad fact of the matter is that 0% of the list of viable rogues in PF include members of the rogue class.

The nice thing about vivisectionist is that you get in-class access to tentacles.

2

More attacks mean more sneak attacks!

@Adeptus Core vs. core, PF rogue is better than 3.5 rogue, but the moment you step outside of that the differences just get sharper and deeper.

3.5 rogue got a ton of love and support and remains a vibrant part of its game's meta as a T4 class with tons of fiddly dials to crank up or down.

PF's rogue got kicked down, kicked around, and spat upon.

And its dials are glued in place.

If that answers your question, @Adeptus?

yep

I feel helpful.

Do we have other 3.5/PF questions while I'm in the mood and on a roll?

4:35 AM

Guess not. I shall retreat to the throne of darkness.

4:54 AM

imgur.com/gallery/ihRohVQ

5:22 AM

I got Dungeonscape Beta!

Anybody here played gumshoe?

@BESW Once.

My phone's autocomplete has taught me a new term:

Pax Americana (Latin for "American Peace") is a term applied to the historical concept of relative peace in the Western Hemisphere and later the Western world resulting from the preponderance of power enjoyed by the United States beginning around the middle of the 20th century. Although the term finds its primary utility in the later half of the 20th century, it has been used in various places and eras, such as the post-Civil War era in North America, and regionally in the Americas at the start of the 20th century. Pax Americana is primarily used in its modern connotations to refer to the peace...

How complex is it?

Pax Americana is the nature of the peace enjoyed in the Western world today, as of World War II.

5:28 AM

@BESW Not terribly, but it's different. There's essentially a spotlight budget: using a procedural skill auto-succeeds but depletes it.

5:45 AM

Hmm.

I'm looking at Trail of Cthulhu.

Might be different there, I've only played Mutant City Blues.

6:20 AM

> GUMSHOE exists to solve a problem that many people found with running Call of Cthulhu – one bad die roll can derail an adventure. You didn’t find the diary, so you didn’t get the spell, so either Arkham is destroyed or the Keeper has to scuttle ‘round and plant the diary somewhere else. In Trail of Cthulhu, the GUMSHOE rules guarantee that you will find that diary. (We don’t promise not to destroy Arkham.)

Yeah, that's the general idea of the system.

Skills are separated into Procedural and... Action? Running around punching people works about the same as in most other games, while Procedural part is always successful. It's up to players to declare how they're finding clues, and GM will inform them when they've gathered all there was to find in a scene.

Hrmm.

I'ma take a nap. ttfn

2 hours later…

8:24 AM

@dopplegreener - awoke to find that myxz had written my answer without any of my "quit worrying and go play" 'tude. :), including pointing out the Fritz Lieber fighter / rogue duo I wanted to bring up.

8:39 AM

GUMSHOE abilities are Investigative and General. Informing players when they've discovered everything doesn't seem to be a core part of the game, especially since the goodies for an Investigative spend can be ad-libbed and negotiated. The point is that the players will never miss the information that can bring them to the next scene.

8:55 AM

Interesting.

It sounds like it has a similar foundational ethos to Cthulhu Dark, but with more "traditional" RPG trappings too.

I'm not sure long-form Mythos games are workable for my group, as much as we like both Mythos and long-form.

Morning all

[wave]

9:13 AM

Guys

Anyone has dnd books handy?

I have a question

(3.5)

Is it stated anywhere that narrative rights for the environment are DM-only? Like, except characters' actions nothing happens unless and until DM says that it does?

9:27 AM

Try DMG1 page 6: Providing the World.

Would have tried, if had the books on hand.

How about this: page 18, Determining Outcomes: "You're the arbiter of everything that happens in the game. Period."

Isn't that the same as "If a dispute arises, you have the final say"?

morning all

In context, it then goes on to talk about fudging rules and roll, and keeping the PCs from knowing you are.

And not to let players know what DC they're rolling against so the GM is the only one who can tell them if they succeed or fail.

...gosh this is all really manipulative and easily nudged into active abusive GMing straight out of the box.

The GM is told to fudge the dice and the rules whenever he wants, but when something happens which upsets a player the GM is told to shrug responsibility off onto the game.

9:39 AM

Well, that's D&D for you.

It all goes back to early editions, IMO

So, I'm not sure there's a specific sentence you can cite, but the ethos is soaked through the pages.

Classic dungeon crawling, player-vs-dm attitude, that sort of thing.

The PHB says, "The DM controls the monsters and enemies, narrates the action, referees the game, and sets up the adventures."

Yeah, the notion is right there: DM's rule is absolute.

Thanks!

No problem.

@surajck Hi!

Are you looking for the Graphic Design chat?

The Ink Spot

GDSE's banter bin. Where we complain about clients, post cute ...

9:45 AM

*blink*

@lisardggY ?

Just a general wordless, gestureless greeting.

Oh. [falls over salutatorily]

That's the spirit.

HAHAHAHAHA

in other words, hello

9:51 AM

Oh, wow. This Trail of Cthulhu adventure has a pre-made PC who's half Chamorro.

wow

It's set around the 1954 atomic bomb tests at Bikini Atoll, on a Navy ship, so it makes sense.

But I gotta give 'em props for knowing it makes sense.

Who's it by?

Because from what I gather by listening to Ken Hite's podcast, he believes in serious research.

Bill White, from an idea by Judd Karlman.

Don't know him. But maybe Hite sets the tone for ToC. :)

10:05 AM

It's also got an Irish-American chaplain whose introductory character note is that he thinks the Marshallese are getting treated really badly.

well,... they were

then again,.. not everyone would have cared to make the observation at that time

Yes. It's refreshing to see it addressed in a Lovecraft-inspired product.

lol

'cause, yanno, Lovecraft would probably have had them be the evil cultists.

I was about to say actually

10:08 AM

"For truly, are we all - the Irish and the Chamorro, the black and the white - not all the same, brothers in insignificance before the horror of Nyarlathotep?"

3

it's prolly plenty more common than Lovecrafts own work

There's a Paranoia Reboot project up on Kickstarter: kickstarter.com/projects/1990654819/paranoia-rpg

4

I like the update to the setting for the post-Cold War era, but I'm not sure what I think about the glimpse at the rules. I don't like mechanics that rely on dedicated dice and 100 pre-printed power cards.

pre-printed? Ew

I see, Paranoia the card game.

10:24 AM

The designer is James Wallis, with pretty nice story-game credits to his name (Munchausen, Once Upon a Time), and has Greg Costikyan on board too, which is nice.

I hope it doesn't turn into a Gamma World 7e situation.

?

GW7 had rules based on D&D 4e, but instead of characters rolling mutant powers from a list, the game came with a set of power cards that were shuffled and randomly chosen.

And WotC sold booster packs of randomly determined powers as supplementary products.

So the card element didn't serve a mechanical purpose, but as a tie-in CCG hook.

Aw.

GW as one of my favorite games when I was younger. Had a two-year campaign in high-school. 4th edition was based off of AD&D2e, but with then-revolutionary ideas, like AC going UP, not down!

Madness!

10:37 AM

On the other hand, Paranoia is a game suited for one-timers, and especially convention games and occasional one timers. I like it, but can't see myself playing it regularly. For this dynamic, it makes sense to make a game with minimal ramp-up time where brand new players can start playing immediately using the self-contained rules on the cards.

I know that this answer makes sense, but I can't remember where the supporting rules are, or that quote. rpg.stackexchange.com/a/49978/15190

Hmpf. Gamma World 4e rulebooks are selling for $90-100 on eBay and AbeBooks. Guess my nostalgia is going to have to take a raincheck.

Futuristic SF in general always has to keep abreast of current technology so as to create a believable future, but the post-apocalyptic genre is particularly interesting, as it has to constantly readjust the nature of its apocalypse.

10:58 AM

Hmm. I'm reading this Bikini adventure from Trail and trying to figure how I'd turn it into a Dark campaign.

I should really be working on tomorrow night's Exciting Conclusion to the DFAE game, though.

@BESW you really should, and yet XD

11:31 AM

[Rubs temples] The irony in this comment thread right now is staggering beyond belief. Though I suppose it's possible that the gentleman in question hasn't been privy to our recent issues with addressing criticism.

1

A: I'm DMing for a party of two. How can I make sure my players have classes that can play well together?

Any of the classes can work well together. Classes in D&D 5e aren't all that black and white. A Fighter with a Criminal background can participate just fine along with a rogue - in fact, that's the general setup for Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser, one of the best known fantasy duos ever. In general...

(Last comment)

@Lord_Gareth Here, have his context.

I saw it yesterday, actually. I'd considered engaging but chose not to because after examining everything I wanted to say it'd just be picking a fight over petty bitterness that is not, in any way, that poster's fault.

Suffice it to say that I very much agree with your statement that a game is an investment of time, effort, and often even money.

Which should be respected.

[squint] ....okay, this adventure just lost a few points with me. It's asking me to have the players roll to scrub the decks.

@BESW Killitwithfire.

@BESW mmm mm mm exciting

11:39 AM

I mean, there's an ostensible good reason behind it: it's actually one in a list of possible actions to restore a portion of the ship's pool of resources which the PCs can draw on to gain bonuses to rolls.

But it's still a horror game about washing up.

6

@BESW Yes but swabbing the deck is not a task with a chance of dramatic failure.

but it is still a contrived excuse to get people to do this boring thing

and yeah,... really how do you fail at this task?

It sounds pretty silly

A big element of this scenario seems to be keeping the ship from falling apart.

no

argh

awful moderation on another site, someone applying the be nice policy as if being able to have a conversation with someone about it makes it okay

(need i provide examples of conversations that should never be brought here ever)

[finds refuge in fate room for a little while]

@doppelgreener What you need to do is read those DWAE spoilers.

11:42 AM

@BESW pad the spoil-lair for me?

Padded.

@doppelgreener You can see why I'm being a little bittah?

....and now we have more than 500 words on how to find moonshine and get drunk, including the hangover.

(With differentiation between nursing the bottle and going on a bender.)

@BESW See previous statement re: destroying the evil with cleansing flame.

BESW's Spoil-Lair

CAUTION: High chance of plot. Not for BESW's players.

@Lord_Gareth My bad, it's only 200 words.

@mxyzplk Excellent clarity edit!

11:52 AM

@BESW thanks

(Also a good example of how de-escalation can lead to more precise wording.)

« first day (1485 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (3483 days later) »

Transcript for

Oct '1424

TRPG General Chat

Main chat room for tabletop role-playing games. Anyone can ask...

dice pen-and-paper roleplaying

join this room
about this room

00:00

06:00

12:00

18:00

all times are UTC

site design / logo © 2024 Stack Exchange Inc; legal

mobile