Pardon me: How do I get a question "on hold" re-opened if I have edited it to make it more clear and less subjective?

@KieranMullen You have a few options: one of them is to come here and ask people to have a look at it. The other is to go to your question and flag it with a custom message and the mods will come and look at it at some point.

Another is that the first edit you make after a question is put on hold automatically puts your question into a queue that high-rep users can see and take a look at

@KieranMullen What question are we talking about out of curiousity?

I asked for an appropriate card game for the PC to play against a horror opponent if the states were dire, but not deadly.

Just curious if anybody here remembers something I read on the Internet, could be 20 or so years ago. It was a list of useless D&D spell names, generally parodying actual spell names. Things I remember are Detect Self, Detect Floor (somatic component: falling on one's face), and Detect Dead (Yup, it's dead all right.)

But I'm afraid that it may be something that got lost to the aether ages ago

My best own answer is Blackjack, but changing the target to 23 (just to shake it to something weird and not something the players automatically have a strategy for).

I need it to be two player, perhaps with intermediate bidding to raise the tension, but not a multi-handed game like poker.

I have this great black-on-black day-of-the-dead card deck. The face cards are all skeletons :-)

@KieranMullen I see so we are talking about this question then:

Yep. BTW, I meant "stakes" not "states" in the above message :-)

I tried to list specific criteria so it wouldn't be a subjective question.

@KieranMullen It certainly looks improved from the original. I think it should be ok. I'll put in a reopen vote, but you might want to flag a mod to look at the question as well. They can reopen it easily, but non-diamond mods have to vote to reopen.

The only answer I got was "Indian poker" which involves sticking a card to your head. It doesn't quite fit the horror theme...

Thank you. How do I "flag a mod"?

@KieranMullen So, if you go to your question, you should see a row of options underneath it. One of them says "flag". Click that then choose "In need of moderator attention". Then type a short message explaining the situation.

Thanks!

No problem :) I hope it gets reopened and you get a good answer.

I am running a "Don't Rest Your Head" one-shot. I've never run an RPG that doesn't have hit-points or a damage mechanic. I am nervous/excited about GMing it.

@KieranMullen Hah! I am in a very similar position only I am doing a short Powered by the Apocalypse adventure.

I hope it goes well for you :)

I'll take a look at that system. I am finally realizing that DRYH involves the GM letting the players do a lot more of the storytelling. I will need to coax that sort of behavior from the players since they are more used to D&D module style playing.

Good luck with your game as well.

@Rubiksmoose This is a test of the direct messaging system. This is only a test. :-) I noticed that I was spamming the board while you were DM'ing me individually. I thought that I should see if this worked.

@KieranMullen You weren't spamming at all actually! All that happens when you tag a user is that they get a little notification. All posts are available to view by everyone regardless of tagging.

And yup it worked :)

Hi all! Just wondering if on Drivethrurpgs there are classes that can take the place of Wizards, Warlocks, Druids, Clerics etc. that don't rely on spell lists but where the class is totally defined by its class features?

@goodguy5 this is what you were interested in.

@Extrakun Can I ask you a few questions about your goals first?

I'll say upfront that I don't think I can give you an answer seeing as I've not dealt at all with 3rd party content. But the answers to some questions will help others potentially help you.

My players like to play spell-casting classes

And there are spells that are, well, more equal than others

I could ban the problematic spells, but I don't want to read through all the spells to look for "gotchas"

@Extrakun I will say that as a DM and player I haven't really found any spells to be broken really. So I think my true answer might be to just let them play and ban any spells that you find truly game-breaking as you find them. But I really don't think they exist.

But to solve the issue you want to offer up classes that are like spellcasters but without spells?

@Extrakun You want a system where there are no spell lists but classes are more like "monsters" in that they have pre-defined abilities?

Looking for something where their powers are defined by class features.

So, something like monsters

@Extrakun But you want the class abilities to be like spells?

To create spell-like effects

Could you give an example? I don't know what it means to be both like spells and not like spells

Mmm, there's the Scholar class from Adventures in Middle Earth

He can persuade animals, does healing etc, but not by using spell slots or choosing from a catalog of spells. Everything he can do is either a Skill Check

or, like the Bard base class features if we ignore the spells

So a select set of magical abilities, without spell slots, is that it?

Writing through this helped me to clarify my thoughts.

@Extrakun It's not so popular in RPG's AFAIK since there is not as much room for specialization.

@Extrakun It is important to realize that I think anything you find fitting this description would not really be a caster in any sense that a D&D player would recognize.

That's how my players referred to the Wizards, Druids, Clerics etc.

Many classes have magical abilities (see paladin smite/aura and others) that are supernatural effects already.

Oops never mind, miunderstood the questions

@Extrakun or rather, individuation. Every spell caster would be the same.

Yeah, from my research so far, it seems that it is a unD&Dish thing to do

@KieranMullen Yeah, though my players were telling me they will pick the same effective spells most of the time.

The defining feature of a caster is that they cast spells. So if your players want a spellcaster they are probably not going to be interested in this substitue. Not saying that there aren't classes which may be fun and meet your standards. But, to me, it doesn't seem like this is a caster we are talking about.

The closest you might get is actually the UA Mystic. It doesn't technically cast spells at all but has class abilities almost identical to spells.

@Extrakun The thing about spells in D&D is that spells are powerful, more powerful than just smacking something with a sword or picking a lock with tools. So they are limited by a number of usages.

Meaning, if one play a wizard in D&D, he or she is probably interested in the "shopping" of spells from a list, and being flexible to customize his/her spells for the day

The problem is there are tons of them and you have the same issue with sorting through them if you are worried about OP stuff.

Yes, I see.

@Extrakun Well yeah. Wizards are supposed to have that versatility.

Thanks for the input! Food for thought

@Extrakun I think that there are really bare bones systems where you play a smasher/caster/healer with just a certain number of d6 of effect. But there's not a lot of flavor there.

Well, my motivation is the new Waterdeep module sounds intriguing, and I don't usually plyay D&D

@Extrakun You could experiment. Ban the caster classes and anything with spell slots, then let players pick some cantrips

It sounds like it's easier for me to use another system, and port the stuff in the module over

However, undeniably, 5E is popular and is harder for me to find players if I do so.

@Extrakun You could go to a point based system where you buy the effect and not the special effect (Hero or GURPS). But that is not predefined for you.

I am more used to Savage World style where PCs have less spells but have more flexiibilitywith the spells

@Extrakun have you considered allowing spells rather than banning them? If the work of going through all the spells and considering which you don't want to allow is too much work... don't. Pick the half-dozen you want to allow at each level, make it a thematic part of the setting.

Personally, except when running AL I never allow the entire PHB, even.

@nitsua60 (I'm actually really surprised to hear this BTW)

@Rubiksmoose Hmm... why?

Yes, I heard from my friends active in AL there is a whitelist of spells

Sounds doable

Or I probably should wait for the module to be out first.

@nitsua60 I don't know. Maybe because I've never experienced people doing it before. Usually I think of it as a good option for less experienced DMs but of course I know you have at least a decent amount of experience.

I mean, it's a world of magic and anti-magic. A heist module must have defined the reasons why a wizard cannot simply cast Pass Wall (or find a scroll for it), or use spells to defeat magical security.

And I felt if the module is just a case of "magic won't work", it's a cop out. However, if it has specific anti-magic defenses, then Wizards are rendered useless

@Rubiksmoose Every home campaign starts with us discussing what sort of setting we want to interact with (tech level, political structures, magic level, insularity vs. "globalism," commercial level, &c.). Then we decide what races/classes/&c. make sense for that setting.

If it has just strong mundane security, then those with spells has a lot of flexibility to deal with them.

@Extrakun Hopefully, the adventure designers considered most of the trickier uses of spells to bypass things and break the campaign so you may find it to be less an issue then you think it might be.

Yes, that will defintely solve the issue

However, my players are really, really creative when it comes to spells.

They have found lots of creative ways to use Enlarge/Reduce

@nitsua60 Makes sense. :) We've usually just played with all the options and in the generic setting which is probably why we've never done that (for D&D at least)

@Rubiksmoose Like how etherealness summons a demon in Tomb of Horror (which makes no sense)

In a world where TNT exists we build vaults to withstand explosives. In a world where there is reasonably common magic banks will be built to withstand them. (IMO).

@ni

@nitsua60 that's awesome

@Extrakun This is a pretty interesting story of a module developer that encountered a major hole and fixed it: dndbeyond.com/posts/228-spell-spotlight-forbiddance

@Rubiksmoose I simply cannot look at all the races and classes and equipment/goods in the PHB and make any sense of a "setting" that encompasses all of that.

@KieranMullen yes, however, wizards might feel unfairly singled out and may ask"Why am I even here on this adventure?"

@Extrakun We had a lot of fun with it, thanks =)

@nitsua60 I need to get better at designing small scale adventures. Whenever I have "two human clans" I end up making the rest of the region/continent/world too...

So I am very keen to see what the module does to resolve this

@nitsua60 Yes I have the same feeling too.

@nitsua60 That is awesome.

@DavidCoffron It's tough to stay small, sure. When the campaign began we left hanging the question of "is the whole world like this, or just our region?" I figured if it looked like we were going to come down off "the Roof of the World" we'd decide then. We never did.

@Rubiksmoose (Secret sauce: I use Traveller's world-creation scheme in D&D.)

@nitsua60 Yeah I guess we've never had too much issue with fitting everything under our mental image of the setting. And/or maybe we just don't create as rich of a setting as you do.

@Rubiksmoose However this is what I mean...the designer himself isn't even aware of the spell

There are simply too many spells, and some of its outcome is unknown until the players get creative with it.

Not that I want to stop all creativeness at the table, however, it's just that sometimes systems that feature many spells

@Extrakun Yeah it can happen. There a decent amount of things in there, but the thing to remember is that 5e does put a lot of power in the DM's hands. To modify, nerf, adjust, and rule on.

I spend more time deciding whether to ban,allow, hack, or think about the rules, than actually prepping the module and play

I am curious. Is in the DM Handbook about the extent of the DM's ability to modify spells?

From where I am from, I get booed by the most D&D players if I don't play rules as written.

@Rubiksmoose For me it's probably how deep Dragonlance goes into my early reading roots. I mean, there's humans, elves (that don't leave their forest much nor do they really like company), dwarves (that travel some but generally live in dwarf-lands), and kender that nobody wants around. And gnomes that people would want even less than kender, if they'd ever met a gnome. And, like, a half-elf.

@Extrakun My personal opinion is that you should flip your priorities a bit. Don't create problems where there are none to begin with. It is impossible to predict all the things people will do with spells so sometimes it is just best to brace yourself for a little craziness and modify things as issues crop up.

And the original module wants you to play using the 8 pregens: 4 fighters, a thief, a (non-functional) cleric, a ranger, and a magic-user.

I know my players. Haha

They warned me they will be "abusing"spells and asked me what I will do, so I have been doing some research

@nitsua60 Wait. No dwarves in a setting based on the most prominent mountain range in our world?

(They are very upfront about when they feel they're breaking the games. Some others are sneaky about it and put me on a spot while I run the game. Those I exclude from my group)

@DavidCoffron The conceit that emerged was that the land itself was super-magical. (You didn't have all those gods and arcanists channeling magic, binding it into scrolls, fashioning ley lines, and what-have-you yet.) And a race that had some of that connection innate would make sense. So we went with svirf rather than duergar for "underdwellers with racial magic."

@nitsua60 That makes sense. I think most of our group is pretty removed from any kind of D&D lore. With the exception of our DM who sometimes does raise setting-based concerns.

@Rubiksmoose And (again for me) it probably combines with my BECMI roots wanting there to just be 4 classes. If not three. Depending on the day, I can take or leave the divine/arcane split.

It really is fascinating the different ways people play D&D.

@Rubiksmoose Even just at the same table:

@nitsua60 That is an extraordinarily good point as well.

I do that, every couple of years =)

Gotta run--have a good night, everyone!

Whats all this then?

@Rubiksmoose Polymorph, if I had to call out one. Turning your BSF in a T-Rex is usually stupid at 8th level - and when he dies in his T-Rex form, he comes back as a full HP BSF. Other than that, yeah, the thing with spellcasters in 5e is their versatility, not the power level of the spells.

hey there @OneCritWonder, welcome to the RPG.SE lair :)

@OneCritWonder what's "all this"?

@HellSaint It's everything that's not "all that"

@HellSaint I take it to be the British English saying equivalent to "what's going on here" or "what is this".

@JoelHarmon the "then" threw me off that interpretation, but you're probably right

Like "Make it right" vs "Make them pay."

joy of problem solving vs. obssession/"can't let it go-ism"?

Nice, if I can find a pithy way to phrase it.

(This is for my game where each player is a different part of a single character's personality.)

"won't drop a bone"

Right now it's in VERY early stages so phrasing isn't really a thing yet....

I've got this idea that your part of the character is represented by a card that has the positive aspect of the drive on one side, and the negative aspect on the other, and it flips during play at certain triggers--or you can choose to flip it as a cost or benefit.

fearlessly chasing a particular and powerful baddie/organization vs. sees everything as conspiracy by that bad?

Mmm, that's good.

I'm kind of inspired by Misspent Youth, where you can start out Cool and sell out into Trendy, or start out Smart and sell out into Pedantic.

Some of the Motives there will translate okay to my concept, like Pride/Arrogant and Altrusim/Unctuous.

@BESW Do they have to be positive/negative perspectives of the same thing, or can they just be two traits?

Each pair should be an image and its reflection.

Like in Misspent Youth: if you're Tough, the flip side is becoming Vicious.

So it can be "Do XYZ"/"Do XYZ, but edgy" or am I missing some nuance

Yeah, it's a bit more than that.

Ok, so I'm guessing that in theory, each side should be advantageous in some context

Each second trait in a pair is about taking a beneficial quality and twisting it into a more selfish, or more violent, or more self-destructive, version of itself.

And yes, each should be something that helps you get the job done.

Is there ever a reason to flip, or is it a punishment mechanic

A big part of the game is about players playing the roles of different parts of one character's inner dialogue.

I'm thinking that flipping will be tied to the influence currency, so that you can flip instead of spending currency to gain influence over a scene--or spend currency to NOT flip if you would be forced to flip otherwise.

That is, "I want to run this interrogation scene, but I don't have the influence so I'm going to flip from Outrage to Wrath to gain control of the scene."

Wait, what's the motivation - Are they flipping because the other "side" would be beneficial in that scene? Or are they flipping because the act of flipping provides a benefit, thereby making the other "side" itself the cost?

e.g. Am I becoming wrathful because being wrathful would resolve the situation, or am I becoming wrathful as a cost for something else

Each scene is controlled by one player, who is acting for one of the character's drives. Maybe you've got one person who's playing the detective's Outrage/Wrath, and one who's playing their Pride/Arrogance, and another who's playing their Thrillseeking/Nihilism. Only one of those gets to be the primary controller for the detective in any given scene.

There's a currency that I'm calling Influence, which each player has and which is bid at the beginning of the scene to gain control of it. Drives that aren't in control of the scene can spend Influence to have a minor effect on the detective but can't wrest primary control away during the scene.

If you don't have enough Influence to do something, you can flip your Drive instead of paying the Influence.

So if Outrage and Pride both want to run the interrogation scene but only Pride has Influence, Outrage can flip to Wrath in order to bid despite not having Influence.

If the detective runs a Prideful interrogation, she might get the suspect to give up info by making him feel outclassed and despairing, so he throws himself on her mercy.

An Outraged interrogation might instead be about making the suspect feel shame for his part in the crime, while a Wrathful interrogation is going to involve threats and bullying.

What do the other players do while one is in charge?

They're the nagging voices in the detective's head, spending Influence to make the scene more interesting by not having it be completely one-note.

I see, it's kinda like Everyone is John, except players are pairs of traits, instead of specific agendas

Kind of, yes.

I toyed with agendas but it got too... directed.

How would players communicate in-game

Would they know up front what each others' traits are?

Yes, it's not a secrets-having game.

The goal is to have players act out the kind of conflicted inner dialogue a noir detective might have.

@BESW actually a little scary

@trogdor It turns the victim into a pig, obviously

@BESW Don't want to ruin it but I can't stop thinking this: So.... It's Inside Out but with a detective instead of a little girl? :P

@Helwar Not quite, but it shares some elements.

Question: Would the "DM" ultimatelly control the character? (following the players actions)

Like, after resolving their influence exchanges and flippings, it turns out that the interrogation will be Wrathful but with added saddness to it...

will you play the character? or the Wrath player control it?

No, the players control the main character like in a traditional game. They're just jockeying for which Drive gets to be in the driver's seat.

rpg.stackexchange.com/a/123952/43856 - I think I got too rude in the comment. Sorry if I did.

But there was so much hate there that it corrupted me :v

AAAAAAAAND it's gone

I half read it before it disappeared in front of my eyes

I don't think you were rude at all.... but the post was kinda deserving of rudeness

so you would have been ok

@HellSaint I probably would've gone with something like...

> Welcome to rpg.se! Please take a look at the [tour], it's a useful introduction to the site. Stack Exchange is a Q&A site, not a traditional discussion forum, meaning answers should "back it up," by citing experience or other practical support of the concept. And please, it's important that we each do our best to be nice even when others aren't.

(All of those are stock phrases I've collected over the years because they're often useful, so I can just string them together as needed.)

ugh. I struggle to not "chat" in comments. It's engrained in my brain to say "thank you" :P

Yeah, it's a different sort of medium.

@Helwar I'm not sure this sort of game would even need a DM

I'd definitely be open to it turning out to being GMless.

But it'd need a strong mystery-discovery mechanic in that case.

@MikeQ At first I thought of it as the players "nudging" the character into one direction or another, with the results unexpected by them too. It's too DM intensive like this, though

Like those videogames that let you answer with one tone or another (angry, sarcastic, serious, empathetic, etc...), but you say "i'll pick angry, to intimidate him a little", but you character points a gut at him and you go "OH my god, not THAT much angry!!!"

Actually... if there's no DM, then there's nobody to play the other characters

And it's just a detective talking to themselves

@MikeQ wich can fill half a novella by itself

Actually.... oooh.

[grabs fistfuls of mechanics from Lovecraftesque and Great Ork Gods and shoves them into the game]

@BESW color me curious

I'm not quite sure how the game would play out, if the players are essentially competing for control, but all share the same goal

Lovecraftesque is one of the only other "one character shared by all players" games I've ever run seen.

In that one, there's no competing for control; control moves around the circle scene by scene.

The players who aren't controlling the character are instead in charge of the rest of the scene: one takes point as a kind of GM figure, and the others add atmospheric detail and pick up secondary characters if there are more than the GM figure can play at once.

@MikeQ The idea there is to see how different motives create different solutions, which have different kinds of effects and fallout.

Hmm. If there's no GM, I think Lovecraftesque is gonna have to be a big inspiration for the mystery discovery element as well.

How is success or failure measured

Actually, stepping back - How is individual success or failure even defined per player

In Lovecraftesque? It's not that kind of game.

No, in Everyone is Noir Detective Johnesque

I'm not sure it's that kind of game either.

or maybe call it Black And White because noir and because of the flipping paired traits

Ok, let's say I've drawn/decided on the Tough/Violent card. What is my goal as a player?

...and now you've reminded me how annoyed I am at Leaves of Chiaroscuro.

Do I get points/credit/cookies if the detective resolves things in a "tough" way? Do I get points for being in control the longest?

Or can I just sit back as the NPCs, and let Mr. Heroic/Reckless and Mr. Logical/Apathetic worry about the detective work

This is all very early stages; beyond the story concept everything is still tentative pre-alpha scribbles.

But right now I'm thinking there's gonna be a revolving economy passing currency between players to give them more and less power to influence the plot, kind of like A Penny For My Thoughts (the player with the most Influence starts a scene, and they hand Influence out to the other players over the course of the scene; their scene ends when they've run out of Influence, and the player with the most Influence starts the next scene).

But with Drive-flipping to throw a wrench in the works.

I've got the notion that each side of each Drive will have a particular thing it's good at and bad at, so you're especially effective in scenes where your specialty matches the detective's goal for that scene.

Okay, so the goal is generally to gain influence (and spend it strategically), because it pays off by giving control in the next scene

The goal is to tell the story of a detective struggling with his priorities as he solves a case, by playing out his inner monologue and the actions which come of it.

What determines the "true" facts and outcome of the case - i.e., the stuff that the detective needs to find out

That's where I think Lovecraftesque probably has the best possible mechanics for me to take inspiration from.

It starts with scenes that each reveal a clue--the clue is revealed by the Narrator (the GM figure) as part of the roleplaying of the scene.

Between each scene, every player writes down what they think is really going on based on the clues so far. They don't share this speculation.

Since the Narrator role is passed through the group, everybody gets to reveal clues.

And because everybody's revising their speculation between each scene based on the new clue they just get, the clues all make sense together even though they're created and revealed by different people.

It sounds more like a card / social game

It's nothing like D&D, that's for sure.

Yeah, I didn't say it like it was a bad thing :)

During gameplay, should the players be competitive? Cooperative? Bit of both? Do they switch coop/competitive depending on who's in what role?

I'm drawing on the end of the RPG spectrum that has games without dice, often without GMs. Lovecraftesque, Pilgrims of the Flying Temple, A Penny For My Thoughts, Dog Eat Dog...

(I mean, technically Dog Eat Dog has dice? But they don't matter, that's the point.)

@MikeQ Not sure yet. Obviously the roles they play are competitive, but I like it when players cooperate to create conflict amongst their characters so it'd be nice to invoke that here.

@BESW Just food for thought, as usual

(...And DED's most GM-like figure is really just a player that the rules are weighted in favor of.)

Maybe you can have the character have some advantages depending on wich trait is dominant. (Like an angry detective would not notice the pain of a wound so much so could run unhindered in a persecution, or a sad detective would be more empathetic but more prone to be "hurt"), Added to the fact that each player knows different truths (as they know different clues), it might drive the players to want to control or relinquish control to a player that has more chances to "win" it

I've also got, in the back of my head, the idea that different Drives have different goals for the story resolution.

I'm not sure how to make that work but it'd be cool if, say, one player was trying to punish the criminal while another was concerned about the detective's reputation and a third was focused on the well-being of the victims.

Realistically this is just going to be another half-finished game on the pile, along with Hounds of God, Surgadores, Long Live the King of Monsters!, the GOG hack, etc.

Maybe if I had more opportunities to playtest...

But that would imply I know how to use playtests effectively.

Morning folks

[wave]

Hi

@MikeQ why did you have to give him the idea?

XD

hi

@trogdor If you want, I could post some nice bootleg that will make the pig statue picture look nice by comparison...

I think I would prefer not

@trogdor oh, well, many MLP bootlegs look better than the official toys made by Hasbro...

oh that is entirely fair yeah

Like Ursula Vernon's Leperlot! (warning: lovingly crafted boils)

replied in the other room to avoid going too much OT here. ^_^

@Rubiksmoose ha nailed it

also, morning nerds

Good morning!

hey there @Helwar -- btw: on that untrustworthy mercs thing you mentioned a couple of days ago, having RPed a merc on a couple of occasions, my sympathies

@AVeryLargeBear Hi!

@kviiri Howdy!

I didn't get any time to read AW last night :(

aw (pun intended)

@trogdor True with any question, good call. :)

hey as well @KorvinStarmast and @AVeryLargeBear

@KorvinStarmast yeah I hadn't meant to drag you into Fate specific stuff, I just meant that I had that experience in Fate posts

could have expressed it better

@goodguy5 knew you'd like that. 🙂

It's fun to be right

sometimes I love it when a random RPG friend asks "you have that booklet that was with this and that book in a box?" and then I find the answer to a question I had asked some week ago.

ugh... the SAME starter body, then just 2 sentence changed? DUPLICATE!

@Shalvenay Hail, Shal, sorry I missed your greeting. was heading out the door ...

@Shalvenay The trick is to be trustworthy as a player