So, recently, started a new campaign with Mongoose Traveller. Now, this thing is fun, and except for one little wrinkle I like running the game, so no worries.
Except, weirdly, I start to feel that the number of options is, I don't know, too much? I am starting to get this vibe from myself that it'd be awfully nice to stick to, say, Classic Traveller, non-unified die mechanic, funky combat chart and all. In fact, weirdly, I almost feel that this would elicit MORE roleplaying than in the present group.
I also feel this when thinking on fantasy. I've got a VERY strong urge to buy the Rules Cyclopedia and just be happy with it; run good old DnD from back when I was a kid and don't worry about the wonkiness.
In fact, a lot these days, I feel there was something IN that wonkiness that made us creative or whatever. A lot of games have a lot of...what, crutches to roleplaying? Lots of traits and stuff that give us various sorts of points when we do X or Y or whatever. I don't want to bother with it... GURPS did this well - buy some advantages, buy some disads that YOU want, and then play 'em as you can, with the GM making sure they're bad enough to have gotten your disad points. That's it!
And then there's the "here's what you should imagine" stuff that seems to go on in games. Case in point. When we were rolling up Traveller characters, the Events seemed sort of a downer. Basically, instead of coming up with a story about why your rolls were X or Y, the book TOLD you what went on with that term.
I'm sure I thought this was fine a year ago. And no, I didn't have a birthday recently or anything. I just feel sort of, well, like there's TOO MUCH of me being told what to think about gaming.
So, this Christmas, I'll get myself the Rules Cyclopedia and The Traveller Supplement Reprints (I've already got the Core Reprints 0-8). And maybe something GURPS because that's my thing...
Anyone else feel this? Or am I just suffering massive nostalgia? (but that can't be; I'm not advocating going back to RIFTS for example...)
Well, let's see. I do like the simpler, shorter kind of systems found in many older games. I think there is something to say for games which aren't balance-obsessed. I also think that notion of playing a classic or vintage game can make players more relaxed and forgiving about the rules - sort of like the way you can enjoy an old, classic sci-fi movie even if you have to make allowances for the special effects.
That said nothing will convince me personally that wonky, "non-unified" systems are a good thing.
It depends, really sometimes old games are really good. Depending on the game.
I own the D&D Cyclopedia and would gladly play or run it, the same goes for a lot of older games on my shelf--MSH for one. I still enjoy them and it isn't nostalgia.
Some games don't hold up as well. I noticed some of them just aren't fun to play when compared to more modern games with more streamlined designs.
Nostalgia?
Possibly - but that's not neccessarily a bad thing.
While I enjoy some of the more streamlined modern designs, I agree that the handholding that many designs seem to think players need seem...well, a bit patronising. Like they assume that players will not have the wit to come up with their own reasons for why the party is together, or why your character is the way they are.
And don't get me started on all the 'social combat' nonsense.
I sometimes get the hankering to play Tunnnels and Trolls, the first game I started with. I doubt I will, as it doesn't deliver the sort of game I like nowadays. But by God we had fun with that small booklet, and sometimes I wonder if all we really need is a system for combat and magic, and our brains and mouths.
More diverse experience is a good thing. However regardless of how complex or simple the rules it is very easy to let the rules master the referee rather than the referee master the rules.
For example perception, in original Dungeons & Dragons the players had to describe to the referee what he was looking for. There were no other way of really doing it as there no mechanic (other than secret or concealed doors) of finding stuff. No perception roll were in the game.
With GURPS it is easy to fall into the habit of say "Go make a perception roll." one that I have been guilty of. What is better is that you do the same thing as you would in a oD&D game except unlike D&D where you arbitrary come up with a roll you use GURPS perception roll to resolve what the player describe.
Do this consistently you will find that you have the same amount of roleplaying and feeling in-game as you do with lighter systems.
I think that as least for GMing a game, there is a lot to be said for the instinctual familiarity you have with a game you played a lot in the earlier years. If the players are agreeable, go ahead, try whatever system - the worst that can happen is you decide you prefer the newer ruleset.
Quote from: Mencelus;413914Anyone else feel this? Or am I just suffering massive nostalgia? (but that can't be; I'm not advocating going back to RIFTS for example...)
That pretty much my own story. After years of trying newer game systems, I'm back to AD&D and I'm liking it! That the game that got me started and it's nostalgia all the way every time I open these books... Strangely, I also get this feeling when I look at an older game that I didn't even play. Maybe it has to do with the unimaginative font choices, pulpy/yellowy paper, etc. I don't know why, but it gets my creative juices flowing!
I believe, as Mencelus said, that the wonky system help to distance myself from the old : "Am I doing this correctly, by the rules?" when I'm running games. Strangely, I'm able to get more out of a system like Basic D&D than 3rd Edition. It's odd because I do find 3rd Edition flexible and logical, but I guess the problem lies here : in 3rd Edition, flexibility was
built into the system, while in Basic D&D it's left to the creative mind of the DM.
Anyway, just rambling... However, I can assure you the nostalgia is a by part of my drive in this hobby, so you're definitely not alone in this. Just look at the OSR and you'll
know that we are legions.
Never was an RC guy. It always left me a little flat; struck me as the domestic beer to AD&D's exotic red wine. BUT - I would play in a heartbeat if someone said they were going to run a game (I DM all the time; don't get to play hardly at all).
That said, welcome back! :)
In my experience as you get older and have less time available to you, simplicity becomes more important and familiarity is comforting.
For example I always loved D&D back in the day and I started playing it (the Holmes Red Box) in 1980. It wasn't the first rpg I had played, that was Runequest a year earlier.
Anyway I digress, recently I picked up a copy of the RC on Ebay. I've never owned that book before as we just used the boxed sets and by the time it came out originally I was into other games. I must say I found the RC to be badly organised, ugly to read, it's got unispiring art and all in all it's a little underwhelming IMHO. I ended up getting rid of it. Then I found Dark Dungeons and it has everything from the RC but it's better organised, nicely written, better art etc.. Or I could get Labyrinth Lord and get the Advanced Companion and do a D&D/AD&D hybrid!
It's the same with Traveller. I started playing in 1981, it was the 3rd rpg that I was introduced to. I loved that game (we played Bounty Hunters who did some trading on the side or was it the other way round!) and recently I've thought a lot about picking it up again.
Now would I get the old books or buy the Mongoose stuff? Well from everything I've read people that loved the original Traveller like Mong Trav as it's very faithful to the original, so would I have the same experience with Traveller as I've had with the RC? I would imagine that Mong Trav is better organised, well written, has good art etc.. all the things that we take for granted in a game released now. So I will probably get Mong Trav as like Dark Dungeons it's the best of both worlds, classic simple rules with modern production values.
It's a great time to be a gamer!
I'm feeling the same. I enjoyed 3.5E and I totally bought into 4E but, after playing it for 12 months, it left me cold and I turned to PF. Recently I find myself yearning for the simplicity of Basic D&D and AD&D.
I ran AD&D ToEE for my old gaming group and it was great fun. The game was fast-paced, the combats rarely took more than 20 minutes, half-an-hour, the story and plot moved along nicely and it was just really refreshing to fit so much into a gaming session again. Yes, there are some abrasively counter-intuitive aspects to the rules, but they only appeared so due to my experience of modern games and they are only abrasive if you let them be. Ultimately, if you need ascending AC and turn based initiative then it isn't a big deal to houserule these things in.
I want to bring my 12 year old daughter into the fold and I want to offer her something simple. I want her to be able to make up her first character, by hand, in 10-15 minutes. I want her to be quickly able to understand the concept as well as the mechanics of her character and I want her to play a game where she is focused on the action and that her decision making is based on her reaction to the game rather than trying to cobble together actions based what her powers, feats or class features say.
Furthermore, it is about time Bargle got his ass kicked.
I had a blast running a Holmes edition D&D campaign this summer. It was weird, though, getting used to TPKs again. Those older versions sure were lethal!
~Scott C.
People need to stop worrying about little nitpicky details in their games, and realize they are little nitpicky details to begin with. Like most issues related to almighty rules balance, for instance. Or that there isn't enough of this or that in the book. Jesus fuck people! Run your fucking game and make up your own shit on the fly! It's not rocket science!
Quote from: Benoist;413983People need to stop worrying about little nitpicky details in their games, and realize they are little nitpicky details to begin with. Like most issues related to almighty rules balance, for instance. Or that there isn't enough of this or that in the book. Jesus fuck people! Run your fucking game and make up your own shit on the fly! It's not rocket science!
Gamers have tricked themselves over the years into believing that professional designers know better than they do about what makes a game more enjoyable.
If you can't figure out for yourself what the fun of the experience is and how to create it then why play?
Quote from: Benoist;413983People need to stop worrying about little nitpicky details in their games, and realize they are little nitpicky details to begin with. Like most issues related to almighty rules balance, for instance. Or that there isn't enough of this or that in the book. Jesus fuck people! Run your fucking game and make up your own shit on the fly! It's not rocket science!
Which is a very nice thought. Problem is, most people playing don't think this way with many games written now (notice I didn't say all!).
I have a ridiculous theory, but it's something I've seen with the two people I've recently introduced to the hobby (2 years ago and again last week). I've noticed that, if they have a history of computer games, they want a rule for EVERYTHING you can imagine, and big obvious ways forward. They feel...lost without them, frankly, which is weird to you and me, but perfectly normal for them.
Which is why I REALLY like that old creative feel in Classic Traveller. The character writeups in the example character section were wonderful; barely three lines of text. And yet, if you'd generated that character, he'd have all this history and such not.
Quote from: Exploderwizard;414019Gamers have tricked themselves over the years into believing that professional designers know better than they do about what makes a game more enjoyable.
If you can't figure out for yourself what the fun of the experience is and how to create it then why play?
See, that's what I'm getting at. I am feeling that many games written now have done exactly that, and in the way they're written, it's hard to tweak/mess with/up end them without really tanking things. But not Classic Traveller (or a few other games I could name). You were supposed to tweak it or whatever.
Not to say we didn't get in rules arguments back in the day, but they tended to be not big deals o stuff you could safely handwave your way through.
Quote from: Exploderwizard;414019Gamers have tricked themselves over the years into believing that professional designers know better than they do about what makes a game more enjoyable.
If you can't figure out for yourself what the fun of the experience is and how to create it then why play?
Spit when you say "professional game designer"; this "industry" needs to go back to being a "hobby".
Quote from: thedungeondelver;414095Spit when you say "professional game designer"; this "industry" needs to go back to being a "hobby".
I think you are right.
Where there is a hobby there will be an industry to support it, but to what extent should the "industry" drive the hobby?
Quote from: Orpheo;414283I think you are right.
Where there is a hobby there will be an industry to support it, but to what extent should the "industry" drive the hobby?
Which is where it went, naturally. I was reading the old Traveller Book 1 on the train to work today, and I was struck by how...EASY it was to get the rules for, say, combat. Which filled all of 3-4 pages (and that's with charts and such like).
Not gonna say the system is perfect; no system is. But it just seems so easier to grasp. I get the feeling that Marc Miller, at least then, had his finger on what it meant to be a GM or player trying to get to the fun stuff, and he laid it out there so you could get to it faster. IMO of course.
So, yeah...probably gonna buy some retro games (or retro clones as someone suggested). Not ragging on Mongoose Traveller (which I am running now; I've got no intention of changing it, at least until the campaign I have planned is done). But really, the stark, spartan way of the old Classic game really touches me in some way.
I don't think the problem is with "professional game designers" (after all, there's no question that Gygax et. al. quickly became "professional game designers"), but with Game Designer Primma Donnas. The guys who seriously think that the designer is a superstar, who is more important to your game than either the the players, or the GM, or both together, or sometimes even the rules themselves.
That's what I found hilarious about the Forge-Swine, they were talking all about defeating the "tyranny of the GM" with their innovations, but their innovations inevitably led to the Tyranny of the Game Designer, so that the person making important decisions for how your group roleplayed stopped being "Bob, who's GMed our group for years" and started being "Some guy none of us have ever met and have barely heard of but a bunch of degenerate would-be beatniks that hate D&D think he's awesome".
RPGPundit
i feel what you mean. i recently got a yen to run a star wars game, and i went and dug out my 1e west end games star wars stuff rather than my wotc saga star wars book. making a character in about five minutes (including the time it takes to print out a copy of a character sheet)? priceless.
Even if it really is just nostalgia ....... nothing wrong with that. :)
Quote from: Mythmere;414411Even if it really is just nostalgia ....... nothing wrong with that. :)
"What do I think? I think it's a wax museum with a pulse." :D
I've said elsewhere what I think about "nostalgia" but there's Nostalgia and then there's nostalgia...
besides, Nostalgia can lead to some regular gaming-because-it-is-still-an-awesome-gameism. :)
Nostalgia, it's not what it used to be.
Quote from: Mythmere;414411Even if it really is just nostalgia ....... nothing wrong with that. :)
I should hope not. Not saying I shall eschew all "modern" games or whatever (been eyeing Wick's Houses of the Blooded for some time now) but there's a certain aestheic I would like to recapture. Maybe the old school clone games do it. Maybe there are modern games that get it right - as someone said, being able to make a character in 5-10 minutes is really, really awesome, and to be able t come away with plenty of roleplaying and mechanical crunch is pretty good too.
It's been a weird year for me because I've had to de-program myself from 3E in order to run and play S&W.
It was a bit discomforting the first few times to go through a descriptive back-and-forth rather than just rolling toward a target number, but it's so much more satisfying.
Quote from: Mencelus;414658I should hope not. Not saying I shall eschew all "modern" games or whatever (been eyeing Wick's Houses of the Blooded for some time now) but there's a certain aestheic I would like to recapture. Maybe the old school clone games do it. Maybe there are modern games that get it right - as someone said, being able to make a character in 5-10 minutes is really, really awesome, and to be able t come away with plenty of roleplaying and mechanical crunch is pretty good too.
I'm sure pages and pages could be written about this, but I'll just try to sum up my feelings about why I prefer some of the older iterations of D&D and other RPGs in a couple of sentences: It has nothing to do with kludgey subsystems or the goofy "you want to roll high here, but low here." It has more to do with fewer choices and less mechanics. Odd that: Fewer player build options and fewer mechanics to get in the way always seem to create more vivid opportunities for the game. The players have less shit to get in the way of how they envision their characters. The DM has more time to build a cool world, random monster tables and interesting situations since he isn't spending three hours building "balanced" encounters. Fights move faster and are more dynamic because your head is in the fight instead of on the numbers, feats and powers. I think there are lessons to be learned from "modern" games as well, but there is more to the older games than just aesthetics. In a lot of cases, they played a helluva lot differently.
If I were you, I would listen to your instinct, read the various options at my disposal, and work up a system that was a good fit for me and my group (you do want them involved in this process, afterall). No reason to scrap Traveller, since you say its going well. You'll need time to plan stuff out for your next campaign. :)
Quote from: winkingbishop;414704It has more to do with fewer choices and less mechanics. Odd that: Fewer player build options and fewer mechanics to get in the way always seem to create more vivid opportunities for the game. The players have less shit to get in the way of how they envision their characters.
I think this is what I'm trying to get at - what was that difference? I mean, there must have been something to it, those older designs, right?
Was looking over the old Classic Traveller on the train yesterday (as I already mentioned). I noticed the trading table, and I thought that its so...simple. Just that, simple. Easy to deal with. A single table, a couple notes on modifiers, and that's all.
I remember trying to use the Mongoose version in play once, about a year or so ago. It was confusing and weird, I remember. I was trying to do things fast of course, but I remember just being overwhelmed by checking all the stuff there. Don't know why - maybe I just brainfarted that day, but still.
I find that, at least for Classic Traveller, I really enjoyed the writing. Heck, the setting I'm using now for our Traveller game was inspired by a short bit in Book 0 of the Classic book, something about "Write a short campaign description, like..." and it gave a quick example. Holy hell! At that point, I was ready to use the "generic Imperium" but that little blurb got me thinking, why? Even Marc Miller never intended it, and gave some ideas about how you might (while keeping the base setting assumption about the way communication works between worlds). Very nice that bit.
QuoteIf I were you, I would listen to your instinct, read the various options at my disposal, and work up a system that was a good fit for me and my group (you do want them involved in this process, after all). No reason to scrap Traveller, since you say its going well. You'll need time to plan stuff out for your next campaign. :)
Well, I'm having a think. There are a few things I wouldn't mind to buy along the path of what I'm talking about. I've a few ideas. Games I'd give a look at again after 10-15 years. A certain aesthetic I guess is what I want, and older games had it in spades.
Quote from: Mencelus;414757Was looking over the old Classic Traveller on the train yesterday (as I already mentioned). I noticed the trading table, and I thought that its so...simple. Just that, simple. Easy to deal with. A single table, a couple notes on modifiers, and that's all.
Until you get a Industrial Rich World next to a Non-industrial, Agricultural World you have a perpetuate money machine. Traveller mechanics are good but they are not perfect.
More complex character don't get in the way of roleplaying. For a particular player or referee that could be true. But complexity is a matter of taste. A clunky system gets in the way not matter if it is simple or complex. A well-designed system makes the game run smooth.
Quote from: estar;414840Until you get a Industrial Rich World next to a Non-industrial, Agricultural World you have a perpetuate money machine. Traveller mechanics are good but they are not perfect.
More complex character don't get in the way of roleplaying. For a particular player or referee that could be true. But complexity is a matter of taste. A clunky system gets in the way not matter if it is simple or complex. A well-designed system makes the game run smooth.
That's always gonna be the case eh? No matter what. Difference is, how much crunchiness went into finding that out? A lot or a little? If the answer is a little, then it sits all right in my book.
And anyway, I didn't say the older stuff I'm thinking about was impervious to abuse; that isn't my point. Not by a long shot.
Quote from: estar;414840More complex character don't get in the way of roleplaying. For a particular player or referee that could be true. But complexity is a matter of taste. A clunky system gets in the way not matter if it is simple or complex. A well-designed system makes the game run smooth.
Right.
My main games and setting are played in a frankly relatively math-heavy, skill based game (the chargen is the hardest part), but for the game we play, it instigates and enhances the RP.
But that kind of thing does not for everyone.
At Origins a few years ago, my brother and I sat in the breezeway trying to rope people in to a kind of fast-and-loose Classic Traveller: roll up a piece of a subsector together, brainstorm world details, roll up a character, say, "Okay, you're mustered out here--what do you do now?" The high point was a sort of Ocean's 11 in orbit sort of thing where a 1/2-term Merchant survivor of a pirate attack twigged the other PCs on to a megamillion credit job lifting a cargo of radioactives from the disabled fat trader he'd been serving on. Whee!
It was a lot of fun; my brother recorded it and put it up on the Internet Archive. I don't know if anyone here listens to AP recordings, but here (http://www.archive.org/details/ClassicTravellerOrigins) it is.
I think our desire to play was partly nostalgia but partly an appreciation of just how much life was left in the concept--kicking around the galaxy looking for the next big score. You're Han Solo! I mean, Halfjack's Diaspora started out as Traveller for FATE, and you can't swing a cat without hitting a different port of Traveller: Mongoose, GURPS, even d20 IIRC.
Did you say Oceans' 11 in space (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfPQ1axa5Og)? :D
Quote from: thedungeondelver;414931Did you say Oceans' 11 in space (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfPQ1axa5Og)? :D
I saw this trailer a while ago, are they ever going to Make this?
I can't find anything out on IMDB.
If they did make it, the networks would probably cancel it anyway. :(
It looks awesome though. :)
Quote from: EBM;414942I saw this trailer a while ago, are they ever going to Make this?
I can't find anything out on IMDB.
If they did make it, the networks would probably cancel it anyway. :(
It looks awesome though. :)
Sean Pertwee wants to do it, the creators want to do it - the point is getting that pitch to stick with somebody. Chief issue is swinging 60's nostalgia (and 40's swing nostalgia) has died out somewhat. People are in a "we-want-our-sci-fi-to-reflect-our-post 9/11-anomie" mode, still. So we get the Battlestar Galactica reboot (which is most excellent, please don't misunderstand me) and so forth.
Maybe it'll stick in a couple years.
Sean Pertwee sounds so very much like his dad. He doesn't look much like him though.
RPGPundit
Quote from: RPGPundit;415194Sean Pertwee sounds so very much like his dad. He doesn't look much like him though.
RPGPundit
Maybe he regenerated at some point before he hit the big time!