« first day (2934 days earlier)      last day (2015 days later) » 
02:00 - 20:0020:00 - 00:00

8:03 PM
I hadn't realised Fate/Zero wasn't written by Nasu, which shows how much attention I pay
 
@Carcer Of course it wasn't written by Nasu. More than half of the male historical figures actually stayed male.
 
@Yuuki I also don't remember there being any seafood
fair point, I should've caught on
 
Speaking of things that are sometimes tolerable or entertaining, apparently my campaign isn't quite dead yet
 
@MikeQ Oh?
 
@MikeQ Wow, that was a great insult-transition.
 
8:18 PM
@GreySage danke
@Xirema I just have to rewrite things to be fun enough for the players and tolerable enough for me
e.g. My players seem to enjoy Pathfinder's combat, whereas I think it's really tedious to manage
 
Well, good luck with that.
 
Structure-wise, the campaign's at a point where I'm not sure what direction to go in, or what should happen next, so I want the players to decide
 
@MikeQ I've found that with Pathfinder and D&D, combat's fun for the players and not nearly so much for the DM. It's something about the way the systems work, I think.
Not sure what it is.
 
@Yuuki Cant speak for other systems, but in dnd, cmbat for the DM is as creative as it is tactical. Because tactically you want to execute the wizard first, then the healer, tank last. Creatively, thats not what the monsters would do (usually) so you have to hold back
 
@Yuuki Honestly I just dislike having to juggle all the numbers and math
I wrote up a console program to quickly do NPC dice rolls, which has helped
 
9:28 PM
One of the things I can say at least for Pathfinder is that you can play a little fast-and-loose with the numbers; if you're off by 1 or 2 it doesn't make much difference. Also, making monster/PC initiatives as a batch works way better - instead of red orc, green orc, wizard, purple orc, fighter, rogue, etc, it's Orcs, PCs; which is nice because it lets you just do a bunch and throw a handful of dice, which I think is quicker
 
@Delioth Yeah, grouping enemy initiatives helps, so does fudging NPC character creation
Also this chat is pretty much my only avenue for brainstorming
 
Also help for NPCs is to always base them in a similar-CR creature. Reflavoring or slight retoolings of existing NPCs can abstract away a lot of the details (if you want to fight some little scaly dudes, 3x Kobolds and 1 Kobold but with a level of Fighter is a solid thing)
Or use tools that are built for that. I personally try to keep a small library of creatures around my party's size in PCGen so that I can make encounters on-the-fly
 
@Delioth My current approach is consult some custom tables of average enemy stats by CR, and then just giving them those stats
 
I'm a fan of the PCGen thing because I can go ahead and just make some creatures at around the right CR and then Lego-style encounter build; and PCGen lets you use an existing bestiary creature a lot of the time (notably, I at one point had a dozen or so different Troglodytes to pick from)
 
I did that for a while
But then I realized how silly it was to spend several hours selecting the feats and abilities of an NPC who would likely exist for 1 round
 
9:33 PM
See, I only did that for re-usable things
 
@Delioth Which feels so deeply wrong, because buffs and debuffs tend to be limited to +/- 1 or 2.
 
Like, Shamans of a few flavors, varying powers of meatwad-types, a couple martial ranged options. Things that work nice and are nice and composable
 
Still, it's a lot of effort that goes into very little in-game implementation
 
Most often Spellcasters are the NPC that gets a little attention, since it's easier to characterize them in-combat due to spell choice and describing a little casting activity.
Also, not spending any number of hours - only a couple minutes. These guys are NPCs, they have lives outside of combat. Feats for martials are always Power Attack>Weapon Focus, and maybe something like toughness. If I've spent 30 minutes on a throwaway, it's too long
 
i.e, it doesn't matter too much to the players how the enemy NPC gets +whatever to hit an 1dX+whatever damage per hit.
 
9:38 PM
I always end up assuming half or so of an NPC's feats are spent on non-combat thigngs
 
@MikeQ it matters an awful lot to some players
 
@Carcer Unless the players are looking over the NPC statblocks, I doubt it
 
...This is one reason I like Fate. I can give a one-shot NPC their story-driven "this is why they get the bonus" value in about three minutes.
 
And it's pretty nice that PCGen will spit out a statblock, and a martial's first several combat feats are pretty standard: Power Attack, Weapon Focus, Toughness
 
@MikeQ or the players are familiar enough with the system to start reverse engineering from the derived values they do find out, which I was wont to do in D&D
 
9:40 PM
I'm more eager for Pathfinder 2e though, since monsters are explicitly not on the same fundamental base as PCs; you can't necessarily build an NPC by bashing together character building stuff
I don't think they've released monster creation for it though, which is a little sad
 
@Carcer I usually roll behind a GM screen so it doesn't come up like that
 
@Delioth and all creature entities existing on basically the same system was one of the reasons I really liked 3.X
 
Either way, I need to be heading out; good evening (etc) all
 
it appeals to my nature
 
@Carcer And it's a fundamental flaw for GM's - there's a lot of overhead and stats that PC's have that are great, but NPC's don't need
 
9:42 PM
it just intrinsically annoys me when the rules are different for PCs and NPCs
 
@Carcer In PF(v1) there's several thousand ways to construct a bonus
 
Since PC's will be around for weeks->Years, NPCs will be around for minutes
 
Like, why does Swordguy Minion D have a +8 to hit and does 1d6+4 damage? Is it from feats? Class features? Ability score mods?
And 99% of the time, it does not matter, as long as those numbers are reasonable for the assumed CR.
 
@Delioth I felt so liberated by 4e in that regard; I'd seen other systems like Dogs in the Vineyard which were even less concerned with mechanical parity between PCs and NPCs but it had baffled me before I saw 4e's implementation.
Now aggressive player-facing systems are some of my favorites, especially for one-shots like Cthulhu Dark and Honey Heist.
 
@MikeQ I personally enjoyed working that kind of stuff out, but I was originally just kind of making a joke about rules lawyering players of the "but HOW did they DO that?!" variety
 
9:45 PM
@Carcer That is what we scientists call "pedantry"
 
@MikeQ Being extremely particular about your neckwear?
 
@Yuuki No, that's pendantry, good try though
 
@MikeQ are you deliberately setting me up for that one
 
40 secs ago, by Mike Q
@Carcer That is what we scientists call "pendantry"
 
you're falling for it Yuuki
 
9:46 PM
@Yuuki This comment is now fake news.
 
abort abort
 
#alwayswaittwominutes
 
Anyway
@Carcer While I can understand that annoyance in general, I can assure you that it's much worse when I had fully detailed NPC stat sheets with a bunch of notes of where all the misc bonuses came from
 
@MikeQ part of the enjoyment I derive from the game is that mechanical character building aspect so it didn't really get to me when I was DMing
 
Like, to make "generic fencing minion" I would spend hours figuring out the combination of race, ability scores, feats, and fighter/swash/rogue levels, just so the total bonuses would add up to something reasonable
And spending a bunch of time to justify why a one-time NPC has a +7 to hit instead of a +6 is just not worth the effort, long-term.
 
9:50 PM
I loved the character design element, but it also was a major part of my burnout.
 
I feel like part of the problem there is deciding that the NPC needs a +7 to hit and then working backwards to justify it
I just made creatures and NPCs
their stats were what they were.
 
@Carcer Right, so now I decide the NPC's CR, find that it needs a +7 to hit, and I'm done. Any reverse-engineered error can be handwaved as a circumstance bonus.
 
4e helped significantly because its NPC design explicitly asks me what role the character has in the story.
Fate does the same thing: the more significant/lasting a character's role is expected to be, the more mechanical detail accrues to it.
PCs are the most important characters, so they have the most mechanical complexity.
 
@MikeQ No, I mean... I figure "this NPC would be a sixth level fighter", and then I make a sixth level fighter. I'm not specifically trying to target any numbers when I build it
 
One-round redshirts tend to just get an aspect/skill combo like "Cannon Fodder +2."
 
9:54 PM
@Carcer But would they be a 6th level fighter? What if they're a fighter 2/ swashbuckler 2 / rogue 1 / slayer 1
Or perhaps, a swashbuckler 1 / fighter 3 / ranger 2, or a fighter 5 /brawler 1, etc etc
 
@MikeQ because six levels of fighter is the representation of their skills? If the NPC had a background for which different stuff made sense I would make that instead
I know there's a lot of options, but I'm not trying to find a path through the options which has a specific end result
 
BESW's point about character importance is relevant to my approach here
 
okay
 
If I expect an NPC to show up, make an attack roll, and get KO'd on the next round, then I doubt anyone will ever ask "Hey what was that guy's level and class"
 
that's a different problem though
 
9:58 PM
It's like how minons or extras in an action movie generally don't have names or expressed motivations
 
@MikeQ Where was he born? What school did he go to? What was his listed income in last years tax returns? The people need to know!
 
I do understand
I can appreciate that having simpler NPCs makes gamesmastering a lot easier
just that I, personally, vastly prefer it when everything is the universe is mechanically consistent
 
Understandable, but mechanical consistency doesn't translate to... er, implementation? consistency in a game like Pathfinder
Like, I could build a 6th level fighter 2 ways, one of which hits really hard, the other never hits
 
execution consistency?
 
Yes, that's probably closer to what I mean
An optimized 11th level wizard, and a poorly built wizard 5 / barbarian 6, are both CR 10 by definition
 
10:02 PM
Consistency and sameness aren't the same.
 
CR in 3.X has never been a particularly good measure of anything though
I only ever used it as a very rough gauge of power level
 
4e is extremely consistent in how it deals with character mechanics; that's not the same as using the same mechanics for all characters.
 
My point is, if all that really matters are the numbers and effects the players interact with, then a blackbox approach should be valid, in general
 
@MikeQ See: Dungeon World.
 
@MikeQ it's definitely a valid approach and I'm not trying to argue that anyone is doing it wrong
my problems with the mechanics of RPGs are my own
 
10:07 PM
@Carcer I should also mention that my objective isn't to destroy the PCs. If I was that sort of antagonistic DM, then yes, handwaving enemy stats would be understandably unfair.
 
@MikeQ Yeah, things are dramatically different when the rules are being treated as a neutral arbiter in a conflict between participants at the table.
 
Anyway, my current concerns are less about how to DM the combats, and more about how to DM the story. Things have been admittedly kinda railroady until recently, and I'm trying to find a way to give the players the steering wheel, while having enough content ready for them.
 
(Of course, that's usually a polite fiction; the rules aren't neutral either.)
 
Hey all!
 
@MikeQ That's where questions about "what role does this NPC play" helped me a lot, really, by breaking down the distinction between combat mode and story mode.
@JackStout [wave]
 
10:15 PM
@BESW I've tried to look back to figure out, plotwise, what would naturally happen next, and I keep drawing blanks
 
I wanted to post a question about whether multiplication and division are used enough in games to warrant implementation in a die roller. Further, I'm not sure how division of odd numbers is handled in any game that might use it. (Floor and ceiling functions are my presumption but may not reflect actual game rules.) It seems too open a question to post.
 
@JackStout Warrant by whom? And for what systems?
 
@MikeQ The roller is intended for general use across multiple games. By warrant I mean are there enough players in need of division to justify the time spent writing code to make it work.
It seems like DnD 4E used damage division, which was floored, but I may be thinking of something else.
 
@JackStout Some of the major game systems have things like "half damage" and "2x criticals."
I think BRP has a thing where if you're using a skill in a way that's just barely justified, you treat it as half its normal rank.
 
@BESW It seems likely that none of these systems are dealing with non-integers, so would it be enough to make explicit divide-floor and divide-ceiling functions?
I'm trying to avoid users having to guess what the arithmetic engine is doing with their input.
 
10:23 PM
@JackStout That's one way to do it. Alternatively, if you're making some sort of app, you could have a Settings menu where the user can specify whether to round up or down by default
 
@MikeQ That's a good idea.
I guess that leads to the question of whether modulo is used. I'm guessing, No.
 
Fate of Agaptus has a thing where you need to track if one side has a score that's 4 times more than the other side's score.
 
@BESW So, that's a conditional with an arithmetic expression. That's probably out of scope for this version, but I can make a note of that for later.
 
It may help to define your intended audience and then address their needs. Pick a set of game systems that you're familiar with, make your app capable of representing those dice mechanics. There are a lot of systems out there and I don't know if it's feasible to make a universal tool for all of them.
 
And then there's Cthulhutech, which has dice expressions fit to drive men mad (appropriately enough).
 
10:28 PM
@BESW just how bad is it? :o
 
@MikeQ For me that's DnD 5E and Fate, but all the people I usually talk to are travelling. I'm trying to get ahead before they return.
 
@Shalvenay One step in the resolution of an action is to choose whether your dice pool will use the highest single roll, OR the sum of the highest set of multiples, OR the sum of the largest straight.
 
I've been asked to include One Roll Engine, as well
@BESW Oof!
Thanks peeps! You always super helpful.
 
Glad we can help! Let us know how it goes, please.
(I have never encountered anyone who actually plays Cthulhutech outside of "I am going to review this game if it kills me.")
 
user15026
@BESW That soudns like so much work
 
10:47 PM
30003 questions! We're at palindrome levels!
 
 
hehehe
here just in time for the good stuff it seems
 
@Ash And if you fail, it's boring.
 
user15026
@GreySage niiiiiiiice
 
user15026
@BESW :(
 
10:55 PM
Cthulhutech is one of those ridiculously overengineered games that disappeared up its own ruleset and never noticed that it stopped being fun to play.
It's got a few brilliant concepts that are then smothered with exception clauses and fiddly bits which add nothing.
 
oh eww what?
 
I choked on my drink at "up its own ruleset"
 
@BESW What sizes do these pools tend to be? 'Cause while I'm not sure I'd like to play that, it's a hella-interesting math problem.
 
user15026
@MikeQ same :)
 
Let's see.... base + dice... your base looks like it's usually between 5 and 7, and your dice are between 1 and 5.
So the pool is usually between 5 and 12 before extra bonuses.
And your target numbers are between 8 and 32.
The dice are d10s.
Also? Cthulhutech makes things harder by using unnecessary vocabulary.
"Base + dice" means "attribute rank + skill level."
And when they talk about attributes and skills, they use those terms. But when it's a dice roll suddenly those are base and dice.
 
11:12 PM
Grr....
 
Hi.
 
[wave]
 
user15026
@BESW whyyyyy, it's like they're going for maximum confusificiation
 
I know, right.
The setting premise is kinda cool, though--in the future, human society has merged technology and magic and begun exploring the stars.... but the nature of magic means the stars are exploring them back home too.
 
@BESW wat?
 
user15026
11:27 PM
@BESW I am curious about this
 
user15026
but not enough to want to touch those strange complicated rules
 
lol
 
CthulhuTech is a science-fiction and horror roleplaying game created by Wildfire LLC and published by Sandstorm that combines elements of the Cthulhu Mythos with anime-style mecha, horror, magic and futuristic action. The setting is Earth in the year 2085 during a worldwide conflict known as the Aeon War, (from the Necronomicon quote: "And with strange aeons even death may die") wherein the planet has been invaded twice: once by a black-skinned manufactured alien race known as the Nazzadi who are derived from humans and who join forces with them, and then a second time by the Mi-Go, an advanced...
 
@Sava Oh hi--welcome =)
 
Thanks @nitsua60
 
11:30 PM
@BESW I feel like one of the setting premises of this room is "BESW tells us about some system we've never tried and has a bunch of horrible things, but extracts the one usable nugget from it that we all can learn from."
7
 
The noise made by the notification scared me, I thought something had broken...
 
@Sava Don't worry--you'll get used to it soon. And if you want you can turn it off.
 
Like a guitar cord breaking... There should be a warning...
Yeah, I just did. Got a game on my second screen, I was like 'wait, this is not a normal sound for the game...'
 
@Sava One time in college I woke in a split second and jumped off a top bunk before I realized what had woken me: the sound of splintering wood. Between that year's roommate and me there were five string instruments out on stands/hangers... =(
 
Yikes, I can understand the adrenaline spiking up.
 
11:34 PM
In other news, it appears the school's RPG club has started calling it "vegan club." (For years there's been a tradition of referring to the club duplicitously: "movie night," "LAN party," "math extra help," &c.)
I overheard one GM calling a missing player tonight: "are you coming to Vegan Club? Mr. [redacted] brought pizza!"
 
I've had some very nice vegan pizza.
 
I find Vegan Club less believable than the previous names. :p
 
@BESW I doubt these ones would fit the bill =)
 
@nitsua60 Prooobably not.
 
But I find it satisfies a strange conservation law in my life: contrast this club's false description with my spouse eating no meat/dairy/other animal products but claiming they're not a vegan.
 
11:38 PM
'Movie night' depicts almost perfectly what one of my players must think my games are, except we play in the afternoons.
 
How so?
 
@BESW is that all vegetable and without cheese on it?
 
@trogdor Yup.
 
He doesn't do anything except eating the snacks and disrupt the sessions with unrelated OOC chats
 
I think Ive had one ever of those
it was,... ok?
 
11:40 PM
Really good no-cheese pizzas tend to not use the US customary red sauce. Pesto is my preference.
 
Pesto pizza... drools
 
I think it had pesto in it
 
@Sava That sounds a little like 70% of this club =)
 
@nitsua60 Well, I wouldn't mind if he was just sitting there being silent, but his constant disruptions are really getting annoying to me and many players. Especially since he will talk no matter what, interrupting players and GM alike.
 
But have you ever had vegan, gluten-free, zero-fat, zero-carb pizza? a.k.a. water
 
11:43 PM
I've talked about it to him, if he doesn't changes his behavior soon, there will be one less security officer on the ship.
@MikeQ So... the pizza was filled with... nothing?
 
@Sava It was filled with hydrogen and about half as much oxygen
 
@Sava Mind if I ask how they feel sessions are going? Good fun? Boring? Thought everything was fine? Only "playing" to be with their friends?
@MikeQ (by count or by mass?)
 
@MikeQ Not very tasty nor nourishing I'd say.
@nitsua60 They're happy: they get out of home to spend time with friends!
 
@nitsua60 by credit score
 
@doppelspooker I would probably lay it at the feet of Zeb Cook, just off the top of my head. (I.e. the strict/comprehensive approach to 2e more than the "play your game" approach of 1e. (Before UA, that is.))
 
02:00 - 20:0020:00 - 00:00

« first day (2934 days earlier)      last day (2015 days later) »