Quote from: David R;290224Agree. But this has always been one of the criticisms of Forge games, right? That it's focus is too narrow. Personally I have never understood this. The game works on it's own terms, why do all games have to a utilitarian function (as far as hacking goes) ?

My take is that I'm perfectly happy to play different games for different experiences. I don't expect all films or all books to be the same, after all.

One of my favourite REGLAR games is Pendragon. I hacked it for a Gloranthan game once and found we were still playing Pendragon with a new skin. That's fine, it was a good game on its own terms. but it was a distinctly different experience from playing Gloranthan RQ, and using HQ is different again. So my conclusion, several years before I got online, was that system matters.

Quote from: droog;290227My take is that I'm perfectly happy to play different games for different experiences. I don't expect all films or all books to be the same, after all.

Well you know I'm hip to this.

I'm trying to get a feel for Sorceror so I'm running a brief campaign using the Ravenloft setting. I kinda of got inspired when another friend used Dogs with Midnight. But Dogs is tricky as you mentioned, another crew liked the game but for very specific reasons.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: HinterWelt;290218Good point although I do think we are talking regular game theory at this point;i.e. theory as applied to "regular" games. Also...we are int he theory subforum if that counts...or is this Forge theory and I don't know it...Oh, my, its full of Artha...

Edit: I reread the description. We're boned.

Quick, which do you prefer, Gurps 3e or 4e?

Quote from: Balbinus;290233Quick, which do you prefer, Gurps 3e or 4e?

ahhh...oooh....GURPS Traveller...Ohcrap, thatwasthewronganswer...AHHHHH@@@!!!!

Quote from: Balbinus;290055The edition I had, first I think, had this big rant about how unrealistic D&D was and how TRoS fixed that.  He went on for ages about D&D, to the point I recall thinking "dude, tell me about your game, stop telling me about some other guy's game".

There are two versions of TROS, let's call the first one the, well, first one, and the second one, the revised one. Well, the infamous rant was in the revised one, not the first one. Nowadays I own both versions, but once I owned the first one only, so when people ranted about it I often thought to myself "what the fuck are they talking about" :confused:. Could I (or you) have inferred that he was trying to do D&D right, just reading the first edition? I couldn't, and I doubt you could have. What did I infer?

1) In chargen you have several priorities to assign. Where have I seen this before? Ah yes, Shadowrun!

2) In combat, you have a pool to divide into attack and defense. Where have I seen this before? Rolemaster, and Dzikie Pola. Bingo!

3) This game suffers from the naked dwarf syndrome. Where have I seen this before? In the game that made the naked dwarf syndrome famous, Warhammer.

4) Spiritual attributes the idea of a bonus which applies in certain circumstances. Where have I seen this before? In Ars Magica 3rd, and Pendragon.

Jake once said (sorry, I haven't got the link) that the main influences he had were Dzikie Pola, Warhammer, and a little bit of Shadowrun.

And I think you're exaggerating with that "He went on for ages about D&D,". It's just an afterword in which he relates how his immersion was broken by the way hit points work in (I guess it was, he doesn't mention it) AD&D, and how he wanted something more dangerous, something which worked more similarly to which he had learnt studying medieval fencing.