« first day (958 days earlier)      last day (4004 days later) » 

12:09 AM
BEWSpy Birthday @BESW !!!
@BESW This sounds familiar...
 
1:13 AM
Hmm is it BESW's Birthday? well then. I wish thee a happy birthday at the cost of my own experience points.(Poor joke I know.)
 
 
3 hours later…
4:04 AM
@Zachiel Yes, it should.
@BrianBallsun-Stanton, @ObliviousSage, @Cat, @SamuelRussell, @Zachiel, @Novian, Thank you.
 
4:31 AM
happy birthday, @BESW :)
 
@LitheOhm Thanks!
What did you want to talk about? I've got a little bit of time.
 
how do you challenge/reward critical thinking in PCs?
 
Define critical thinking, or give an example of the kind of behavior you'd like to see.
 
erm.. Less gut instinct and far more reasoning/analysis
 
In what system?
 
4:34 AM
don't have it worked much further from that, I know crit think is kind of vague
3.5 initially but soon I plan on hitting Ars Magica 4th
 
And in what context? Combat? Or are you imagining that this involves avoiding combat?
 
outside of combat.
I'm not smarter than each of my players. I'm not sure how to outwit them all collectively.
 
Then good luck in D&D. It's an uphill struggle against the mechanics. I spent eightish years in 3.5 trying to encourage non-combat solutions.
 
k
heh
have you tried Ars Magica yet?
 
I'm not familiar with AM except what I've heard in chat here.
But let me think about this, and I'll try to come up with some General Principles.
(It's something I've worked on a lot, but I've had really good players who are willing to meet me halfway on it.)
 
4:38 AM
kk
:)
I will too. I took a class last year on critical thinking
then realized today that I had no decent way of bringing it into RPGs/practicing. Then I got lost in trying to define it and it all went downhill from there
I hope your day of celebrating your existence has gone well!
 
Nothing unusual yet. [grin] Going out for dinner, I expect.
 
:D
 
4:59 AM
@LitheOhm yes :)
@LitheOhm I give immediate and tangible bennies for activity I like.
 
5:18 AM
@BESW, happy birthday :)
 
Thanks!
 
5:35 AM
@BrianBallsun-Stanton my project for sale just became system-agnostic instead of 3.5 as of last night. AM4=Creative Commons License=one can publish adventures for the system?
proper credit, etc.
 
@LitheOhm hurr?
say again?
 
3.5 has the OGL, different than Creative Commons. I can publish adventures (a la Pathfinder) as long as proper credit is given. I haven't worked with Creative Commons License before - it looks even more open than the one I read on WotC
 
linky to which CC they use?
 
by-nc-sa?
specifically?
 
5:37 AM
 
nc's going to hurt you
 
k
nc is?
 
non-commercial is ... well, non-commerical
you have to get permission
I didn't know that was core ArM4 though
 
oh, right
damn
 
are you sure ArM4 is by-sa-nc?
 
5:38 AM
well, open content adventure for that one lol.
 
also, what aspects of ArM4 are you reproducing?
 
I thought this was where I downloaded the one
 
haven't gotten into it yet - until recently the setting I was working on was D&D exclusively
that looks familiar
 
okay. So, this is "e-mail the publisher" territory
 
5:39 AM
got it
 
I mean, to a large dgree, there's very little of the core stuff you need to reproduce
and I doubt created characters and stats are copyrighted
 
That PDF is massive, I'm guessing the rules are thus more comprehensive than one might require for a single adventure?
 
okay, wait
 
k
 
I'm so confused, even moreso
is it your intention to use the ArM4 system in excerpt for this?
or to say "go read X book"
 
5:42 AM
am sorry. Am scatterbrained
It is my intention to publish (open or commercial, depending on the system) adventures for varying systems. Each set in the same system-agnostic setting I'm working on.
 
...I'd also point out that publishing adventures for a previous version of a system is not ideal
 
... be careful for Ars Magica... cause quite a lot of stuff is baked into the setting
 
true @magician
 
It is a free version
 
5:43 AM
I picked it because it was available for download. I couldn't find 5 for free
 
but it's a question of your audience
like the spells are Aristotelian.
it breaks if you... use Real Physics.
 
so far my site has a low following for RPGs. My project is to attempt to initiate people into games so the stats will improve
k
 
cool. Will be here a while yet
 
The thing about Ars is, even if you discard Aristotelian nonsense, it is at heart simulationist. And the world is actually derived from the rules in many ways: mages live a certain way because that's how it works out. Unlike, say, D&D, where application and extrapolation of rules leads to total setting collapse. Therefore, Ars is a poor fit for system agnostic settings, as it affects the setting.
 
5:46 AM
I hadn't realized that
 
It's a meta-derived setting? That... is amusing.
 
They've had 5 editions to iron it out, I'm sure it was a process.
 
Of course, D&D is also a meta-derived setting until it becomes inconvenient, at which point meta is told to go sit in the corner and think about what it's done.
2
 
lol. On that, I found some Eberron character sheets in the storage room. I really doubt my grandparents were into that - means one of my uncles or aunt plays. I will smell them out.
 
Cool.
 
5:49 AM
Definitely :)
so AM = not a great fit
 
But the end results is the Code of Hermes, which all (sanctioned) magi abide by, that tells them what they should and shouldn't do. Without rules like "you forfeit your immunity if you wander into other magi's santcum", you can't have magi living together.
 
k
I am still very tentative as far as what systems to include. But I do have a copy of AM4
 
What's Burning Wheel published under?
 
looks like they go through distributors. I didn't see any downloadable content yet
oh, web store
I suck at this game. Found nada
 
@LitheOhm well, it is a good fit, but... if you write for it.
 
6:00 AM
@LitheOhm The fundamental principle of Encouraging Creative Non-Combat Thinking is to keep the non-creative combat solution from being easy.
 
Or take the ArM approach
All problems as conflict, fall into roughly 4 categories: I've researched a spell that solves this problem, I can fake a spell that solves this problem, I've got people to solve this problem, I run away.
 
k
 
In D&D, for example, combat is almost always easiest. It's right there: your characters are mechanically designed to have the most options and the greatest chance of success in combat. You spent the majority of character creation and leveling thinking about combat. Why wouldn't you turn to combat as the first answer to any problem?
 
5th option: someone will be coming by shortly to scrape me off the walls
 
It is in the strategic application of which spells to which problems as constrained by the environment as well as what resources to use that makes life interesting.
 
6:02 AM
@BESW true
 
@Magician yes. There is the "over my head" option.
@BESW Whereas in ArM, combat is almost an afterthought that most characters haven't bothered to stat on their sheets.
 
@BrianBallsun-Stanton more involved mechanics than D&D3.5, it seems
 
@LitheOhm different focus.
 
k
 
Ars Magica, unbelievably, is actually about... magic and the uses thereof.
 
6:02 AM
lol
 
Nooooo. Reeeally?
 
It's not about adventuring, for example, save as an excuse to use magic.
 
@BrianBallsun-Stanton To be fair, I do believe some people play Flambeau slay-the-dragon games.
 
Well, here's the thing,that's actually kind of difficult to grasp.
@Magician well, yes. But they're silly.
I just find it hard to imagine an interesting slay-the-dragon game
 
@BrianBallsun-Stanton I found this lovely kettle that perfectly matches your black pot. Would you like it?
 
6:04 AM
@BESW oh yes please! I am quite quite mad!
As a philosopher-gm (not to be confused with philosopher-king) my position can only be defined as... well... weird.
It is why I just, quite literally, ILLed a rare volume of pretty damn modern lore about the history of explosions to cover an edge case that may or may not come up in game.
 
when writing for ArM, the setting is important to the system. I cannot simply be loose with my setting and have adventures from different systems coexist? ie. d20 Modern, 3.5, PF, CoC...
 
@LitheOhm it depends. If you're writing for Ars Magica, write the adventure, but not the setting
 
k. I want to keep each piece faithful to the one setting. Is it very incompatible?
 
So instead of going "here's this awesome world" go "here are these people. They're interesting. You may want to refluff their races if they're into that sort of thing."
@LitheOhm absolutely.
 
k
 
6:07 AM
I mean, there's awalys "faerie adventure time" or "magic realm adventure time"
but.... the power levels of Ars are so very different
is your adventure on a timer?
Cause if it's not, and the magi get to a bit where they can take a breather, that breather is likely to be 3-6 months.
 
The project? Or the adventures themselves?
ah
 
Cause you just can't get good work done more quickly.
 
I didn't have it set down so yeah, it could easily be
 
And they'll come back with spells of adventure solving, based on how well they've understood the problem.
whereas if it's on a timer, magi rock up, poke around, go "notit!" and run away.
 
Sherlock Maerlyn meets tabletop RPGs?
 
6:09 AM
(and/or it fits one of their solution profiles...)
@LitheOhm ?
 
reasoning, magic as opposed to sword-swinging
 
sorry, not following
Magi do not operate on normal adventuring parameters.
 
not with it tonight, I apologize.
 
They cheat
Given a dungeon... well, Oy, @Magician how would Calvin and Leo "solve" a dungeon, respectively.
Given your bog standard D&D dungeon?
Calvin is his first campaign's PC. Leo is his second.
 
does antimagic/dead magic even exist in ArM?
 
6:11 AM
@LitheOhm Oh sure. It's called The Divine.
(well, and the infernal)
 
@BrianBallsun-Stanton Calvin's solution is... apply gremlins to the problem until the problem is gremlins. That is a solved problem.
 
Magi, quite rightly take one look at it, and go "nope"
 
lol
k
 
"gremlin" = pseudo-sentient faerie construct that exists to elicit emotions. And incidentally do what it's made for. He had 3 favourites: stone gremlins who could... lift stuff. (end of list). Mind-gremlins, to turn one of your memories sentient and have a chat with it... and fire-gremlins, in case you didn't need that forest.
 
@LitheOhm The problem with the fundamental principle as I've presented it is that it quickly leads to Mean GM Syndrome.
 
6:13 AM
@BESW railroad/"only one solution"?
 
The trick is to turn it on its head: instead of making the behavior you want to discourage HARDER, identify the behavior you want to encourage and make that EASIER or MORE INTERESTING.
2
 
@LitheOhm From my perspective it's "Oh look, that creature is just outside the difficulty that you've carefully prepared your creature-slaying spell for"
 
I believe ArM will take much more reading then - and I'll read it in light of learning it on it's own, instead of incorporating it into my current project
 
@LitheOhm yes. It's a delightful game. But fiddly.
I need to make sure not to overuse this "just outside your difficulty" thingo
 
kk
@BESW I believe I see
 
6:15 AM
A combat example: if the obvious solution to "a ranged caster is killing us" is "engage the ranged caster in melee," and you want to encourage more creative thinking, the answer is not to give the ranged caster a squad of melee brutes to punish anyone who goes near him.
That's just "making the obvious answer more interesting."
 
dunk tank or something like that
 
Instead, provide a cliff to shove him off, boulders to roll at him, a ritual to cut off his magic, or other interesting alternatives.
 
my players have tended to be incredibly combat minded. Their characters, and their playstyles, are built to solve everything with sneak attack. If it doesn't succumb in three turns, run.
 
That sounds like a good solid D&D mentality enforced by the system you've chosen to play in.
 
@LitheOhm yeah, weheras I make a horrible PC. I refuse to meet any problem from the front.
 
6:17 AM
There's nothing wrong with it.
 
yeah, adaptation and all that.
 
What's wrong is if you're trying to get them to act un-D&D-like in a D&D environment.
 
I recently stumbled upon the idea that I might be trying to put screws into a wall with a hammer.
 
That's like saying "We're going to play dodgeball, but throw the balls softly and don't try to hit anyone."
3
 
haha
 
6:18 AM
Yeah.
Quite frankly, meaning no disrespect and with the sincerest empathy because I've been there, you're Doing It Wrong.
 
@BrianBallsun-Stanton Leonardo would gradually mindcontrol the sentient occupants to first learn everything about them, then resolve them. Subverting the pretty ones is also an option. In case of non-sentient threat, it is either labwork, or just let others handle it because it's a stupid problem.
 
Fair enough @besw
 
It can work if your party is interested in making it work. Mine was.
 
@Magician Yep! And that's why Ars Magica is its own system.
 
But right now they're playing D&D and you're trying to get them to play something else while still actually playing D&D.
 
6:19 AM
is ArM more PC-driven, then? Plotwise?
 
@LitheOhm um.... It... depends on your social contract, really
And how warped your GM is.
 
@LitheOhm You might need to rephrase that. D&D is the ultimate PC-driven game: everything which happens in a D&D game is based on the PCs' desire for loot and XP.
 
There's such a delightful lab research system that... well, as an academic... I love using it.
It can be PC driven, or it can be Threat of the year driven..
 
k
 
but the threats are ... .....
Any threat the PCs can see, they can solve.
It's a question of making the environments interesting enough that seeing takes some effort.
 
6:22 AM
k
 
So you do that through social constraints (opponent is a magi, options are far more limited), environment constraints (you really don't want to cast in the middle of town) and political constraints.
But if the threat and the magi are in the middle of nowhere, and the threat rocks up... the magi... resolve it.
Mainly by playing "notit!"
 
heh. k
 
And the magi that loses the not-it game grumbles a bit and exposes him/herself to the most minimal danger possible.
Cause my gods does getting hurt suck.
like "kiss this season/year of labwork goodbye" suck.
So magi don't really do the "risk" thing. They've got people for that.
also, if you think 3.5 rocket tag is bad, it's not even close to Ars Magica's
 
morning all
 
it's a delightful system/setting, but very... firm in itself.
It's not one of these new indies on the block that needs to compete with the others, it's just off in its own world doing its own thing.
 
6:28 AM
@BrianBallsunStanton I'm still mulling over that MouseGuard research challenge
 
I like that. I don't like that I might not be able to make it mesh with the setting as it's influenced by other systems.
 
@Pureferret ?
@LitheOhm well, describe your setting
 
Also thoughts on SR4?
 
start with basic philosophical approaches :)
@Pureferret I'm so confused
 
@BrianBallsun-Stanton starting small. Less than 10k square miles. Honestly I'm aiming for bringing beginners in - not for appealing to vets
 
6:30 AM
On how to replicate researching something in game as a conflict
 
mountains, rivers, one major port city, a few smaller towns
civilization divided by specialty. Mages in either of these two towns, skill monkeys in this one, combat pros in this one, etc.
 
@LitheOhm okay. But wrong abstraction
So basically city and towns, isolated, middle of nowhere.
 
This was last discussed between us, oh lets say....six eons ago?
 
okay...
@Pureferret yeah. me context switch good
 
And you May have an extant question about it
 
6:31 AM
six deities, erm...what else?
 
Me English good too
 
it's not done yet
 
okay. What physics does it run on?
 
normal.
 
okay. What kind of challenges are there?
 
6:33 AM
Can someone fill me in? I heard the words physics and now Im intrigued
 
@Pureferret It's me being philosophical, we're discussing if system-agnostic can run to Ars Magica.
cause yeah, if you've got a 10 square km footprint, and style it as "lost city"... it's pretty easy to just plop it into game
of course, providing creatures statted for ArM is... interesting
but that's a challenge of all system-agnostic stuffs
and basically is a fill in the blanks with list of creatures at the front
 
Political, archealogical, supernatural, Abyss, MacGuffin of some sort
 
@LitheOhm Abyss... is a problem.
 
yeah. I haven't made anything system-agnostic before, trying to keep the details broad
 
Most magi, quite rightly, are allergic to Hell.
 
6:35 AM
k
extraterrestrial?
 
@LitheOhm like, I can see how to refluff it into Ars...
@LitheOhm beyond the sphere of fire? Pish. Tosh. :)
 
I thought that 'System-Agnostic' would necessarily fit in any system, lest it fall short of its namesake
 
@Pureferret hard to do in practice :)
you basically have to give... plot and personalities... but not much else.
And setting means that the number of systems able to support it drops to those that will sleep with just about any setting, the sluts. :)
 
I was just going to give personalities/rough archetypes (this person is an expert spearman, etc.), cities, trade
 
in practice? i thought you were a philosopher ?
 
6:37 AM
@Pureferret please use reply arrow.
 
lol
yep, I'm after the sluts
 
@LitheOhm Right, well, Ars-Magica at least wants a kiss goodbye in the morning. :)
 
anything I can try and convince newbies to pick up and try
haha @BrianBallsun-Stanton
 
if they're all faithful to the same setting, or as faithful as they can be, then I could demonstrate the differences among settings.
 
6:38 AM
@LitheOhm yes. Or, do a plots + personalities + location details thing
 
"D&D 3.5 has Bob as a rogue. In d20 Modern, we changed him into a gunslinger instead because X"
 
And the first pages are a dramatis personae, where gms drop... characters/monsters/creatures in
"Lillith is a lovely girl of moderate power who plays games of mainly intrigue and assassination. She may have also made a deal with the devil for X"
 
aye
 
But that doesn't fit what you want to do
 
it doesn't?
 
6:40 AM
no, you want to provide setting with that
system-agnostic doesn't presume setting, which is why you drop it in on an extant setting.
There are arguments for and against, but I'd love plot + personality + fiddly bits for my games
 
noted, heh. So making the setting itself system-independent is uncommon?
 
@LitheOhm it's extremely hard to do
too many points of correspondance
 
starting to see that
 
the more details you have, the less flexibility
 
might have to narrow the scope, compatible with games X Y Z or something.
yeah
 
6:42 AM
well, why bother?
 
@BrianBallsun-Stanton ...It's funny how bad D&D is at handling "power granted by X for Y", a notorious fantasy cliche.
 
If you're looking for a newbie game, drop it in minimus or something and move on
@Magician yes. It really really is.
Oh, you made a deal with the devli? Then go invest a couple tens of thousands in XP to reflect that one choice that didn't... give you... any XP.
 
Not a newbie game, but games to bring newbies into. Plural. I'd like the setting to support whichever one people wanted to branch into
@Magician agreed
 
@LitheOhm well, the way to do that is to do a planar tour.
 
@BrianBallsunStanton Apologies but Im on my phone onbth train on the way to work so no reply arrows for me
 
6:44 AM
"now stopping off at D&D 3.5, please pull your 3.5 character sheets out of your pocket"
 
@BrianBallsun-Stanton and if it does give you something, warlocks of the world will just look at you and cry.
 
@Pureferret no worries. :)
 
Ahh I see
 
@Magician yes. And then PCs will rush down the door of whatever specific subsystem you just published...
Figure out the faustian loopholes, and go nomnomnompower
 
pun-pun-pun-power
 
6:45 AM
the multi-system setting-faithfulness might not be feasible on the big scale; However, I could still pull in characters from elsewhere and convey what I was trying to get across
 
@LitheOhm Well, having an adventure that's a grand tour of systems could be fascinating
 
it's the telos, more or less.
I got a gig as a role-playing games editor :) I want to outshine the previous editors, and kick some ass.
 
I reckon it's not just about a system-agnostic setting. You want to combine it with setting-agnostic games. Which means D&D and Ars are right out.
 
I've played some setting-agnostic D&D
 
@Magician but hey, have fun with GURPS and Hero and unisystem and fate and cortex...
 
6:48 AM
been working with my own settings for a long while, here and there
I love GURPS, the few times I got to play it
 
@BrianBallsun-Stanton ...the last two, maybe :P
 
@Magician yes
@LitheOhm setting agnostic != self-made setting
 
@LitheOhm Except its not. Sure, it can handle Eberron and Forgotten Realms and the like, but it carries a metric shitton of assumptions, and largely undocumented ones at that. It's another matter entirely that some of those assumptions become deeply ingrained in the roleplayers' psyche.
 
played in Faerun and didn't last long
 
@Magician I.e. Players shalt be murderhobos
and any player that tries to spurn the path, shall be mocked as a Bard.
 
6:51 AM
much of the fun I've gotten from 3.5 has been making my own settings. I said to hell with Hextor and the like a while ago
 
@LitheOhm did you change the spells? The way swords work?
 
The named ones?
swords work..?
 
there's surface-setting and there's setting-philosophy
 
k
 
surface setting is easy to change. It's the fluff on top of the waves of mechanics.
There's lots of great drama there, but there are few baked in... ontologies.
A demon god is a demon god is a demon god.
 
6:53 AM
k
 
At a completely different level is the mecahnical-fundamental influences on the narrative world, like: "some people have PC levels"
 
isn't that system?
 
no, because it defines the shape of your world. And if it doesn't then it's very hard to have a world with any substance behind it. I.e. the typical PCs. versus town guards.
the power-relationship in D&D is... astonishing
but that shapes the world.
not the names of things, but the shape of the things under the names
I.e. if you need to have Traditional Kingdoms, then you can't have the ability to have adventurers accidentally lay siege to a castle.
Or if they can, you need to somehow pretend like they can't. And the more you pretend... the more odd edge cases pop up, like "why isn't that 20th level druid saving the world instead of us schulbs"
or "wait, the king is epic. Why does he care about us?"
because the power relationships of the world matter, because they expose the mechanical affordances that the players, in the end, manipulate.
 
k
hadn't thought of it in a power relationship sense. You have a good point.
 
and that's why MMOs feel so campy.
Because they have very little exposed "surface" to actually play with.
and bad world-ports feel the same way. There are lots of invisible walls as the game goes "wait, you're not supposed to play with x"
 
6:59 AM
yeah
 
whereas in my games of Ars, the players can play with anything
and, if necessary, the manipulations possible can be derived from first-principles.
 
as it should be in tabletop games. If I want invisible walls I'll play Spyro the Dragon
 
this of course, has its own problems, as your players have to be comfortable with a half-hour discussion on the nature of a thing.
 

« first day (958 days earlier)      last day (4004 days later) »