This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.
NOTICE: Some online security services are reporting that information for a limited number of users from this site is for sale on the "dark web." As of right now, there is no direct evidence of this, but change your password just to be safe.

Author Topic: Frank Trollman libels Alexander Macris [of Autarch, and ACKS]  (Read 22491 times)

GeekyBugle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2940
  • Now even more Toxic
Frank Trollman libels Alexander Macris [of Autarch, and ACKS]
« Reply #195 on: October 25, 2019, 09:54:19 PM »
Quote from: GnomeWorks;1111836
Then why the ever-loving fuck should I give any TTRPG company money.

Or is Crom too fucking stupid to understand economics?

You should do with your money whatever you like, if you need a game designer to tell you what is or not allowed go ahead. Doesn't mean we Need to give anybody money, or are you too stupid to understand capitalism?
“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.”

― George Orwell

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCjC7-w5KDKNiD-k0tVo1DPw?view_as=subscriber

Sacrificial Lamb

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1909
Frank Trollman libels Alexander Macris [of Autarch, and ACKS]
« Reply #196 on: October 25, 2019, 10:46:20 PM »
Quote from: GnomeWorks;1111836
Then why the ever-loving fuck should I give any TTRPG company money.

Or is Crom too fucking stupid to understand economics?

That's my point as well. If they reject rules, why buy new product? If people here want to play a LARP, then they should go for it. But the "rulingz not rulez" crowd here don't seem to love 3e. And my response is:

"Why not, bitches?! Rulings not rules, right?" :rolleyes:

In other words, this group secretly cares about the rules for rpgs quite a bit, but they have trouble admitting it. They're more likely to change shit for their campaigns, and they're more prone to authoritarianism and dick-waving in their DMing style.....but they still do secretly care about the rules. In any case, my 5e crafting thread cured me of ever using the word, "rules" again....in regard to tabletop rpgs. If I have to read another "RULINGSZ NOT RULESZ!!!!11" sperg-out, I'll melt.

So now I'll just use the term, "game mechanics", to prevent that sperg-out from ever happening again. :cool:

SHARK

  • Great White Hope
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2950
Frank Trollman libels Alexander Macris [of Autarch, and ACKS]
« Reply #197 on: October 26, 2019, 02:44:08 AM »
Quote from: Sacrificial Lamb;1111856
That's my point as well. If they reject rules, why buy new product? If people here want to play a LARP, then they should go for it. But the "rulingz not rulez" crowd here don't seem to love 3e. And my response is:

"Why not, bitches?! Rulings not rules, right?" :rolleyes:

In other words, this group secretly cares about the rules for rpgs quite a bit, but they have trouble admitting it. They're more likely to change shit for their campaigns, and they're more prone to authoritarianism and dick-waving in their DMing style.....but they still do secretly care about the rules. In any case, my 5e crafting thread cured me of ever using the word, "rules" again....in regard to tabletop rpgs. If I have to read another "RULINGSZ NOT RULESZ!!!!11" sperg-out, I'll melt.

So now I'll just use the term, "game mechanics", to prevent that sperg-out from ever happening again. :cool:

Greetings!

acrificial Lamb, hold on there a moment. I think more than a few members have agreed with most of your basic premise that the 5E crafting rules and magic item system is not perfect, and in fact is very basic and leaves much to be desired. At the same time, many have also maintained that *Rulingz, not Rulesz" as you say is the best solution. I have said that myself. If there are shitty rules, broken, fucked up sub-systems, or whatever details that you don't like, the DM has the authority and duty to change whatever they like.

I also am not impressed with the 5E Crafting and Magic Economy system, and yes, I have changed them to better suit my campaign. Many members here have done the same, some of which for the same reasons that you decribe and critique the 5E crafting and magic economy system.

Rulingsz Not Rulesz! is a crucial concept for any and all DM's to embrace. 5E is not a perfect system, and even back in the day with AD&D, we changed and modified the official game system nine ways to Sunday. 5E nowadays is no different.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
"It is the Marine Corps that will strip away the façade so easily confused with self. It is the Corps that will offer the pain needed to buy the truth. And at last, each will own the privilege of looking inside himself  to discover what truly resides there. Comfort is an illusion. A false security bred from familiar things and familiar ways. It narrows the mind. Weakens the body. And robs the soul of spirit and determination. Comfort is neither welcome nor tolerated here."

"Courage is not the absence of fear, but is doing what you have to, in spite of the fear."
"Let Death and Fire Be Their Portion!"
"Delenda Est Parthia!"

insubordinate polyhedral

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • i
  • Posts: 338
Frank Trollman libels Alexander Macris [of Autarch, and ACKS]
« Reply #198 on: October 26, 2019, 03:25:03 PM »
Quote from: amacris;1111830
Anyone who has read my games know that I'm no fan of "mother-may-I" type mechanics. My game gives you rules for as much as I can think of. But 2,000 years of organized practice of law has found that there are no systems of adjudication that do not require a human adjudicator's involvement. The only argument is over how the adjudicator should be involved.

Start with precedent: A precedent is a legal ruling on a particular issue that can be used to help decide subsequent questions of law with similar issues. For instance, if a court is asked to decide whether a semiautomatic pistol is a legitimate weapon of self-defense, a previous ruling that revolvers were legitimate weapons of self-defense would be precedent. If the precedent is followed, it is called "binding." If the precedent is ignored, the new case is said to be "distinguished" from the old by certain new facts. For instance, the court might distinguish pistols from revolvers by pointing out that their ammunition capacity is much greater.

What does this have to do with role-playing games? One of the foundational role of the gamemaster is that of Judge, responsible for "ruling on grey areas not covered by the rules." The process of ruling on grey areas creates precedent - or what we call "house rules". How much precedent is going to matter will depend on whether your game is a "common law" or "civil law" game.

"Common law" originated in Old England as a history of legal rules created by judges when deciding disputes. The judges began with the traditional customs of how matters had been handled, and then over time built up a body of law based on those past precedents. Common law generally has little or no basis in anything written. The main disadvantage of a common law system is that there is no written "code" that citizens can consult to understand the laws of the land. The main advantage is its flexible capacity for growth and adaptation.

On the other hand, "civil law" originated in the Roman Empire as a collection or code of statutes created by legislatures. Judges interpret the statutes, but their rulings are not said to create law. The main disadvantage of a civil law system is that citizens can't depend on different judges to interpret the law the same way each time there's a case. The main advantage is that the laws tend to be more detailed and specific.

Faced with a question, a purely common-law court will look up what the court said last time it was confronted by a similar question. Meanwhile, a purely civil law court will look up what the most relevant statute says about the question and interpret it as it thinks best. Since each system has weaknesses, most legal systems today use a mix of both civil and common law, with legislators creating the overall framework of statutes, while judges fill in the gaps using common law methods based on precedent. Under this system, citizens can look at statutes to learn the baseline of the law, and then refer to past cases to understand how judges have previously ruled.

The analogy to a gamemaster in a tabletop game should, I hope, be clear. The game designer is the legislator; the game rules are the civil law; the citizens are the players; and the decisions of the gamemaster about grey areas in the rules are the common law.

A gamemaster running a rules-light game will end up acting mostly like a common law judge, forced to make rulings about particular situations without written statutes. In this case, precedent matters a lot. Fairness demands precedent. To prove this point, let's illustrate what happens when precedent is ignored. Imagine that you are running Basic Fantasy, a rules light game modeled after the classic 1980s editions of Basic Dungeons & Dragons. During a desperate retreat, Marcus, the party's fighter, wants to jump across a 15' chasm to safety. "Fighters jumping across chasms" is not covered by the rules. You decide that this is a test of heroic agility best resolved with an ability check against Dexterity. If Marcus rolls less than his Dexterity he will succeed; if not he will fail and plummet to his death. Marcus rolls a 9, less than his Dexterity of 12, and succeeds.

Next round, Quintus, the magic-user, decides he too wants to escape across the chasm. You again consult your rulebook and note that "magic-users jumping across chasms" is not covered by the rules. You decide that this is clearly a test of herculean strength, and demand an ability check against Strength. Quintus, with a Strength of 7, fails the roll, and his player demands to know why Marcus got to roll against Dexterity but he had to roll against Strength for the same task.
What can you say to this criticism? That you're the GM, your word is law, and it's your right to rule however you like on situations not covered by the rules? That there is no written rule stating which attribute is to be used in resolving the success of jumps, so this is completely fair? You can certainly say that, but it's unlikely to persuade the player of poor dead Quintus.

Let's now imagine that a couple weeks have passed, and the party must now, once again, jump across this chasm. You once again check the rules and again see no game mechanic specifying the chances of success. You announce that each character has a 2 in 6 chance of falling in, but otherwise they jump across successfully. Morne, who has both 18 Dexterity and Strength, demands to know why he now has a 33% chance of falling in, and not the 10% chance he'd have if you stuck with either of your two past rulings. You shrug. "There's no rule that says it has to be an ability check," you say.

It should be obvious that this is not a healthy manner in which to run a game. A game run like this is a game that lacks fairness, common sense, and verisimilitude. Yet it's very common when playing a rules-light game to experience this sort of arbitrary decision-making on the part of the gamemaster out of an insistence that "there aren't really any rules!" This attitude derives from a failure to recognize that, just like a common law judge creates law when he decides a case, a gamemaster creates rules when he makes rulings. Fairness to the players demands that the rules for any given situation be the same for each player in that situation.

It's common to call games like OD&D, which heavily depend on the GM's judgment calls, rules-light games, in contrast to rules-heavy games like Pathfinder, which provide exhaustive mechanics. But with our deeper understanding of common law and civil law, we can see that a gamemaster's ruling is functionally a law, just like a game designer's rule is a law. Every rules-light game will over time become heavier with rules as its judge makes decisions about how things work. Rules-light and rules-heavy are only descriptive of the starting state of the game. The only question is how much the designer has left to the GM or the legislature has left to the judge.

This being the case, when you are running a long-term campaign, you should remember that every time you issue a ruling, you have added to the "common law" of the game design. You should write down your rulings, and apply them again to similar situations in the future - or distinguish them from prior rulings to explain why they aren't being applied. The very best gamemasters do this so consistently that over time that their long-running campaigns begin to develop an entire body of house rules covering the many special situations that have arisen in their campaign. Sometimes an entire new RPG develops.

That's how my own body of D&D jurisprudence, developed over hundreds of sessions of Classic D&D, ultimately became the Adventurer Conqueror King System. Of course, my efforts with ACKS are nothing compared to the old masters. After all, the entire corpus of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons is just Gary Gygax and crew's common law rulings on Original Dungeons & Dragons. Even more impressive, the legendary skill-based RPG Runequest began as a set of house-rules for D&D! (The transitional D&D-to-Runequest house rules were called the Perrin Conventions, named for Runequest's lead designer Steve Perrin.)


If you wrote a book about the jurisprudence of RPGs, I would read it and buy copies for all my friends.

Fuck it, I'm quoting the whole post because it was awesome and deserves to be quoted again.

Spike

  • Stroppy Pika of DOOM!!!!!
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8105
  • Tricoteuse
Frank Trollman libels Alexander Macris [of Autarch, and ACKS]
« Reply #199 on: October 26, 2019, 03:45:44 PM »
Quote from: insubordinate polyhedral;1111917

Fuck it, I'm quoting the whole post because it was awesome and deserves to be quoted again.

Please do not.
For you the day you found a minor error in a Post by Spike and forced him to admit it, it was the greatest day of your internet life.  For me it was... Tuesday.

For the curious: Apparently, in person, I sound exactly like the Youtube Character The Nostalgia Critic.   I have no words.

[URL=https:

GnomeWorks

  • Hates Elf Adventurers
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 769
Frank Trollman libels Alexander Macris [of Autarch, and ACKS]
« Reply #200 on: October 26, 2019, 04:00:25 PM »
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1111846
You should do with your money whatever you like, if you need a game designer to tell you what is or not allowed go ahead. Doesn't mean we Need to give anybody money, or are you too stupid to understand capitalism?

So you've never bought a TTRPG book, ever, then.

Either that, or you're completely full of shit.

I wonder which it could possibly be...
Mechanics should reflect flavor. Always.
Running: A combination of the Shattered Star Pathfinder AP, The Illithiad 2e adventure series, and Tear of Ioun 4e Dungeon miniseries (D&D 5e).

Sacrificial Lamb

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1909
Frank Trollman libels Alexander Macris [of Autarch, and ACKS]
« Reply #201 on: October 26, 2019, 05:02:07 PM »
Quote from: SHARK;1111877
Greetings!

acrificial Lamb, hold on there a moment. I think more than a few members have agreed with most of your basic premise that the 5E crafting rules and magic item system is not perfect, and in fact is very basic and leaves much to be desired. At the same time, many have also maintained that *Rulingz, not Rulesz" as you say is the best solution. I have said that myself. If there are shitty rules, broken, fucked up sub-systems, or whatever details that you don't like, the DM has the authority and duty to change whatever they like.

I also am not impressed with the 5E Crafting and Magic Economy system, and yes, I have changed them to better suit my campaign. Many members here have done the same, some of which for the same reasons that you decribe and critique the 5E crafting and magic economy system.

Rulingsz Not Rulesz! is a crucial concept for any and all DM's to embrace. 5E is not a perfect system, and even back in the day with AD&D, we changed and modified the official game system nine ways to Sunday. 5E nowadays is no different.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK


I'm fine with people changing game rules, if they wish to do so. No objection there. In fact, it is sometimes even necessary to change rules to fit our individual campaigns.....but I believe that the grognards still care about game rules more than they let on. If they didn't care about the rules, then they wouldn't favor one rules set over another. Granted, I'm being a little obnoxious about this, but I hate it when the grogs defend rules that are poorly written and make no logical sense.....and then defend these crappy rules with...."Rulingsz Not Rulesz!"

That just drives me nuts. :cool:

That mantra is not a legitimate justification for poorly written game mechanics. That's why I created the 5e crafting thread. I did that to break down the 5e crafting system, examine it, tear it to pieces, and then take it to its logical conclusions. Admittedly, I missed a couple details in that thread.....but I think that my overall points were solid.

GeekyBugle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2940
  • Now even more Toxic
Frank Trollman libels Alexander Macris [of Autarch, and ACKS]
« Reply #202 on: October 26, 2019, 06:10:11 PM »
Quote from: GnomeWorks;1111922
So you've never bought a TTRPG book, ever, then.

Either that, or you're completely full of shit.

I wonder which it could possibly be...

You do not understand capitalism. I don't NEED to buy any TTRPG book, if I buy them is because I want to. And besides the rules there's other stuff inthere, like settings, adventures, etc things I can strip from there to use in my campaign.

Needs = Food, Clothes, Shelter, Medicine

Wants = Entertainment, travel, finer clothes/food, bigger more comfortable shelter.
“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.”

― George Orwell

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCjC7-w5KDKNiD-k0tVo1DPw?view_as=subscriber

deadDMwalking

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2255
Frank Trollman libels Alexander Macris [of Autarch, and ACKS]
« Reply #203 on: October 26, 2019, 07:21:35 PM »
When you use a corpus of rules, especially a published rule set, you can provide the book(s) to your players and say 'here are the rules'.  Your players can spend as much or as little time as they like learning the rules.  Knowing the rules can make it easier for players to explain what they want to do in a way that the game handles.  If a player wants to make a flying leap to land a kick on the boss then spin around and make attacks on all of the henchman nearby (as they may have seen in a movie) the rules explain that they can do that, but it requires multiple actions over several rounds.  

Every time you change or modify the rules, you have to spend some non-zero amount of effort tracking and communicating those changes.  

When a rule set requires massive changes to function, it requires significant effort to track and communicate those changes.  

As a consumer of RPGs, it is in your interest to help publishers identify areas in the rules that are routinely disregarded by significant numbers of groups (maybe even a majority).  Rules are disregarded for several reasons - the first and most glaring is that they produce bad results.  The second and often overlooked is that they are too complicated.  A lot of groups won't even realize that they're not using the rules presented in the rule set if they've 'simplified' things.  The third and least problematic is when a particular flavor is desired.  Lots of 'tinkering' is normal, and many games publish alternate rules to change some of the core assumptions.
When I say objectively, I mean 'subjectively'.  When I say literally, I mean 'figuratively'.  
And when I say that you are a horse's ass, I mean that the objective truth is that you are a literal horse's ass.

There is nothing so useless as doing efficiently that which should not be done at all. - Peter Drucker

Spinachcat

  • Toxic SocioCat
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 14127
Frank Trollman libels Alexander Macris [of Autarch, and ACKS]
« Reply #204 on: October 26, 2019, 07:22:19 PM »
Quote from: GnomeWorks;1111836
Then why the ever-loving fuck should I give any TTRPG company money.

Or is Crom too fucking stupid to understand economics?


Why do YOU give any TTRPG company money? What are YOU looking to buy?

Personally, I look for rules that stay out my way and buy stuff mostly because of settings, but every hobbyist has their own reasons for buying new RPGs. I'm very "Rulingz not Rulez" and I'm totally an authoritarian Viking Hat GM because it works for me and my players.  

And if Crom was into economics, Conan would have been an accountant. Very different series of novels.
 

Quote from: Sacrificial Lamb;1111933
Granted, I'm being a little obnoxious about this, but I hate it when the grogs defend rules that are poorly written and make no logical sense.....and then defend these crappy rules with...."Rulingsz Not Rulesz!"


How dare you! The AD&D 1e grappling rules were perfect!! :)

HappyDaze

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • H
  • Posts: 3508
Frank Trollman libels Alexander Macris [of Autarch, and ACKS]
« Reply #205 on: October 26, 2019, 09:23:45 PM »
Quote from: Spinachcat;1111949

How dare you! The AD&D 1e grappling rules were perfect!! :)

And the pummeling rules were...something else.

Spinachcat

  • Toxic SocioCat
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 14127
Frank Trollman libels Alexander Macris [of Autarch, and ACKS]
« Reply #206 on: October 26, 2019, 09:32:11 PM »
Quote from: HappyDaze;1111966
And the pummeling rules were...something else.

Those were double perfect! :)

amacris

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • a
  • Posts: 487
Frank Trollman libels Alexander Macris [of Autarch, and ACKS]
« Reply #207 on: October 27, 2019, 06:47:22 PM »
Quote from: Spinachcat;1111949
And if Crom was into economics, Conan would have been an accountant. Very different series of novels.


I would like to subscribe to your series of light novels on Kindle Unlimited

yancy

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • y
  • Posts: 71
Frank Trollman libels Alexander Macris [of Autarch, and ACKS]
« Reply #208 on: October 27, 2019, 08:38:04 PM »
Quote from: Spinachcat;1111970
Those were double perfect! :)

The grappling and pummeling rules were probably the best goddamn part of the game. Other than the random city encounters with prostitutes chart. And maybe the psionic attacks.

If you could just keep those three things, and chuck the rest, you've got a real contender.

Well actually you'd need to keep the section on converting Boot Hill and Gamma World characters too, to have a fully functional and balanced game system.
Quote from: Rhedyn
if you are against this, I assume you are racist.

Spinachcat

  • Toxic SocioCat
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 14127
Frank Trollman libels Alexander Macris [of Autarch, and ACKS]
« Reply #209 on: October 27, 2019, 08:44:19 PM »
Yancy, you're a very bad person!!! :D Welcome aboard!