Quote from: Zak S;979256It's not clear in your question what sentence or idea the word "that" is referring to.

Classic evasion. :rolleyes:

Quote from: Dumarest;979322Classic evasion. :rolleyes:

What possible goal could I serve by pretending to not know what this one specific vague guy was talking about while answering everyone else's question you idiot?

What is there to evade saying here? It's not like there's some embarrassing scandal at the heart of "IS MAZE OF THE BLUE MEDUSA NIHILISTIC???"

It's not like these questions are hard to answer.

Especially because the writer can simply clarify their question and then OH NOES!! My clever evasion failed and now I have to answer them!!!!!!

Seek therapy.

Quote from: AsenRG;979292You did say "The life of a D&D character conforms to no religious or moral principles".
Life, for us, is what you make of the things given to you by a "setting" with way more randomizers than the average game. If the characters make it a lesson in following a moral code, then it is a lesson in following a moral code.

It's only a lesson if their eventual fate (death or success) conforms to some moral principle and/or the narrator pronounces a judgment on them that we need to be sympathetic to in order for it to work as intended.

Your paladin saves everyone: D&D is working as intended.

Your paladin gets bit by a rat and dies in a ditch at first level and everyone laughs: D&D is still working as intended.

QuoteYou got me here - I just assumed you don't have many Paladins in your games, and I shouldn't have;).

You assume a lot of bullshit. It wastes the time of everyone who is kind and generous enough to read what you write. You should ask questions before assuming things--especially if assuming them would require whoever you're talking to logically contradicting themself.

QuoteI'd say that's not what the "life" of the characters is. That's the mechanics governing the outcomes of said life.
But a Righteous Deed isn't any less so if it fails.

Just because a character or player thinks a deed is righteous doesn't mean the game agrees.

D&D is only moralizing if the game of D&D makes a judgment as to whether the deed is righteous and then declares the deed worthy in some way. There is no guarantee it will.

This is the question Is D&D nihilistic? Or moralizing?

It pronounces no judgment, in the vast majority of playstyles anyone honestly attests to, on the righteousness of actions. It is therefore nihilistic.

If your good deed guarantees you go to heaven, it would be moralizing. It isn't.

QuoteArguably, to the best of our knowledge, the fates of RL people don't depend on any ethical or moral philosophies.

That's because there is no god and life actually is meaningless and if you are smart and accept this then you might very well be called a nihilist.

QuoteAnd yet, if we follow them, we're not called "nihilistic".

Yes, because a person is not a fiction. A fiction's philosophy isn't drawn from what one of its characters do or believe, it's drawn from what the fiction does to them for believing it and whether that fate is approved by the narrator.

An obvious example of moralizing non-nihilistic fiction is Dante's Divine Comedy: The characters believe a wide variety of things. Some are punished, some are rewarded and it's al done in a way the author clearly approves of (or at least appears by most interpretations to approve of).

A player in D&D can try to live or play according to a moral principle, but the game and table won't necessarily reify it. So while you can say "Fred is a moralizing D&D player" it is inaccurate to say "D&D is itself moralizing".

QuoteThat's, to me, akin to saying "the lives of novel characters are determined by the autors' whims, not by moral principle, regardless of what the character thinks determines their fate. There is, therefore, no moral lesson you can draw from their lives."

No, you missed the incredibly, epically mind-bogglingly obvious:

A lone author can believe in a moral philosophy, like "Dolphins punish people who steal" and then.....they can write an ending where the person who steals is eaten by dolphins and the narrator goes "...and it was good they were eaten by dolphins, because that's the moral". In D&D you can't--that's the whole point. The PCs' destinies are not determinable by anyone except via a confluence of multiple authors and randomness. You read what happened to who and there is not going to be any moral cause and effect.

Any lesson D&D teaches will only ever be tactical, not moral.

QuoteSo, "D&D is nihilistic", but Fate (and 2d20, arguably) embody the concept of cosmic balance - because for every bad thing that happens to you in those games, you can get a lucky break later:D?

That's a line of reasoning I'd expect from someone who was bashing D&D and trying to promote narrativist systems. Yes, I've read that logic already...on the Forge, in its early days.
I'm genuinely puzzled what you think you're achieving with basically repeating it.

Narrative games were:

1. Specifically designed to copy the way "theme" works in 3-act drama. A PC's fate is often meant to be related to something that came up earlier. This can lead to the game enforcing a moral idea, as in Dogs In the Vineyard.

2. Designed by hippies.

...so they were, in some cases, right to say their games could preach a moral better than D&D.

They were just wrong to think of nihilism as a bad thing.

They thought this because they were hippies, that is: morons.

For example:

"
I realize I'm asking a classic story games newbie question: "My players keep pushing the game to be about killing monsters and taking their stuff, but I want it to be about philosophy and relationships and the things the Buddha taught! How can I trick them into playing how I want them to play?"
"
http://www.story-games.com/forums/discussion/18263/my-little-savages

A game is a party--parties shouldn't moralize, and aren't good at it when they try.

On the topic of the thread, rather than the sub-topics it spawned, all I can say is I am interested enough in this adventure that I would like to get it. I am intrigued by the formatting and layout - which is a rarity for me as usually I would never say I care about those things. But I don't care because almost all adventures use the same annoying formatting and layout. If this one improves on the standard, I am interested. In terms of content, I've always enjoyed this writer's ideas. Some are for me, others not, but there's always enough for me that I want to use it in my games where I can. A room where the shadows of the players become actual pits? My players would eat that up!

Quote from: Mistwell;979363On the topic of the thread, rather than the sub-topics it spawned, all I can say is I am interested enough in this adventure that I would like to get it. I am intrigued by the formatting and layout - which is a rarity for me as usually I would never say I care about those things. But I don't care because almost all adventures use the same annoying formatting and layout. If this one improves on the standard, I am interested. In terms of content, I've always enjoyed this writer's ideas. Some are for me, others not, but there's always enough for me that I want to use it in my games where I can. A room where the shadows of the players become actual pits? My players would eat that up!

When I run it, I actually have begun alternating between the existing random encounter table and this Bonus Vanilla One:

http://dndwithpornstars.blogspot.com/2016/07/maze-of-vanilla-medusa.html


Bats

d100 bats. The AD&D rule for bats is there's a (# of bats)% chance of putting out torches. I think the Maze is a lot more interesting as a true resource-depleting dungeon, then when you run out of stuff you face the difficult choice of finding a hidden exit, finding a way past Lady Crucem Capelli or Mad Maxing supplies together from scraps and stolen equipment inside the dungeon.

Diseases are an option with bats but I kind of hate them in D&D because either you get rid of them and, yay, just made the cleric do a thing or you don't in which case you just hate your character for a while. Or they're "interesting" (now your piss is lobsters!) which is kind of a gonzo grotty zany Old School cliche.


Beholder

Not exactly a vanilla monster, but a standard one. Plus something where at least you know just how scary it is on sight, unlike all the other cryptic bosses hiding in the Maze. Or maybe it's just a gas spore. Maybe not wandering, maybe tucked away in one of the hidden rooms.


Arya Fucking Stark

Faceless assassin 13-year old. But who is she trying to kill? Maybe one of the statues? In which case how? And who is she pretending to be?


Blindheim

The frog so fucked looking you go blind is a good cascade-effect monster. Plus like did we do frogs? Don't think there's any frogs in there.


Carrion Crawler

Scavengers go wherever, right?


Drow

The drow are so fucking Maze. They'd be like shit who built this lit Maze we should kick it with them this is so #goals. We should kick it with them and turn them into weird spider hate cult friends underground. Whoever built this place must've read Vault of the Drow like...twice. Definitely that. And then they'd be like whaaat? Party of adventurers? You are asleep with our sleepy dust crossbows and we don't give a FUCK. Let's find something blue to touch until it's blaaaack and then resist 25% of all yr magic.


Goblin

Goblins are, as established, bad ideas. Going into the Maze is a bad idea. They'll talk backwards and try to steal art. Players will be like "Hah, idiots" and then the goblins will punch them and then what? The players punch them back but..wait, fuck, some of them are


Nilbogs

haha. Nilbogs get hit points when you hit them. Fucking read a Fiend Folio illiterates.


Lava children

Speaking of the Folio, just like "You hear a hissing sound down the corridor and smell sulfur". And a representative of WOTC is like "We decided it was inappropriate to have players murdering things that basically look like human children" and you'll be like "Yeah we're the OSR, you're lucky you have us, huh?" and then the players fail their Wis save and hug the babies and then scalding.


NPC party

NPC adventurers are like chickens, they're good with anything and they can replace you if you die. Tom Middenmurk's are the best.


Pudding

I can very easily see a chubby blanket of custardthick ooze like the unyellow part of a sunnyside egg scouring the lonesome smooth corridors. Color indicates resistance type: red= edged, blue=fire, etc. Standard biomedical approach to oozes: trial and error it until you get the right combo, then remember which is which. unless everyone who fought oozes last time is dead...


Rats

Rats start to look pretty tasty after all your food's been eaten by rats.



Wizard

In search of exotic stuff to put in stuff and do wizard stuff with. Probably the boss of like the goblins. Accompanied by 2 or 3 at all times.

I just literally got here and I have no idea what is going on in here, but I figured I'd leave my two cents here. I also did not know Zak S. posts on this forum. That's cool, and I hope the best for him.

As a fellow fan of old-school D&D, I agree with Zak that story games were a mistake, though he's a little harsh on the hippies.

I don't like hippies either, but at least they're not Goths or Punks. Hippies are less pretentious and malcontented, plus their music is better. I'll take Janis Joplin and Creedence Clearwater Revival over Sisters of Mercy and Type O Negative any day of the week.

TL;DR Anime Rules, Marvel and DC Suck. And much like Story Games and the whiny pretentious Goth kids at Onyx Path, Punk Rock was also a mistake. Sorry for those who like Punk, but all the pretentiousness within the modern punk scene combined with the fact that Goth spawned from Punk, I've grown to resent what Punk became. Goth was never good to begin with though. Shitty music, pretentious nihilism, and acting like emotionally masochistic malcontents while wearing guyliner and cutting yourself was never really my thing.

That's not to say Nihilism is inherently bad, because it isn't. But Nihilism only works when done right in a certain specific way. There is a time and a place for nihilism, but it must have some of kind of point or meaning to it.

I used to LARP with a bunch of stuck-up pretentious Goths and Punks, and I've never forgiven those subcultures since.

I think I'll go play my Classic D&D, if you need me, I'll be on the couch drinking Scotch and watching Sailor Moon.

I imagine when someone posts something like that they're really hoping 1000 new friends will be like omg we have the same taste  let's hang out.

Quote from: Zak S;979376I imagine when someone posts something like that they're really hoping 1000 new friends will be like omg we have the same taste  let's hang out.

Not really. I just really hate Goth and Punk things and felt like venting.

Ask anyone on this forum familiar with my posting history and they can confirm that my immense hatred of all things Goth and Punk is a hatred that knows no limit.

What a curious life to lead.

Quote from: Zak S;979385What a curious life to lead.

Um, okay....

You enjoy your life and I'll enjoy mine.

Goth chicks are sexy and I regret that when I was young and healthy I was all cool and aloof from subcultures like that instead of jumping in with both feet.

Hehe well said.

Quote from: Itachi;978134By the little I've heard of this it sounds terrific in a weird mythic planescapey way.

I've heard the comparison to Planescape twice now, but I haven't read what are the elements that are similar?

[FYI, I'm a Planescape fan and I like ZakS' work]


ZakS, what's your thoughts on the Maze of the Blue Medusa being compared to Planescape?

Was that an inspiration source?

Quote from: Doc Sammy;979375I used to LARP with a bunch of stuck-up pretentious Goths and Punks, and I've never forgiven those subcultures since.

Doc, the problem wasn't the Goths or the Punks. The problem was that you gamed with pretentious douche nuggets.

Pretentious douche nuggets can be found in any subculture. It's true that Goths had an unfortunate number of pretentious douche nuggets among the fandom, but I met some really fun Goths and gaming & partying with them was a blast.

Also, I am a confused about pretentious and punk in the same sentence. Is it an old school punk vs. new punk thing? I'm an Anthrax & Slayer fan since their first albums and in high school I hung with the metal/punk kids and "pretentious" wouldn't survive long in that scene.  BTW, early 80s had punkers and headbangers at same shows, bands of one genre opened for the other, etc.  Thus, the slam dance / mosh pits.

Quote from: RPGPundit;979214I think the description made in this thread of it as just 'slightly modified' is highly unfair. In its time, it was an absolutely revolutionary step in the OSR.  It's still way more revolutionary in terms of its mechanics than many other OSR rule-sets. It is pretty much the definition of 2nd wave OSR.

The changes in the rules change the whole way the game plays.

Have you reviewed the core book for Lamentation? If so, post a link. If not, email Raggi for a copy.

I read the PDF years ago and I don't remember seeing revolutionary rule changes, but I've never played LotFP so maybe I missed something major.

What are the revolutionary changes?

Why is it 2nd wave OSR? I though DCC was the poster child for that.

Or do you consider 1st wave to only be the direct retroclones like OSRIC, S&W, LL, etc?

Maze of the Blue Medusa is not written for Lamentations of the Flame Princess; it is a generic OSR publication. That being said, it can easily be dropped into any game where an island of cultists is occasionally invaded by groups of reptilian elitists that consider humans to be no better than slaves or food. This does fit quite well into the atmosphere of LotFP, which caters to adult tastes.

Anyone who wishes can download an art-free .pdf copy of LotFP and the Gamemasters book at no cost from RPGNow and assess the mechanics. This path bypasses any judgmental pontification from those who might not have actually played this system.

I have run LotFP games at conventions for years. It is mechanically elegant and fun. Anon!

Do not trust Ashen Chanterelle!