Quote from: StuartIf you had to run Harry Potter with D&D, there would be a lot of Magic Users.  Maybe Hagrid is a fighter.  Maybe Doby and his friends are "Elves"

D&D is an exceptionally strong example of niche protection. Rolemaster has many different kinds of wizards with different spell lists to name but one example.

I wish people would stop thinking that niche protection is an all or nothing affair.

It's not, unless one insists on saying it is. In which case, this is a rather meaningless thing as it applies to one significant game on the market (and really not even that when you add in all the expansions you can buy).

Quote from: gleichmanYou are not so foolish as to believe this are you?

Enlighten us,  obviously nobody on this site knows as much as you.

Quote from: McrowEnlighten us,  obviously nobody on this site knows as much as you.

Oh I don't know, I would think that anyone who plays D&D would have taken exception to  HinterWelt's assertion that they can't find solutions for much of anything outside of mechanics...

But hell, maybe it's just me. Everyone else seems good with it.

Quote from: gleichmanOh I don't know, I would think that anyone who plays D&D would have taken exception to  HinterWelt's assertion that they can't find solutions for much of anything outside of mechanics...

But hell, maybe it's just me. Everyone else seems good with it.

No, I think what he was saying is that in D&D niche protection is done via mechanics. That is something we all know.

Quote from: McrowNo, I think what he was saying is that in D&D niche protection is done via mechanics. That is something we all know.

No, he said this:

Quote from: HinterWeltHowever, if you are a fan of niche protection, you likely will be looking to mechanics for all solutions and answers.

And that said something that may well not apply to to lots of people. I for example am very picky about what mechanics should and should not be used for- rejecting them in many areas common to current game designs.

It also implies that fans of niche protection are rather limited people, but I may just be reading him wrong because I would consider it an insult to be told I can't think or be creative outside the ruleset...

Quote from: StuartYou see this is a lot of fantasy literature:

Aragorn and Boromir are more or less interchangeable as far as "niche" goes.  Probably Gimli too.  The Hobbits... all about the same.

All examples from Tolkein, who had 12 interchangeable dwarves descend on Bilbo at the beginning of The Hobbit. I would argue that this sort of thing is actually a weakness of Tolkein's writing, rather than a strength.

QuoteSame deal with most of the characters from Robin Hood.  And Harry Potter.

Bullcrap. Many of the unnamed Merry Men or Hogwarts students are pretty interchangeable, but they're not the sort of characters who would be PCs in a Robin Hood or Harry Potter RPG. You wouldn't confuse Little John for Friar Tuck, and Ron and Hermione and Neville are all very different characters in their own right.

QuoteBut they're all different, interesting characters -- even if they don't have niche protection.

How do they not have niche protection? To take Harry Potter as an example, Hermione is the smart one who's maxed out on Library Use. Harry is the impetuous guy who's willing to get in there and get his fists bloody when necessary. Little John is the big brute who can knock down just as many soldiers as the Sheriff sends after him. Friar Tuck is a jolly monk who uses the air of respectability his monastic robes give him to cover for the outlaws. They all have their own niche; it's just not a niche which happens to tie in with precise job descriptions.

The Harry Potter characters can all do magic, but to say that they don't have niche protection just because they all do magic is to say that D&D characters don't have niche protection because they're all capable of speaking Common.

Quote from: StuartIn D&D (and similar RPGs) they'd both be "fighters".  They have the same niche.  I think we're making the same point -- you need to consider them beyond that.

BZZZZZZT. Niche != "character class".

Specifically, Aragorn in Lord of the Rings fills the niche of "last scion of forgotten race of Kings". Boromir slots into the niche of "guy who succumbs to the temptation of the ring". Those don't have easy D&D analogues in terms of character class, because Tolkein wasn't writing in terms of D&D rules. (Perhaps they were using GURPS: Aragorn had the "Epic Destiny" advantage, while Boromir had the "Weak-Willed" disadvantage...)

Moving back to the subject of gaming and systems: in Ars Magica, assuming you forgo the multiple-PCs aspect of Troupe play (as some friends and I did in our most recent ArsM campaign), all the player characters are powerful wizards. At the same time, you'd never see two starting characters in an ArsM party sink all their points into the same areas of spellcasting - you'll have your Ignem specialist over here, your Intellego specialist over there...

Quote from: StuartIf you had to run Harry Potter with D&D, there would be a lot of Magic Users.

Yes, but you wouldn't, especially if you were running a game with the assumption that the PCs were all Hogwarts students. You'd run it in something like Ars Magica instead.

@Warthur:  You're arguing against a point I'm not making.

If you want to say niche = thing that makes each character different... I have no argument with that at all.  

I'm talking about games that carve the system up so that the assumption is a group of 4 players will have *very* different character types:

Warrior, Wizard, Thief, Priest

Tank, Striker, Controller, Leader

Decker, Rigger, Street Samurai, Mage

And contrasting that with fantasy literature that often has groups of character who would all be from one of the niches above, and yet they're all differernt and interesting characters.

Quote from: gleichmanNo, he said this:


And that said something that may well not apply to to lots of people. I for example am very picky about what mechanics should and should not be used for- rejecting them in many areas common to current game designs.

It also implies that fans of niche protection are rather limited people, but I may just be reading him wrong because I would consider it an insult to be told I can't think or be creative outside the ruleset...

Um, you have issues...serious issues. Out of that one statement, you have surmised I hate all DND gamers and anyone who favors niche protection...despite saying the opposite in several posts.

Look, in context,the quote you sited of mine means "You will look for all solutions and answers for niche protection issues in mechanics." This is opposed to finding them in setting or character divisions. I will give you that it was perhaps a bit vague but I figured most folks here would read with understanding...and apparently have since they did not take the umbrage you did.

Simply, go find some one else to get into a flame war with. I am not interested.

Thanks,
Bill

Quote from: Stuart@Warthur:  You're arguing against a point I'm not making.

If you want to say niche = thing that makes each character different... I have no argument with that at all.  

I'm talking about games that carve the system up so that the assumption is a group of 4 players will have *very* different character types:

Warrior, Wizard, Thief, Priest

Tank, Striker, Controller, Leader

Decker, Rigger, Street Samurai, Mage

And contrasting that with fantasy literature that often has groups of character who would all be from one of the niches above, and yet they're all differernt and interesting characters.

Just so you know, Stuart, you and I are very much on the smae page as I understand your position.

To that point, I do not favor systems that force a character to a niche. In that, Warther (I think it was him) earlier spoke of how unfun it would be to have a group of interchangeable characters;i.e. characters with the same identical abilities. Personally, I believe this is what niche protection systematically leads to. You are forced to fill x role in the party. I just prefer more rounded characters than that.

Again, to make it clear though, I do not think people who favor niche protection should be blasted into outer space. This is just my opinion.

Bill

Quote from: HinterWeltUm, you have issues...serious issues. Out of that one statement, you have surmised I hate all DND gamers and anyone who favors niche protection...despite saying the opposite in several posts.

Look, in context,the quote you sited of mine means "You will look for all solutions and answers for niche protection issues in mechanics." This is opposed to finding them in setting or character divisions. I will give you that it was perhaps a bit vague but I figured most folks here would read with understanding...and apparently have since they did not take the umbrage you did.

Simply, go find some one else to get into a flame war with. I am not interested.

Thanks,
Bill

Ummm...just so you know, Bill...he was not the only one who took it the way he describes.

But this issue is now so convoluted as to be less than helpful, shall we say. I don't have Roma handy, or I'd question you in a bit more depth...

Quote from: James J SkachUmmm...just so you know, Bill...he was not the only one who took it the way he describes.

But this issue is now so convoluted as to be less than helpful, shall we say. I don't have Roma handy, or I'd question you in a bit more depth...

Sorry to hear that. I still think that is a pretty unkind reading as I have said in other posts that niche protection is fine for other people... I just don't like it. Then you made the jump to thinking I was insulting all DND players...really?

Well, I have nothing to say to that except that it was not meant that way. I still think this guy has a chip on his shoulder.

What issues do you have with Iridium James? Don't worry, I will help out if I can if you have something about Roma you want to discuss.

Some points you might want to make may involve how I offer up special abilities to certain classes? How I have a bigger level bonus to in-class skills vs out of class skills? I know it may seem I have this "Niche Protection is on or off" thing going but I do believe there are different levels...and thus the questions. Note: I ask about strong vs weak or no niche protection...

So, with that, you could characterize that as a form of niche protection. I would not. My view of those items would be that they are a specialization path for characters. Yes, a Specialist can take weapon sepcializations cheaper than other classes, but everyone can specialize in weapons. Yes, a magus gets spells cheaper but everyone can take spells. Yes, priests and druids can cast free form magic but it is, by definition, the power of their god and the definition of their being (and in character you could become a priest or druid given enough time/social connections/etc).

The one that would be closer to niche protection than any others would be the class bonus to skills. That would be 3% per level for in class skills as opposed to 2% per level for out of class skills. Since you can change class so easily, I am not sure this is such a big deal. At best it would rank as pretty weak niche protection...and again, I would call it more "niche advantage" since it does not restrict one class from taking other classes skills.

All that said, if it is something else I am all ears.

Bill

Quote from: Stuart@Warthur:  You're arguing against a point I'm not making.

If you want to say niche = thing that makes each character different... I have no argument with that at all.  

I'm talking about games that carve the system up so that the assumption is a group of 4 players will have *very* different character types:

Warrior, Wizard, Thief, Priest

Tank, Striker, Controller, Leader

Decker, Rigger, Street Samurai, Mage

And contrasting that with fantasy literature that often has groups of character who would all be from one of the niches above, and yet they're all differernt and interesting characters.

So the problem with niches in RPGs is the wide disparity and (apparently) that it doesn't map well with the fiction it's supposed to be based on?

In the first case, I really see no reason why two or more characters might not pick the same class/skills/feats if they were central to the campaign.

In the second case... well... it really depends on the fiction. If you're playing all wizards (Potter) it makes sense to differentiate characters on different bases (basises?). Like... how everyone's a ninja in Naruto, but each ninja has a ridiculously different set of powers. God... I'm discussing Naruto as it applies to tabletop RPGs on an internet forum. So... yeah... what sets one character apart from another will (and more importantly *should*) vary from game to game if being all like the source material is what you're after.

If I'm playing a ghost in the shell RPG, I think it's safe to assume we all start as section 9 (or section 8 or 6 or 7 or whatever) operatives. The things an operative has/needs, you can assume they have. They know procedural stuff, have pretty keen wits, know their way around the weapons locker, and are better than a civilian when it comes to... anything having to do with their job at section nine. Only in comparison to each other do "niches" become apparent. Then there's the sniper, the bureaucrat, the badass major (probably only second best at any one thing, but second best at everything's still damn good... also the skills necessary for the role as party leader), the lameass rookie (and even he served as the one least/non cyber character, so at least one person wasn't vulnerable to hacking, IIRC).

Conversely, if I'm playing Akira, it's not unreasonable to have one character with a millitary background, a mad scientist, a psychic, a politician, a spy, and a speed-freak with a bike and a blunt object in the same party. Also some people are more than one of these things. Oh, and some of them are kids. Of course... Akira doesn't do the whole "party dynamic" thing either.

Quote from: HinterWeltSorry to hear that. I still think that is a pretty unkind reading as I have said in other posts that niche protection is fine for other people... I just don't like it. Then you made the jump to thinking I was insulting all DND players...really?

All DnD players? well, maybe not the exact same as Mr. Gleichman.  However, what you said could, even given context, be taken in a very bad light:

Quote from: HinterWeltAh, grasshopper, you see, there are many reasons for multiple characters beyond mechanics. The least of which would be having number on your side. The strongest, imo, would be story. However, if you are a fan of niche protection, you likely will be looking to mechanics for all solutions and answers.

These two lines together are a weird set - it looks like you're setting up a false dichotomy. Since I know you, I shrugged it off as something I didn't get what you were trying to say. I figured you'd clarify it in due time.

Quote from: HinterWeltWhat issues do you have with Iridium James? Don't worry, I will help out if I can if you have something about Roma you want to discuss.

Issues? Nothing off the top of my head. It played nicely the one time I got a shot. Hope to again, soon. And I didn't mean question as in Inquisition.  Nobody expects the...oh nevermind...

My only point was going to be the things you mention (and I wanted to make sure I was remembering correctly); that is that there is some level of niche protection in Roma. It probably can be explained in many setting-accurate ways, but it is there, nonetheless. D&D skills are not so different (from the overview you give) in that a fighter can take stealth and disable device, etc - hell, so can a Cleric.  It might cost more, but it can be done.  There are a few things that are class specific in 3.5, but then they went and opened up multi-classing to such an extent that you can do just about anything.

Now pre 3e, it's a bit more straight up. But then everything outside the specific class stuff was more or less up for grabs.

Being a fan of "Niche Advantage" I have no issue with Iridium...