Scion has a couple of trippy and unwieldy mechanics involving Fate. Everytime you spend Legend points, the GM is supposed to roll to see if you get fatebound. The mechanics are convoluted. The difficulty number changes over the course of the scene, and there's a lot to track.
Worse, despite complicated rules, much is left to GM fiat. If there's 2 or more mortal NPCs in the room the GM chooses whether to apply those 6 successes as one strength 6 bond or 2 strength 3 bonds, or some other combination, which arbitrarily changes the power level. And then the GM chooses the exact fatebound role they pick up, and those can very quite a bit in terms of story potential and power. If the GM wants to saddle you with a nemesis or sidekick, they can suck your willpower and legend points away, and if they want to reward you with a lover who boosts all your rolls, they can do that to, so it's very subjective.
As a result, I've largely ignored the letter of the rules, and just winged it. For a while, that worked great. I mean, why slow everything down with another dozen+ dierolls per combat if in the end I'm just going to have to make the critical decision myself anyway? I know I'm not alone in this, most of the best STs on the Scion Forum have admitted to eyeballing it too.
But I now expect trouble with the way improvised Fatebonds interact with the Mortal Reverence system, especially now that the PCs are high enough Legend that they have actual worshipers. The mortal reverence system pretty much requires solid fatebond numbers, not mutable improvisation. Plus, it's a little unclear. If the bonuses stack, then they bump up to huge numbers (like seriously +1000 dice would be pretty easy to attain). If they don't stack, then the system's not worth the hassle, as +3 dice is barely noticable at God level.
So I came up with an idea of how to solve this. If you're in my Scion Campaign, please don't read any further. Seriously, this will only work if the PCs don't know about it before hand, and I think you'll find it to be a lot of fun. It'll benefit your characters, so just trust me and let it happen. To facilitate that, I'll put the rest of this in as a comment, so you have to intentionally click on it to read it.
Thursday, May 29, 2008
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
Fungeon - The Blank White Cards of Hack & Slash Dungeon Romps
I just discovered Fungeon today*. It's a GM-less hack and slash dungeon romp, where the players build the dungeon as they explore.
I'd done something similar (but dreadfully more complex) several years back, which we lovingly called Forge Knight Quest (as it used parts from Dwarven Forge dungeon tiles, the Mage Knight miniatures game, and Warhammer Quest). We played that till till someone broke their nose.** Eventually, it sprouted Forge Knight Quest Dark, which allowed "programmable" monster behavior inspired by Simulator Bots in the Nintendo 64 game Perfect Dark. Basically, it just liberally mixed bits of all the above games in an attempt to make a semi-random GM-less dungeon-romp minis game. We'd also played a bit of D&D minis, and a game that blended all the WotC minis systems (D&D, StarWars and even Axis & Allies using the Godzilla-ish conversion rules they'd put up at wizards.com), plus a bit of Heroscape thrown in for good measure. What can I say? I like minis, but I also like cooperative games.
Fungeon is kinda like that, except it's more like an RPG, not minis-based, and is a lot more rules-light. So it's got a bit in common with the Rune RPG, too, only a lot lighter. It's also kinda reminiscent of Blank White Cards, since you're making a joint map and encounters on paper (and on the fly). Strikes me as a lot of fun, and I might give it a shot after we've moved into the new apartment.
*: When a forumite talked (joked?) about converting Scion to Fungeon's mechanics - a very odd concept. He wrote it straight-faced with no apparent irony, but what a strange idea.
**: I mean that literally. In the midst of the game, she realized she'd left something out in the car, so she went downstairs to get it. Walking back to the elevator she fell and broke her nose. She went to the hospital, and for some reason we never played the game again. It'd been a regular weekly game for a couple months before that. Go fig.
I'd done something similar (but dreadfully more complex) several years back, which we lovingly called Forge Knight Quest (as it used parts from Dwarven Forge dungeon tiles, the Mage Knight miniatures game, and Warhammer Quest). We played that till till someone broke their nose.** Eventually, it sprouted Forge Knight Quest Dark, which allowed "programmable" monster behavior inspired by Simulator Bots in the Nintendo 64 game Perfect Dark. Basically, it just liberally mixed bits of all the above games in an attempt to make a semi-random GM-less dungeon-romp minis game. We'd also played a bit of D&D minis, and a game that blended all the WotC minis systems (D&D, StarWars and even Axis & Allies using the Godzilla-ish conversion rules they'd put up at wizards.com), plus a bit of Heroscape thrown in for good measure. What can I say? I like minis, but I also like cooperative games.Fungeon is kinda like that, except it's more like an RPG, not minis-based, and is a lot more rules-light. So it's got a bit in common with the Rune RPG, too, only a lot lighter. It's also kinda reminiscent of Blank White Cards, since you're making a joint map and encounters on paper (and on the fly). Strikes me as a lot of fun, and I might give it a shot after we've moved into the new apartment.
*: When a forumite talked (joked?) about converting Scion to Fungeon's mechanics - a very odd concept. He wrote it straight-faced with no apparent irony, but what a strange idea.
**: I mean that literally. In the midst of the game, she realized she'd left something out in the car, so she went downstairs to get it. Walking back to the elevator she fell and broke her nose. She went to the hospital, and for some reason we never played the game again. It'd been a regular weekly game for a couple months before that. Go fig.
Sunday, May 25, 2008
D&D and Scion
As stated last week, I'll be running a couple sessions of D&D the next few trips to Portland. I wanted to get myself up to speed on the 3.5 rules since I hadn't run in a while, so I checked out the Rules Compendium from my local library. (Great book, by the way. Too bad it came out so late in 3.5's life, as it's both really helpful and easy-to-use. Despite 4th being out any day now, I'm still tempted to buy a copy of the 3.5 Rules Compendium.)
Anyhow, in refamiliarizing myself with D&D, I've come to realize a new analogy to explain my frustration with certain mechanical aspects (namely DV and soak) of Scion.
Scion is like a D&D campaign with the following houserules:
Anyhow, in refamiliarizing myself with D&D, I've come to realize a new analogy to explain my frustration with certain mechanical aspects (namely DV and soak) of Scion.
Scion is like a D&D campaign with the following houserules:
- The calculation for AC is 12 + Dex Mod + Armor + Level.
- All characters and monsters have Damage Reduction at least equal to Hit Dice + Con Mod.
Friday, May 16, 2008
Nature vs Nurture in Scion
The core concept of Scion is strongly in the "Nature" camp - PCs are children of Gods, and that semi-divine nature blesses them with many powers and the potential for immortality.
However, much of the rest of the game flirts with the "Nurture" position, or at least doesn't give one much reason to put much stock in biology.
However, much of the rest of the game flirts with the "Nurture" position, or at least doesn't give one much reason to put much stock in biology.
- If another God adopts a Scion, it changes their favored abilities/epics/purviews. Hard to say whether that's "Nurture" or just "Nature can be changed".
- Divine Ichor doesn't necessarily have the same chromosomes and DNA as our mortal cells. Likely it doesn't, in fact, since bodies made of said ichor can shapeshift and turn immaterial and lift hundreds of tons and what not.
- The laws of Genetics came to be codified only because Gaia was locked away in Tarterus for a few thousand years. Now that she's free, the very concept of "Nature" becomes wild and unpredictable, and the laws of biology trend towards mutability and inconstancy.
- Not all Scions grow up to be Gods - within the setting, many don't even make it to Demigod, and it's largely assumed the PCs are amongst the first to achieve Godhood in the modern era.
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
A, B, and/or C
In my ideal world, I'd have 3 different RPG groups every week, or at least biweekly. (They need better names than what follows, but at the time of writting the following in an email to a friend, I didn't want to spend a bunch of time brainstorming names, so letters were good enough.
Getting to blow off some steam via slightly off-kilter D&D in Portland sounds like Group B Heaven.
Of course, nobody with a real life ever has the time for 3 gaming groups*, let alone the social dynamics of hanging in three circles. It almost has to be 3 different circles, too, as there's some danger if you have too much crossover between A and B. Either you end up taking B too seriously, or A gets disrupted by B's lighter/experimental influence. It seems there needs to be at least one player in each group that isn't in the other groups for it all to flow naturally without the streams ever getting crossed. Of course, some folks who do have (or make) the time for 2 or more groups just pick A or B (as fits their style) and focus on it to the exclusion of all else. I bet that's far more common than the A/B/C pattern I try to follow.
*: Then again, some would argue I don't have a real life.
- Group A would be a serious method-acting group, where the goal was to tell an ongoing narrative as artfully and entertainingly as possible.
- Group B would be a more freeform group, where we tried different things. Everyone would try to resist getting too attached to their characters, and in general take the game a little less seriously. That grants the freedom to experiment.
- Group C would be somebody else's campaign, so I could learn from sitting in a players chair, and seeing what did and didn't work for them.
Getting to blow off some steam via slightly off-kilter D&D in Portland sounds like Group B Heaven.
Of course, nobody with a real life ever has the time for 3 gaming groups*, let alone the social dynamics of hanging in three circles. It almost has to be 3 different circles, too, as there's some danger if you have too much crossover between A and B. Either you end up taking B too seriously, or A gets disrupted by B's lighter/experimental influence. It seems there needs to be at least one player in each group that isn't in the other groups for it all to flow naturally without the streams ever getting crossed. Of course, some folks who do have (or make) the time for 2 or more groups just pick A or B (as fits their style) and focus on it to the exclusion of all else. I bet that's far more common than the A/B/C pattern I try to follow.
*: Then again, some would argue I don't have a real life.
Scion Throwing Rules
Helpful stuff I wrote at the Scion Forums. I'm duplicating it here so when it inevitably comes up again, I can cut and paste.
IMHO, the furthest he can throw the baseball is 160 yards.
Here's how I arrived at that number:
A baseball is something just about any mortal can throw with one hand, so definitely this Scion can, too. That means it's normal range will be modified by his Epic Strength. Per page 126 of Hero, it's normal range is quadrupled.
But what is it's normal range? That's not clearly spelled out anywhere. We can compare it to thrown weapons, to get a place to start. All the thrown weapons have a range increment of 10 or 15 yards. I'd suggest going with 10, but that's really up to the GM.
But that 10 isn't it's maximum range. According to page 203 of Hero, even a mortal can throw it (or any 10-yard range weapon) up to 20 yards at +2 to difficulty, or 40 yards at +4 difficulty.
So the scion, with his Epic Strength, can throw the baseball 40 yards at normal difficulty, up to 80 yards at +2 difficulty, up to 160 yards at +4 difficulty.
Well, first we need to know if its a "normal throw" or a "feat of strength" throw. Demigod page 54 indicates he can the former category is things he could hold in one hand without his epic strength, the later category is things he needs his epic strength to hold.
He's got Str 4, Ath 2, so that totals to 6. We look up 6 on the chart on page 181 to see that this lets him lift 550 pounds, presumably using both hands. Sadly, no where do the rules exactly state how much one hand can hold. But since the manhole cover weighs around 1/3 his lift capacity, we can probably assume it's a one-hand item for him.
Since it's a one-hand item, we use the same math as a baseball. Therefore, "officially" it's the same 40/80/160 yards.
Ultimately though, it's the GMs call. I'd be tempted to trim it's range a bit, just 'cause it weighs more and really isn't designed for throwing. In fact, I'd give it a range of 5 yards, which he quadruples to 20 due to epic strength. He can toss it to 40 at +2 diff, or 80 at +4 difficulty.
________________________________________________
But, I'm not sure that's enough of an answer, so here's the extra credit. Let's talk about something he can't throw with one hand, something a bit bigger, like a motorcycle.
He can throw a motorcycle 8 yards.
Demigod says he can throw "as a feat of strength" anything he can lift if his Mundane Strength + Athletics total were 5 lower, or if his Epic Strength total were 1 lower. Most of the time, you can just forget the first part. The Epic is what's going to matter, unless the PC has 1 or 0 dots of Epic, or has just frankly tons of Arete: Athletics.
For example, by the Mundane system, he can throw (as a feat of strength) things of up to 40 pounds (since Str+Ath-5=1), but by the Epic system, he can throw things of up to 500 lbs (the amount of bonus that 1 dot of Epic strength adds to your lift total). Epic's just a heck of a lot better.
So, we decide he can throw the motorcycle. But how far?
The answer is on Demigod page 54, but the formula is never stated explicitly. From the example, we can conclude the formula is Mundane Strength + Athletics + Epic Strength Successes in yards.
In his case, that's 4+2+2=8
There's no range "increments" for feat of strength throwing. There's no penalty at up to 8 yards, and he just can't throw it further than 8 yards. (Unless he stunts. Stunt dice and other bonus dice add to the formula, so a 3-die stunt would let him throw a motorcycle 11 yards. There's still no range penalty for that.)
Scion Forum FAQ wrote:Here's a more specific question:
Q: How far can I throw things? Where are the throwing rules?
A: The throwing rules are most clearly stated in Demigod, page 54.
Other information relevant to throwing can be found in Hero, pages 126-127, page 181, and page 203.
PapillonV wrote:
So, a Scion has Strength 4, Epic Strength 2, and Athletics 2. He's throwing a baseball across a field. He doesn't have anything like Hurl to the Horizon yet.
Ignoring Str+Athletics rolls and the like, what's the base distance he can chuck it, and how's it calculated?
IMHO, the furthest he can throw the baseball is 160 yards.
Here's how I arrived at that number:
A baseball is something just about any mortal can throw with one hand, so definitely this Scion can, too. That means it's normal range will be modified by his Epic Strength. Per page 126 of Hero, it's normal range is quadrupled.
But what is it's normal range? That's not clearly spelled out anywhere. We can compare it to thrown weapons, to get a place to start. All the thrown weapons have a range increment of 10 or 15 yards. I'd suggest going with 10, but that's really up to the GM.
But that 10 isn't it's maximum range. According to page 203 of Hero, even a mortal can throw it (or any 10-yard range weapon) up to 20 yards at +2 to difficulty, or 40 yards at +4 difficulty.
So the scion, with his Epic Strength, can throw the baseball 40 yards at normal difficulty, up to 80 yards at +2 difficulty, up to 160 yards at +4 difficulty.
Quote:He probably throws the manhole cover about the same distance, but it's technically up to the GM. Here's what makes the area somewhat grey...
Say the same Scion then wants to throw the oft-cited manhole cover (he stole one on the way to the field just to practice). How's it calculated then?
Well, first we need to know if its a "normal throw" or a "feat of strength" throw. Demigod page 54 indicates he can the former category is things he could hold in one hand without his epic strength, the later category is things he needs his epic strength to hold.
He's got Str 4, Ath 2, so that totals to 6. We look up 6 on the chart on page 181 to see that this lets him lift 550 pounds, presumably using both hands. Sadly, no where do the rules exactly state how much one hand can hold. But since the manhole cover weighs around 1/3 his lift capacity, we can probably assume it's a one-hand item for him.
Since it's a one-hand item, we use the same math as a baseball. Therefore, "officially" it's the same 40/80/160 yards.
Ultimately though, it's the GMs call. I'd be tempted to trim it's range a bit, just 'cause it weighs more and really isn't designed for throwing. In fact, I'd give it a range of 5 yards, which he quadruples to 20 due to epic strength. He can toss it to 40 at +2 diff, or 80 at +4 difficulty.
________________________________________________
But, I'm not sure that's enough of an answer, so here's the extra credit. Let's talk about something he can't throw with one hand, something a bit bigger, like a motorcycle.
He can throw a motorcycle 8 yards.
Demigod says he can throw "as a feat of strength" anything he can lift if his Mundane Strength + Athletics total were 5 lower, or if his Epic Strength total were 1 lower. Most of the time, you can just forget the first part. The Epic is what's going to matter, unless the PC has 1 or 0 dots of Epic, or has just frankly tons of Arete: Athletics.
For example, by the Mundane system, he can throw (as a feat of strength) things of up to 40 pounds (since Str+Ath-5=1), but by the Epic system, he can throw things of up to 500 lbs (the amount of bonus that 1 dot of Epic strength adds to your lift total). Epic's just a heck of a lot better.
So, we decide he can throw the motorcycle. But how far?
The answer is on Demigod page 54, but the formula is never stated explicitly. From the example, we can conclude the formula is Mundane Strength + Athletics + Epic Strength Successes in yards.
In his case, that's 4+2+2=8
There's no range "increments" for feat of strength throwing. There's no penalty at up to 8 yards, and he just can't throw it further than 8 yards. (Unless he stunts. Stunt dice and other bonus dice add to the formula, so a 3-die stunt would let him throw a motorcycle 11 yards. There's still no range penalty for that.)
Composure, Resolve, Reflexes
(at the Scion Forums) kagetora0 wrote:
You'd keep Appearance and Perception, but still add Composure and Resolve.
For the 12th Stat, you could add "Reflexes". Reflexes is about reaction time, speed, and gross/full-body movement. Dexterity would remain the stat of precision and accuracy.
In this way, you'd break up attack pools and DV to be based upon two different stats. This would allow for more variety amongst PCs as well as making it easier for the GM to craft antagonists that were hard to hit or good at hitting, but not necessarily both. This could solve a lot of Scion's problems.
Of course, it would have other impact, and you'd need to make some other tangential rulings to support it:
I kinda like that. I think it would solve a lot of the systemic flaws of Scion. Unfortunately, it's too sweeping a change to implement to my campaign at this stage.
In my gaming group, we have decided to experiment with two things: using the nWoD stats (Basically, nixing Appearance and Perception, and adding Composure and Resolve, as social and mental 'resistance' stats) and then using those stats to make a social and mental "DV"Another option would be to go for a 12-stat system instead of 9-stat.
...
The main trouble we've run into is knacks. It's been a challenge to come up with a variety of knacks for Epic Resolve and Epic Composure; and equally a challenge to slide the old Appearance and Perception knacks in again.
You'd keep Appearance and Perception, but still add Composure and Resolve.
For the 12th Stat, you could add "Reflexes". Reflexes is about reaction time, speed, and gross/full-body movement. Dexterity would remain the stat of precision and accuracy.
In this way, you'd break up attack pools and DV to be based upon two different stats. This would allow for more variety amongst PCs as well as making it easier for the GM to craft antagonists that were hard to hit or good at hitting, but not necessarily both. This could solve a lot of Scion's problems.
Of course, it would have other impact, and you'd need to make some other tangential rulings to support it:
- At character creation, you'd get 10/8/5 (Or maybe even 11/8/6) points for Attributes.
- At template/upgrade you'd get 6/4/3
- Possibly raise the standard per-session XP award by 1 since your points have to go a little further to shore up all your weaknesses.
- You'd still need plenty more knacks for Composure and Resolve, plus a couple extra for Dexterity and Reflexes (assuming the original Dex knacks were now split between them)
- Numerous boons would need their dice pools altered to make the new stats worthwhile
- I'd be tempted to base starting Willpower off Highest Virtue + (Average of Composure and Resolve)
I kinda like that. I think it would solve a lot of the systemic flaws of Scion. Unfortunately, it's too sweeping a change to implement to my campaign at this stage.
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
D&D Repatriation
I'll be running D&D again soon. This isn't about 4th Ed excitement (in fact, I'll be running 3.5 so I don't have to learn a new system before the first session), it's about friends offering to cover most of my gas money to Portland once a month if I DM for them.
It's going to be a light-hearted (and somewhat nostalgic) game. It'll be the only campaign I've run in the past 5 years were Python quotes at the table were not only tolerated, but possibly even encouraged. I'm even going to start it with the old "approached by a wizard in tavern" intro, just to set the tone. My plan is for each session to be self-contained, a single short adventure, with the same characters but otherwise little in terms of ongoing plot. It's not really a campaign, it's an excuse to hang with friends once a month and sling some dice in the process.
Bet you never expected that, huh? A little outside my comfort zone. I'm nervous, since I didn't pick the game. Last time that happened, it didn't go so well. I'm hoping the completely casual nature will keep this from being another train-wreck. We're running 9th level characters, since my recollection is that the sweet spot of 3.5 mechanics is 8th to 13th level or so. That was pretty much my only bit of say in the process - 9th level characters, only using stuff from the corebooks so I don't have to read up on a whole bunch of other stuff. I plan to haul minis down there, and either a water-soluble battlemat or cardboard dungeon tiles. It'll be 80% improvised. The bits I'll work out in advance involve crazy dungeon tricks, good old school White Plume Mountain / Tomb Of Horrors stuff.
Wish me luck!
It's going to be a light-hearted (and somewhat nostalgic) game. It'll be the only campaign I've run in the past 5 years were Python quotes at the table were not only tolerated, but possibly even encouraged. I'm even going to start it with the old "approached by a wizard in tavern" intro, just to set the tone. My plan is for each session to be self-contained, a single short adventure, with the same characters but otherwise little in terms of ongoing plot. It's not really a campaign, it's an excuse to hang with friends once a month and sling some dice in the process.
Bet you never expected that, huh? A little outside my comfort zone. I'm nervous, since I didn't pick the game. Last time that happened, it didn't go so well. I'm hoping the completely casual nature will keep this from being another train-wreck. We're running 9th level characters, since my recollection is that the sweet spot of 3.5 mechanics is 8th to 13th level or so. That was pretty much my only bit of say in the process - 9th level characters, only using stuff from the corebooks so I don't have to read up on a whole bunch of other stuff. I plan to haul minis down there, and either a water-soluble battlemat or cardboard dungeon tiles. It'll be 80% improvised. The bits I'll work out in advance involve crazy dungeon tricks, good old school White Plume Mountain / Tomb Of Horrors stuff.
Wish me luck!
Thursday, May 8, 2008
The Magic Decision
In my inbox:
Here's the options I see before me:
Each year every DCI Judge needs to renew and actively judge events (based on level). Failure to do either can result in your judge membership expiring soonIt's been about 9 or 10 months since I last judged or played in a tournament. It's been 6 to 8 months since I last bought a Magic card. I haven't actually played Magic since I moved to Seattle (which is silly, considering that the HQ of judging and the game itself is like 20 minute drive away). I need to make a decision.
Here's the options I see before me:
- Dive back into it. Recommit to judging before my Level 2 expires. Find a place I want to play and/or judge, and go do some casual games from time to time. Start buying cards again so I can get up to speed on what the formats are like and how the rules have changed.
- Get out. Set up an ebay account and start selling all my cards. Score some money, and free up shelf space.
- Follow plan #2, then regret it later, and feel like an idiot.
Elegance and the Heart of RPGs
Got an email today from an old friend I hadn't talked to in ages. He recommended I look at Primetime Adventures and FATE (the later of which I'd read when a different friend recommended it).
In replying to him, I ran through an overview of RPGs, and it helped me to put recent developments of my tastes in gaming into words. Most of the following is quoted from our email exchange:
In general, the more simplistic the rules set, the better the game. Simple rules let you focus on the drama, the story, and the characters. Every moment spent thinking about rules just undermines that. For my tastes, RPGs are primarily an acting / storytelling medium, with just a touch of game involved to handle dramatic conflict. I suspect the trick is to simplify the heck out of the rules, boiling every action down to no more than 1 die roll, and a structure simple enough to never require looking anything up during the game.
But in a lot of ways, he's right. He's absolutely correct that video games can (and often do) a better job of immersing you in environment than RPGs - vids have picture and sound, which for all the attempts at GMing a good description, just blow RPGs out of the water 9 scenes out of 10.
It's certainly easier to find a good video game than a good GM.
And as far as tactical challenges, those are certainly better handled by video games (or maybe a really streamlined miniatures game) than by RPGs. So, you've definitely got a point there.
The one thing I prefer about RPGs which I don't have much faith in technology improving on, is the opportunity to act. I love up-close improvisational drama. RPGs allow me to do that without having to make a big production of it.
The problem is that then games like 7th Sea and Scion make the process of running it such a chore that you might as well go join some big theatrical production. Same thing with LARPing once you break 20 players with any frequency. It's all just too much work, and the GM ends up spread too thin.
Fiddling with byzantine rules, hiding behind a screen, rolling tons of dice and adding up successes to compare against difficulty charts, all of that just undermines the things RPGs do well: getting your friends together to share in a joint story where every one gets to contribute to the plot and the drama and the characterizations.
So far, I have yet to see an online or video game that actually gives me a chance to genuinely act. None I've played allow me to (at least) improvise in largely-unlimited directions. If you know of one, please send me a link, 'cause it would almost certainly have to kick butt.
In replying to him, I ran through an overview of RPGs, and it helped me to put recent developments of my tastes in gaming into words. Most of the following is quoted from our email exchange:
In general, the more simplistic the rules set, the better the game. Simple rules let you focus on the drama, the story, and the characters. Every moment spent thinking about rules just undermines that. For my tastes, RPGs are primarily an acting / storytelling medium, with just a touch of game involved to handle dramatic conflict. I suspect the trick is to simplify the heck out of the rules, boiling every action down to no more than 1 die roll, and a structure simple enough to never require looking anything up during the game.
- I agree that FATE reads really good, but I have yet to play it.
- Amber works, it's just plain solid provided the GMs ego never enters the picture.
- Dogs In The Vineyard seems to work, but I haven't played it enough. Really just tested it a tiny bit. We'll likely be using it for Firefly later this year.
- Universalis is awesome (though best as just a way to set up a game run in a slightly different system).
- FUDGE's only real flaw was that the 7 words they chose didn't have an order that all minds settle on - if they'd just used numbers 1 to 7 the game would demo better. As written, it trips people up on the first session.
- GUMSHOE strikes me as amazing for Mystery games.
- Continuum worked great once I "dumbed down" most of the complexity right out of the system and just focused on the complexity of the setting.
- d6 Star Wars was decent as long you weren't playing Jedi - trying to emulate the lightsaber battles of the movies just breaks it.
- With the exception of 3 sections that contradicted each-other, old WoD LARP actually functioned pretty well (provided your disbelief wasn't ruined by the Rock-Paper-Scissors aspect). I think it was at the cusp of having too many powers - a neonate game ran well, but an elder game was a few too many rules to expect the players to internalize.
- And I've played (and crafted) some homebrewed lite systems that work really well.
- 3.X D&D (and this pains me to say, since I grew up on D&D, and I have a couple buddies who work at Wizards) doesn't do enough to encourage good stories. It tries too hard to be a tactical combat system, and it has way too many fiddly bits. It can be a good game, but in order for it to consistently be a good roleplaying experience, you have to really abstract the rules down to nothing (or at least to True20). I'm hopeful that 4th Ed will fix some of that.
You know, I'm starting to believe that RPGs really aren't fun at all, and anyone who thinks that they have had a fun RPG experience is remembering wrong. :)I suspect he included smileys for fear that I would react violently and argue vociferously.
...
there's been nothing that I WANT to do in an RPG that videogames don't do better than tabletop games. :)
But in a lot of ways, he's right. He's absolutely correct that video games can (and often do) a better job of immersing you in environment than RPGs - vids have picture and sound, which for all the attempts at GMing a good description, just blow RPGs out of the water 9 scenes out of 10.
It's certainly easier to find a good video game than a good GM.
And as far as tactical challenges, those are certainly better handled by video games (or maybe a really streamlined miniatures game) than by RPGs. So, you've definitely got a point there.
The one thing I prefer about RPGs which I don't have much faith in technology improving on, is the opportunity to act. I love up-close improvisational drama. RPGs allow me to do that without having to make a big production of it.
The problem is that then games like 7th Sea and Scion make the process of running it such a chore that you might as well go join some big theatrical production. Same thing with LARPing once you break 20 players with any frequency. It's all just too much work, and the GM ends up spread too thin.
Fiddling with byzantine rules, hiding behind a screen, rolling tons of dice and adding up successes to compare against difficulty charts, all of that just undermines the things RPGs do well: getting your friends together to share in a joint story where every one gets to contribute to the plot and the drama and the characterizations.
So far, I have yet to see an online or video game that actually gives me a chance to genuinely act. None I've played allow me to (at least) improvise in largely-unlimited directions. If you know of one, please send me a link, 'cause it would almost certainly have to kick butt.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)