TheRPGSite

I received this today from penandpapergames.com; notification of a new player in my area looking for gamers:

"Looking For: Looking for a player to join a GURPS Game.
The world is Fantasy/Tolkein Derivative with Romanesque elements.  I'd also describe open-world, low-fantasy, and heavy emphasis on role-playing versus roll-play.
Heavy GM interaction needed for character creation as the world is 20-years in making and refining.  Must be 18+ due to NDA required to play, and we're utilizing GURPs for the game system due to flexibility.  It's not necessary to know GURPS though, as Our GM been using it 30 years+."

This is pretty much my idea of hell. It has all the hallmarks of awfulness to come. Role play/Roll play, a micromanaging GM, and GURPS. And the NDA tells me the GM either thinks his world is publishable, or this whole game is designed around building the plot for his novel. I'm almost tempted to join in just to subvert it...

Quote from: Herne's Son;972351I'm almost tempted to join in just to subvert it...

Or and I'm just throwing this out there you can leave them alone to have their fun and you can have yours.

Which is what I'll inevitably do.

Gaming ads are just like other personal ads (or if you've ever been a hiring manager-- applications, resumes and cover letters sent for openings). There are always plenty of very clumsy, poorly thought out first attempts that you can totally take pity on or make fun of if you want to. It would be pointless and cruel to actually join just to ruin this person's time. However, if someone were to actually show me an ad like this that they were thinking of posting and asked what I thought, I would respond with something like, "No, you shouldn't. It sounds truly horrible. Gamers who think their game world is going to become a novel make terrible GMs, and there aren't many people who really want a micro-managing GURPS GM. I would be genuinely worried about someone who said yes to this ad being in reality a troll trying to mess with you. You are better off leaving this pet project of yours in the shoebox under your bed."

I saw one recently where the Player was looking for a GM to run a game for him in a setting that Player had created.
That seemed... unlikely to succeed.

Another one, for a Vampire game, promised a 'curated' gaming experience... which I asked about, and got this reply:
"There will be a lot of scenes for individuals, for them to pursue their own desired course for their character. These scenes will be tailored to you; they may make you happy or sad or anxious, but they will all help you personally develop. Vampire isn't about running through objectives as a party for us, but rather building a world where everybody still feels like the main character in their own story."

All fine and good, 'other people's fun' and all that...

I wouldn't get near this with a ten foot pole. Or a ten foot Pole for that matter. The NDA aspect does make it seem a little creepy though.

If the GM's game world is that delicate, I wonder that they allow anyone to play in it, other than in hopes of some sort of ego stroking.

The biggest redlight to me is the heavy GM interaction to character creation. I have a friend who runs games like this and you feel like your playing his novels characters. I'd not be interested in repeating the experience but others fun may vary.

So many red flags:

"role-playing versus roll-play"

"the world is 20-years in making and refining"

"NDA required to play"

and of course

"GURPS"

Okay, that last one is a joke.

(Also: How can a Tolkien-ripoff take 20 years to "create and refine"? That's longer than it took Tolkien!)

There was a time in the early '90s after I left school when I was hard up for people to game with. I tried a few of the ads on the FLGS corkboard, and I regretted it each time. I quickly discovered it was easier to make people I already liked into gamers than to try and find gamers that I liked.

Unless it were for a big playtest or something, I would never sign a legal document of any kind to participate in a game. A bit of a red flag.

Quote from: Herne's Son;972351I'm almost tempted to join in just to subvert it...

See if he has good stuff.

If he does, you know what to do.

NDA is that for real?!

I'd empty my bladder with laughter if some 'no mark' asked me to sign one for their pwecious game.

Quote from: Baulderstone;972375...it was easier to make people I already liked into gamers than to try and find gamers that I liked.

Rave On, John Donne

Hmm. I wonder if the "experienced GM" got a chance to look at this before it got posted. The writer says he's a different person, and has awful ad-posting style. The NDA seems off, but it might be "hey we take this world seriously so we want you to be an adult and promise not to post OOC details online to not undermine IC character knowledge and so on" which gonzo ad poster dude just writes "NDA" for.

However, some of you folks' reactions make me wonder where you guys "come from". It can make complete sense (worded another way) to involve the GM in character creation for a detailed GURPS campaign. In fact, the GM had better at least spec out what sort of character to make, or it may not fit the campaign, especially if you're looking at the 4e Basic Set which lets you buy multiple arms and super powers and a nictating membrane and whatever else.

I read in another forum where this was posted that the NDA could be an attempt to not leak anything about the game world that's been created.  Maybe they think what they have is really special, I don't know.

Quote from: RunningLaser;972391Maybe they think what they have is really special...

I'm sure they do. I'm also sure it's not. And I doubt if it is anything they could copyright if it is already a Tolkien rip-off to start with.

Lost me at GURPS.

"Fantasy/Tolkien with Romanesque" vanilla D&D fantasy sounds like.

"Heavy GM involvement required for character generation"? No thanks. If the world is that complex and involved I'm not sure I would be able to satisfactorilly play a character in it.

NDA? To play a Tolkien derivative GURPS fantasy game? Why? Doesn't sound like you've got anything that special.

Quote from: DavetheLost;972408NDA? To play a Tolkien derivative GURPS fantasy game? Why? Doesn't sound like you've got anything that special.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and speculate that the guy running this campaign is actually Christopher Tolkien.

Quote from: RunningLaser;972391I read in another forum where this was posted that the NDA could be an attempt to not leak anything about the game world that's been created.  Maybe they think what they have is really special, I don't know.

Maybe the NDA is a public service attempt to prevent the players from cornering others in game stores and vomiting out "Well, my character..." stories?

Quote from: HappyDaze;972422Maybe the NDA is a public service attempt to prevent the players from cornering others in game stores and vomiting out "Well, my character..." stories?

As a former game store employee, I have decided this guy is now my personal hero.

Quote from: Baulderstone;972423As a former game store employee, I have decided this guy is now my personal hero.

Hah ha! OMG, been there, done that, got the t-shirt! Smiling and nodding your customer service while delicately trying to extricate oneself from such conversations was a learning lesson.

I quickly learned that direct communication, putting them on hold while I went and did needed work, was really the only sane way to deal with it. Lonely people have all day to share their fantasies to be heard. But then there's real work to do, so it's gotta take a backseat. ;)

Quote from: Dumarest;972393I'm sure they do. I'm also sure it's not. And I doubt if it is anything they could copyright if it is already a Tolkien rip-off to start with.

I've been in game development for twenty years. I stopped counting the number of people who've told me "I have this amazing game idea I'm working on. I'd tell you about it, but I'm afraid you'll steal it."

They all have the same things in common:

1. I'd laugh, then tell them that whatever they're thinking, someone has (a) already thought of it and if it's actually good (b) already published it.

2. None of them have ever actually publish their precious game.


Sad truth: your brilliant idea isn't that brilliant. Someone has already thought of it, probably done the math on it, and concluded either (a) it ain't that great of an idea and/or (b) it has a market of about 2 people, including the author and their mom.

Quote from: Baulderstone;972421I'm going to go out on a limb here and speculate that the guy running this campaign is actually Christopher Tolkien.

(http://i.imgur.com/puANLcE.gif)

Nuke it from orbit.

Quote from: Dumarest;972374...
and of course

"GURPS"

Love it    :D

I love that you were banned for posting this on rpg.net.

I don't think this is that crazy. People put years and years into their world and are just overprotective of it.  And the more time spent on a single campaign/world, the less you are exposed to more modern stuff. That role vs roll playing thing was all the rage in the '80s.  As to GURPs, okay, that's a little odd.

And don't say people never steal. Even from weird little projects.

Look at The Clonus Horror. For some reason Michael Bay tried to steal that for his movie The Island.

Quote from: Herne's Son;972351I'm almost tempted to join in just to subvert it...

Well, we know where players like you come from. TheRPGsite is where.

What? Not one person commented on that creaky old construct of Roleplay vs Rollplay?

What has theRPGsite.com come to?

Ok, so: GURPS, like. So take your snide comments elsewhere.

Tolkien-esque vanilla fantasy with romaneque... dude. Really?  How many fucking words do you need to say 'Vanilla Fantasy'?  

I actually like most of the rest of that opening line except for the noted bits. Low fantasy? I can get behind that. Open world? Only say that if you mean it, bro.  Because if I join a game that promises Open World I will, sure as shit, stress test the hell out of it.  Its not even a conscious thing, I just sorta do it. Not enough playing at Conventions or something.

Heavy GM interaction?  

Well, that is entirely up to what that means. I mean I could tell you 'people waiting silently in your house' and mean 'rapists' or 'surprise party'... could go either way.  I've tried to do 'heavy GM interaction' game mastering and found it was too much work for me and too frustrating for most of my players, so I don't do that, but I got no problems with a GM wanting to help me make characters that fit his world better.  But I do object to Bad-Touch GMing.

World 20+ years in the making?  Eh. I've got a decade or so of world building on this very site, but really after the first few years it was mostly tinkering around the margins and contradicting my earlier self. This (along with the 30+ years experience with GURPS (hey! I've got that! I mean, I first played GURPS thirty years ago (second ever RPG, yo!)... and that's enough for ad copy!), just is a way of assuring players that they won't be stumbling into a shitshow of 'um... let me see... I think rules for breathing are on... um..' for an entire session.  Its an assurance of competence. Sorta like Made in the USA means you'll pay twice what you would have for the same thing made in china at a sweatshop.  Its not actually a garauntee that no sweatshops were employed in its construction.

Now the NDA? Yeah... thats... precious.  That's a particular brand of special. Licking the window special.  

All in all I'd rate this particular posting at maybe a 3 out of 10.  Not really fucked up enough to rate a proper thread, but with some gems that deserve mockery nonetheless.

I see nothing wrong here. It seems to me that the GM wants to make sure that the players are on the same page with him.

No you can't bring a cyborg ninja psi character you created with GURPS without asking the GM.

- the GM must be such a horrible person /sarcasm

Quote from: John Scott;972474No you can't bring a cyborg ninja psi character you created with GURPS without asking the GM.

See, this is why roll-playing is superior to role-playing: the dice eliminate from play any Unique Special Snowflake players.

It's like my son said to me a few weeks back. "Papa, do you know?" - that's how he starts half his sentences to me - "Huw said, you get what you get and you don't get upset."
"Was this at lunch?" I asked.
"Yes. How you know, papa?"

As a parent says to their kid about lunch, I say to the player rolling up their character: you get what you get, and you don't get upset.

Now, if you actually roll up a cyborg ninja psi, awesome! Let's go with it. But if it's at all likely to happen, you're probably playing a whole game devoted to silliness, like Vampire or something. And so it goes.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;972475Now, if you actually roll up a cyborg ninja psi, awesome! Let's go with it. But if it's at all likely to happen, you're probably playing a whole game devoted to silliness, like Vampire or something. And so it goes.

Silly Vampire: The Masquerade is best Vampire: The Masquerade.

I'll take Lupine Impersonator (with minty-fresh breath spray!) over Tragic Moping Sexy Rich Loner Vampire any day of the week. She can team up with Muslim Terrorist Assassin Vampire and they can fight crime. Vampires-that-turn-into-snakes-and-deal-drugs crime. Fun!

it could also be the GM is playing out a lifepath character creation. That can work really well in GURPS, as you can note the hours of learning based on what your character was doing, which translates to skill points. With a nice detailed world, you then also have a good idea where the character has been and who they know, etc., and so does the player since you did it together.

Sign the NDA with your character's name. Insist on this and refuse to back down.

Quote from: Just Another Snake Cult;972506Sign the NDA with your character's name. Insist on this and refuse to back down.

Thread winner^^

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;972451I love that you were banned for posting this on rpg.net.

See, that is just rpg.net's no insults rule at work. What makes this pure, rpg.net hypocrisy gold is that The Wyzard comes into makes one boilerplate ban announcement (https://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?806320-Ummm-yeah-no-thanks&p=21201184#post21201184) and locks the thread, but then he comes back to make more one more post in the locked thread bemoaning the guy's NDA (https://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?806320-Ummm-yeah-no-thanks&p=21201190#post21201190).

Do as we say, not as we do.

There is always the possibility that the GM wants to keep the details under wraps to maintain the surprise of discovery.
There may be more than one group playing in the setting and publishing details destroys the freshness for others.
=

Quote from: Greentongue;972527There is always the possibility that the GM wants to keep the details under wraps to maintain the surprise of discovery.
There may be more than one group playing in the setting and publishing details destroys the freshness for others.
=

That would almost make it seem worse. If he nailed me for an NDA violation because I was discussing his game world on this forum, that would make some level of sense. If he nailed me for an NDA violation for casually talking another player in his other group that was also under the NDA, that would be full-on crazy.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;972475See, this is why roll-playing is superior to role-playing: the dice eliminate from play any Unique Special Snowflake players.

It's like my son said to me a few weeks back. "Papa, do you know?" - that's how he starts half his sentences to me - "Huw said, you get what you get and you don't get upset."
"Was this at lunch?" I asked.
"Yes. How you know, papa?"

As a parent says to their kid about lunch, I say to the player rolling up their character: you get what you get, and you don't get upset.

Now, if you actually roll up a cyborg ninja psi, awesome! Let's go with it. But if it's at all likely to happen, you're probably playing a whole game devoted to silliness, like Vampire or something. And so it goes.

Horseshit. People just roll until they what they want or find other ways to play the system. Annoying players are going to annoying no matter how you approach it.

Quote from: Voros;972534Horseshit. People just roll until they what they want or find other ways to play the system.

If you ever run a game, there's a word I'd like to introduce to your vocabulary: "No."

It works best when coupled with some other phrase, for example,

"No, your first set of rolls is what you'll use."
"No, don't be stupid."
"No, you play what you roll, if he dies you can roll another."
"No, you get what you get and you don't get upset."

This is where you say, "And the player then says no, I'm leaving." And players do have that right, but they don't exercise it as frequently as people suggest on internet forums. Most players, like most DMs, just go with the flow, at least for a dozen or sessions or so, just to give things a chance.

The OP's quoted game group ad read to me like someone who hasn't played or run a game for a long time and is feeling insecure, that potential players will argue with him and that he won't have the confidence to tell them, "No." He's a Bitter Non-Gamer. Since I game more or less regularly now I don't have that worry, I know players generally just go with it. Most people are much more easy-going in person than in forum discussions, since forum discussions are dominated by BNGs.

Just Say No, Nancy told us.

Quote from: Voros;972534Horseshit. People just roll until they what they want or find other ways to play the system. Annoying players are going to annoying no matter how you approach it.

Any player who rolls up a character without me as a witness just rolled up a character that won't be played in my game. Any GM who lets a player game the system probably shouldn't be a GM.

Thanks for the lecture that misses my point. Course I say no all the time when I GM: no multiclassing for instance.

But you were just claiming that 'roll playing' prevents Snowflakes (a moronic and tiresome terminology but let's put that aside for now). Which is BS, you can prevent others from derailing the game through much more effective method than committing to purely random chargen. And in my experience those who claim to use purely random chargen or often the worst powergamers and system-abusers.

Quote from: Dumarest;972579Any player who rolls up a character without me as a witness just rolled up a character that won't be played in my game. Any GM who lets a player game the system probably shouldn't be a GM.

Okay, that seems paranoid but you go girl.

Are you claiming you've never had a player try to game the system at the table? Or you just trying to show me your GM cock-size? Your response seems like a non-sequitur to my post which is that shitty players will be shitty players regardless of the system or chargen. Random chargen isn't going to fix stupid.

Quote from: Voros;972595Okay, that seems paranoid but you go girl.

Are you claiming you've never had a player try to game the system at the table? Or you just trying to show me your GM cock-size? Your response seems like a non-sequitur to my post which is that shitty players will be shitty players regardless of the system or chargen. Random chargen isn't going to fix stupid.

You really should get back on your meds. A couple of people point out how stupid your comment was and you overreact like nobody's business.

I'm the one over-reacting? Okay...you're the one who tried to pull out your big GM cock but you didn't actually address what I said and still haven't.

I said that random chargen doesn't prevent shitty players from being shitty. Do you want to present a rebuttal or not?

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;972564"No, you play what you roll, if he dies you can roll another."

Bingo.

Sometimes random chargen gives you a special snowflake, sometimes it gives you some poor sod doomed to die at first opportunity for stupid decision-making. ;)

Quote from: darthfozzywig;972431I've been in game development for twenty years. I stopped counting the number of people who've told me "I have this amazing game idea I'm working on. I'd tell you about it, but I'm afraid you'll steal it."

They all have the same things in common:

1. I'd laugh, then tell them that whatever they're thinking, someone has (a) already thought of it and if it's actually good (b) already published it.

2. None of them have ever actually publish their precious game.


Sad truth: your brilliant idea isn't that brilliant. Someone has already thought of it, probably done the math on it, and concluded either (a) it ain't that great of an idea and/or (b) it has a market of about 2 people, including the author and their mom.

We tell people this ALOT over at BGG. About every 3 months we get the "I want to show my game design. But Im afraid someone will steal it." Then we inform them of the ins and outs of all this. Some are so fearful they are instead asking for how to PATENT the game to protect it. Then we inform them of the ins and outs and COST and time, which is oft wasted.

About once a year we get a "I want some advice on my game idea and how to design it. But I cant tell you about it because you might steal my idea." Not even a game. Just an idea.

Heres the bitch though... It can and oh it very does happen. But its so rare that its like worrying about being hit by a meteor if you walk outside.

Quote from: Voros;972595Okay, that seems paranoid but you go girl.

Not even slightly. From experience allowing players to roll out of sight is just asking for trouble sooner or later.

But more importantly. If a player honestly rolled great out of my sight and then showed it to me. I have zero way of telling that unless someone else saw the rolls and can confirm. This is why I tell players to not roll if I or someone else isnt observing.

Back on topic: The add seems ok overall really. The NDA is a little odd. But theres no data on the why of it. Could be anything. Doesnt want key into leaked, doesnt want it stolen, etc.

As for the DM hands on Char-Gen. Um... Its Gurps. The GM kinda needs to enumerate whats allowed and what isnt. Like "Sorry No you cannot create a superhero, an alien, or drive a tank in this setting." and state what can and cant be used.

Quote from: Voros;972600I'm the one over-reacting? Okay...you're the one who tried to pull out your big GM cock

I still remember pulling my big GM cock out of the red box...:-)

I used to pull out my Big GM Cock (TM) alla time, but I realized it was rude to all the players that weren't my GF, so I stopped.  I've got only so many hours in the day for sex, you know.

Quote from: Voros;972594And in my experience those who claim to use purely random chargen or often the worst powergamers and system-abusers.

Yeah...that's why all the min-maxers flock to OD&D and leave 3.5 and PF alone...Jesus, WTF are you thinking?  Regale us please with all these diabolical ways powergamers abuse random chargen.

Quote from: CRKrueger;972676Yeah...that's why all the min-maxers flock to OD&D and leave 3.5 and PF alone...Jesus, WTF are you thinking?  Regale us please with all these diabolical ways powergamers abuse random chargen.

Voros's claim that that random systems draw more power gamers is highly dubious, but I will say that someone who cheats at dice rolls can make out a lot better during character generation in games like Stormbringer 1E or Heroes Unlimited  than someone with an optimal build in 3.5

Of course, as has been previously established, it is pretty simple to police rolls.

Quote from: Baulderstone;972680Voros's claim that that random systems draw more power gamers is highly dubious, but I will say that someone who cheats at dice rolls can make out a lot better during character generation in games like Stormbringer 1E or Heroes Unlimited  than someone with an optimal build in 3.5

There's an argument there, that I think we might talk about if this thread had gone differently. I think that there's a certain desire to make/get the best possible character. In a build-based game, you can obsess about allocating those feats or points or whatever. In random creation, that energy more comes out in 'abuses' (real cheats, or in attempting to cajole rerolls or 'create a new character when the first doesn't turn out well, etc.).'

QuoteOf course, as has been previously established, it is pretty simple to police rolls.

Very true.

Color me oblivious but can't the GM jack up the opponents to match the character?
Seems like it would be more of a party thing than a GM thing.
Don't invite a Superman to your party if you are not a superhero yourself.
=

Quote from: Voros;972594you can prevent others from derailing the game through much more effective method than committing to purely random chargen.

Of course! It's just one tool in the toolbox. But here's the thing: continuing with the theme that most players and DMs just go with the flow of the rest of the group... most players aren't trying to "derail the game." So the toolbox doesn't have to be very full. It just doesn't happen much.

Storygames were all about stopping the GM from abusing the players, which simply didn't happen very much. And many of these hardarse DM discussions are about stopping the players from abusing the DM, which simply doesn't happen very much. Most of these discussions read to me like the people who buy insurance against virgin birth of the Messiah or alien abduction. It's possible, but...

If you set things up right and nip problems in the bud, you usually don't have many problems with players or DM.

Quote from: CRKrueger;972676Yeah...that's why all the min-maxers flock to OD&D and leave 3.5 and PF alone...Jesus, WTF are you thinking?  Regale us please with all these diabolical ways powergamers abuse random chargen.

He's thinking about how cool and ironic an' shit he is.

Ahh yes, who would have thought a thread started to gang pile a pretentious DM ad would quickly turn into a slap fight with E-peens.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;972699Of course! It's just one tool in the toolbox. But here's the thing: continuing with the theme that most players and DMs just go with the flow of the rest of the group... most players aren't trying to "derail the game." So the toolbox doesn't have to be very full. It just doesn't happen much.

Storygames were all about stopping the GM from abusing the players, which simply didn't happen very much. And many of these hardarse DM discussions are about stopping the players from abusing the DM, which simply doesn't happen very much. Most of these discussions read to me like the people who buy insurance against virgin birth of the Messiah or alien abduction. It's possible, but...

If you set things up right and nip problems in the bud, you usually don't have many problems with players or DM.

The question I have is why do so many people seem to keep gaming with these assholes?   I keep reading stories of "my horrible GM..." or "my problem player..." when it's a game at the FLGS that people could just walk away from.

Quote from: Greentongue;972688Color me oblivious but can't the GM jack up the opponents to match the character?
Seems like it would be more of a party thing than a GM thing.
Don't invite a Superman to your party if you are not a superhero yourself.
=

This used to be our primary argument against characters with psionics in D&D. Once you have just a single PC with psionics in the group, you are now opening the door to allow encounters with all sorts of TPK capable monsters with psionics. It just wasn't worth it.

Quote from: DavetheLost;972704The question I have is why do so many people seem to keep gaming with these assholes?   I keep reading stories of "my horrible GM..." or "my problem player..." when it's a game at the FLGS that people could just walk away from.

There is a shitty idea floating around that "bad gaming is better than no gaming". The reality is that "no gaming is better than bad gaming".

Quote from: CRKrueger;972676Yeah...that's why all the min-maxers flock to OD&D and leave 3.5 and PF alone...Jesus, WTF are you thinking?  Regale us please with all these diabolical ways powergamers abuse random chargen.

I found powergamers faked their chargen, random or otherwise. 'Policing' my players is about as attractive to me as keeping all my players in gimp masks.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;972700He's thinking about how cool and ironic an' shit he is.

I guess like Alanis Morissette you don't know what the word ironic means as nothing I've said here is ironic. But I guess you read on the net that millenials are 'ironic' and gotta repeat it like a brain-damaged mental patient.

Keep on nipping at my heels though...

Quote from: Voros;972714I found powergamers faked their chargen, random or otherwise. 'Policing' my players is about as attractive to me as keeping all my players in gimp masks.

If someone is going to cheat, they are going to cheat.  You go with point-buy you need to then check their math, you use some other build process, you need to check that.  They then start to play, you need to check every roll.

You will NEVER stop an asshole from being an asshole through mechanics. Period.  The only game that may be cheat-proof is Amber.

You just don't play with assholes, and kick a cheat the second they crop up.

Quote from: CRKrueger;972718You will NEVER stop an asshole from being an asshole through mechanics. Period.  The only game that may be cheat-proof is Amber.

You just don't play with assholes, and kick a cheat the second they crop up.

Uhhhh...that was actually my point. Is everyone arguing with themselves here?

Painful pleas for advice elsewhere also include:

* "I don't want to kick out player X or Y" (because they're my friend, or whatever).

* "I think a GM should try to give everyone what they want" (even if they're confused about what they want, or what they want is to win despite massive foolishness).

Quote from: Voros;972720Uhhhh...that was actually my point. Is everyone arguing with themselves here?

If that was your point then it surprises me that you failed to realize how silly it was to claim random chargen is more susceptible to cheaters than point buy.  The more complicated the point buy system, the easier it is to cheat and the harder to verify.  For random chargen, you just have to watch them roll dice if you think they are cheating.  You don't eliminate cheat-policing either way.

I didn't compare it to point buy. Just noted that powergamers CLAIMED to prefer random chargen. Probably because it let them fudge their rolls as I'm not the GM equivalent of the Soup Nazis.

Quote from: DavetheLost;972704The question I have is why do so many people seem to keep gaming with these assholes?   I keep reading stories of "my horrible GM..." or "my problem player..." when it's a game at the FLGS that people could just walk away from.

I dunno. I think mostly they just walk away quietly, but they don't post about it on the internet so we don't hear about it. I've walked away from plenty of games. But I've also written about plenty of great games - doesn't lead to much discussion, though.

The thing is though that most issues don't become issues if dealt with straight away. For example, there's always the, "but I don't have enough points to build my character concept" guy. If you try to make them play a character with "only" a million points of abilities, they'll chafe against other restrictions in game. But if you use random roll character generation and explain that's how the game will go for everyone, that person generally just shrugs their shoulders and goes with it. Or they walk away in the first session, so they never become That Guy, they're just "hey didn't we have a guy come once... what was his name? He didn't even bring snacks."

But generally players will just accept things and roll with it. As will DMs.

I just make some shit up that sounds fun, and then roll for everything else. I mean, random dungeons (suitably altered to remove insanity) and everything. I wrote about that here - http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?35920-GM-Advice-insufficient-steps&p=940288&viewfull=1#post940288 - and followed it up saying how it'd gone, but nobody was much interested. People only want to discuss disasters.

Quote from: Voros;972714I found powergamers faked their chargen, random or otherwise. 'Policing' my players is about as attractive to me as keeping all my players in gimp masks.

I often GM with half or more of my players on Skype and I don't want to do all of the dice rolling. So they could be cheating me blind. But I don't think they do and I don't worry about it. As for chargen, I don't have to make any effort to police my players and I don't have to be there when they are creating a character. I know what a character created with Adventurer or Cinematic point totals looks. I'm not even checking for cheating. I just know that none of them have cheated. It isn't rocket science.

------------
https://sites.google.com/site/grreference/home/reffiles/b-spell-lists

Quote from: Just Another Snake Cult;972506Sign the NDA with your character's name. Insist on this and refuse to back down.

That... that was *beautiful*.

Quote from: Voros;972735I didn't compare it to point buy. Just noted that powergamers CLAIMED to prefer random chargen. Probably because it let them fudge their rolls as I'm not the GM equivalent of the Soup Nazis.

Telling people they can't fudge character creation rolls isn't being the soup nazi. If the whole group decides they want to be able to fudge so they can make the types of characters they have in mind, that is fine for them to negotiate. But it isn't crazy to expect no fudging on those rolls in most circumstances. If we are going to roll random stats, I'd kind of like everyone at the table to be honest about their results. If you have a group of players and some fudge, but some don't, it isn't fair to the people who play by the rules.

Quote from: Voros;972714I found powergamers faked their chargen, random or otherwise. 'Policing' my players is about as attractive to me as keeping all my players in gimp masks.

It depends on the campaign and the players of course, but I found back when I was running 3E, policing was actually kind of necessary. My games now are point buy and I find checking the numbers is pretty important. Not simply because of cheating, but there were also plenty of instances of people messing up the rules while trying to make builds. The same thing happens in point buy systems, people miscalculate the numbers, not because they are cheating but because it is easy to make mistakes on that sort of thing if you are not careful. Also sometimes people aren't sure how the point buy works exactly and make mistakes due to misunderstanding how many points it takes to buy a skill. So I don't present policing as a matter of weeding out cheaters, because I think that is pretty rare in my group, I just present it as me going over the character creation process to make sure the numbers add up. Sometimes I get lazy about it though.

Quote from: Voros;972735I didn't compare it to point buy. Just noted that powergamers CLAIMED to prefer random chargen. Probably because it let them fudge their rolls

Okay. So that's the actual claim that Voros is trying to stand behind. We can go back and parse what he's said up-thread, but that at best gets us to 'you don't communicate your ideas well' and not to 'your ideas are wrong.' Fine. Let's do that.

Voros, you have observed that in your experience, powergamers prefer random generation methods. I'm certainly not going to discount your personal experience. I've certainly noticed in 5e that the people who like to maximize their character capacity prefer rolled stats rather than the stat array or point-buy options*,  perhaps hoping for a good set of rolls, and I'd assume just quickly getting rid of a character if the rolls were sub-optimal. I can definitely see if your experience is similar, where you might get this theory.

*but as a confounding variable, those options actually play differently, as the max starting stat with rolled is 18+racial bonus, while it is 15 with the other two options

Quoteas I'm not the GM equivalent of the Soup Nazis.

But there I'm going to part ways. Having people roll in the open (by which I mean with witnessing) is a perfectly reasonable thing to do. If you trust your players and don't feel the need, rock solid. Rock your bad self out. However, there is a value in the comfort afforded to knowing that everyone's rolls are being seen. I'm trying and failing to find an analogy equivalent to 'good fences make good neighbors,' but hopefully that alone gives you the idea. Knowing full well that the guy next to me can't be cheating makes me secure in my decision not to (since I'm not the only one being honest, and thus losing out, comparatively).

And I say that, secure in the knowledge that no one in my main group would cheat*. We're all grown adults and realize it is just a game, so cheating is silly. The assurance that no one else is cheating is just part of our social contract.
*That's not entirely true. There's one guy who comes in from out of town every 3-4 months and plays along, and he cheats CONSTANTLY. Even though he's always playing throwaway characters. It's become a running gag, and is tolerated because it is so bizarre and we don't even get why he's doing it.

And as an aside, I don't see the Soup Nazi isn't really a good comparison. Grammar Nazis maybe, as they are overly fastidious busybodies policing others actions where it is not needed. The Soup Nazi was just a cantankerous guy with exactly one lever of control over the world-at-large using it punitively against anyone he saw as slighting him. Even if you don't like roll-policing, it isn't about punishment, it is about a social contract protecting against those who would cheat having an advantage over the honest player.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;972736I dunno. I think mostly they just walk away quietly, but they don't post about it on the internet so we don't hear about it. I've walked away from plenty of games. But I've also written about plenty of great games - doesn't lead to much discussion, though.

That seems to be a consistent theme on forums. People spend 99% of the time talking about scenarios that make up 0.1% of gaming experience. Both because they are more notable and because these ridiculous scenarios are easier to describe than 'that  really good game we had last night' which is probably pretty boring for anyone not playing in it.

Quote from: Headless;972702Ahh yes, who would have thought a thread started to gang pile a pretentious DM ad would quickly turn into a slap fight with E-peens.

Of course.

But that's only because I know I always win E-peen fights.  Seriously, when I unveil my E-Peen voices from the Heavens thunder "Unleash the Kraken!". Frankly its a bit tiresome, but bitches love it.

Quote from: Spike;972786Seriously, when I unveil my E-Peen voices from the Heavens thunder "Unleash the Kraken!". Frankly its a bit tiresome, but bitches love it.

There is some massively Lovecraftian imagery associated with a Pokethulhu whipping out a Kraken-ish E-Peen that deserves an entry in the Monster Manual, with artwork.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;972776Okay. So that's the actual claim that Voros is trying to stand behind. We can go back and parse what he's said up-thread, but that at best gets us to 'you don't communicate your ideas well' and not to 'your ideas are wrong.' Fine. Let's do that.

Voros, you have observed that in your experience, powergamers prefer random generation methods. I'm certainly not going to discount your personal experience. I've certainly noticed in 5e that the people who like to maximize their character capacity prefer rolled stats rather than the stat array or point-buy options*,  perhaps hoping for a good set of rolls, and I'd assume just quickly getting rid of a character if the rolls were sub-optimal. I can definitely see if your experience is similar, where you might get this theory.

I don't think what I said was unclear. I think a lot of what people projected onto what I said made it unclear.

A simple 'what do you mean, can you give an example?' would have produced exactly what Willie says here. Instead a bunch of posters as usual lost their shit cause someone was questioning the holy system of random chargen, which magically removes 'snowflakes' and powergamers from the table. Uh huh.

Of course these days I just play people I trust not to cheat so its not an issue but as a young man it was. I remember us all sitting around watching people roll their characters, it a long time, cut into play time and bored the shit out of new players so now I just tell people to bring their PC sheets to the game and I look them over. I only spend time with new players during chargen. The advantage with a point buy system is that as Brendan says I can easily confirm if it has been made according to the system. These days I actually leave it up to the player what method of chargen they want to use.

Again, no system will fix stupid.

Quote from: Dumarest;972374(Also: How can a Tolkien-ripoff take 20 years to "create and refine"? That's longer than it took Tolkien!)

Now that is funny. I needed that laugh.

Look, like I said, the guy probably hasn't played in 20 years. He's just sat at home feeling lonely and paging through his folder of maps and scribbled notes and dreaming of The One True Perfect Campaign. Now he's reaching out but because he's a BNG he doesn't know how to talk to people properly.

He'd probably be alright in person, once you got past the first awkward hour or so. And then he could watch his players completely trash his One True Perfect Campaign with carelessly killing off their first 3 characters and a bunch of Monty Python jokes. And there's a good chance he'd grow up and just roll with it and say, "alright you crazy bastards, pass the cheetos and roll up a new character."

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;972773Telling people they can't fudge character creation rolls isn't being the soup nazi. If the whole group decides they want to be able to fudge so they can make the types of characters they have in mind, that is fine for them to negotiate. But it isn't crazy to expect no fudging on those rolls in most circumstances. If we are going to roll random stats, I'd kind of like everyone at the table to be honest about their results. If you have a group of players and some fudge, but some don't, it isn't fair to the people who play by the rules.

The last campaign I started, I borrowed an idea from someone on the Castles and Crusades forum: I let my players choose their ability scores. I figured, "What the hell? It's their character, their vision, their roleplay."
Only one guy came back with all 18s and I knew he was going to. They were all able to play exactly what they wanted and the campaign balanced fine with a little care.

Quote from: Harlock;972917Now that is funny. I needed that laugh.

At least I'm good for something! Now sign my NDA.

"BNG"?

Tried Googling it but nothing made sense.

Quote from: Dumarest;972928"BNG"?

"Bitter Non-Gamer"

Someone who no longer plays the games, just likes to complain about them online.

Bitter Non-Gamer. Not merely someone who doesn't game and is happy about it, there are zillions of those, but someone who doesn't game and is bitter about it. So all they do is think about gaming and talk about it online. They always insist that they'd have zero tolerance for the slightest deviation from The Right Way To Play. Which is probably why they're not gaming.

And the longer they don't game the fussier and weirder they get about it, like the guy who hasn't dated for ten years who wants a woman on $100+k with a PhD who is extraordinarily beautiful, 30-35yo and a virgin but not a prude. Really the guy just needs to get laid. And the BNG just needs to stop pouring over his notes lovingly and roll the dice and pass the cheetos.

It's here, along with other things I added to the wiki back in the day.

https://wiki.rpg.net/index.php/RPG_Lexica:ABC

Quote from: WillInNewHaven;972738I often GM with half or more of my players on Skype and I don't want to do all of the dice rolling. So they could be cheating me blind. But I don't think they do and I don't worry about it. As for chargen, I don't have to make any effort to police my players and I don't have to be there when they are creating a character. I know what a character created with Adventurer or Cinematic point totals looks. I'm not even checking for cheating. I just know that none of them have cheated. It isn't rocket science.

------------
https://sites.google.com/site/grreference/home/reffiles/b-spell-lists

My first few online games, I fiddled around with dice-rolling solutions, and none of them were really satisfying, so I went to just having everyone make their own damn rolls. It's not like I ever make a point of visually confirming all players rolls when I am playing in person anyway.

Quote from: Harlock;972923The last campaign I started, I borrowed an idea from someone on the Castles and Crusades forum: I let my players choose their ability scores. I figured, "What the hell? It's their character, their vision, their roleplay."
Only one guy came back with all 18s and I knew he was going to. They were all able to play exactly what they wanted and the campaign balanced fine with a little care.

I will say on the scale of games with random roll character generation, D&D is one where the stats don't matter a great deal, especially in earlier editions. A character with all 18s can adventure with someone that with no stats providing positive bonuses, and it isn't going to make too much difference.

Quote from: Baulderstone;972941I will say on the scale of games with random roll character generation, D&D is one where the stats don't matter a great deal, especially in earlier editions. A character with all 18s can adventure with someone that with no stats providing positive bonuses, and it isn't going to make too much difference.

My (ancient/incomplete/probably-flawed) memory of White Box D&D was it had no formal effect but there was a minimum attribute value to be each class, and if your Prime Requisite (ST for fighters, IQ for wizards, WIS for clerics...) was above certain levels, you'd get a multiplier to earned experience throughout the game. So actually valuable eventually if you live, but extremely abstract. Taken in the context of players picking (or lying about) their attribute values, it means they pick to get more XP than players that picked/rolled a lower value for their prime requisite.

Quote from: Voros;972714I found powergamers faked their chargen, random or otherwise. 'Policing' my players is about as attractive to me as keeping all my players in gimp masks.

I like the gimp mask idea, but I won't police players either.

I must agree with Voros. There are plenty of cheating asshat powergamers and they will fuck with chargen, random or otherwise.  

But that's a player problem. Asshats get nuked.

The benefit of random chargen is speed and unexpected combinations. That's why I enjoy it.  

Quote from: jeff37923;972706There is a shitty idea floating around that "bad gaming is better than no gaming". The reality is that "no gaming is better than bad gaming".

This is always an important rule to remember.

Also, the corollary is "Finding (or building) a good gaming group is worth the effort"

See, I wouldn't play in this game for a single reason - experience causes me to assume that the time and devotion I'm required to spend on chargen is inversely proportional to the time the game will actually last before the GM burns out and gives up. I'm not sure why that should be the case, but it seems to hold true.

Quote from: jeff37923;972862There is some massively Lovecraftian imagery associated with a Pokethulhu whipping out a Kraken-ish E-Peen that deserves an entry in the Monster Manual, with artwork.

I've been getting ready to look around for an artist to do me up a sweet new avatar pick (I'm thinking Pika Wick...), I'm sure I can add that image to my order... now I just have to find an artist to commish for it...

Quote from: Voros;972897I don't think what I said was unclear. I think a lot of what people projected onto what I said made it unclear.

A simple 'what do you mean, can you give an example?' would have produced exactly what Willie says here. Instead a bunch of posters as usual lost their shit cause someone was questioning the holy system of random chargen, which magically removes 'snowflakes' and powergamers from the table. Uh huh.

I'm going to be honest-I don't care who was right or who was wrong. I could just see us spending the next 20 pages debating what you never intended to say (whether you said it or not) to absolutely no point. I don't tend to use terms like big swinging dicks, but I guess I agree with the people who said that this thread was devolving into that*.

Quote from: Skarg;972952My (ancient/incomplete/probably-flawed) memory of White Box D&D was it had no formal effect but there was a minimum attribute value to be each class, and if your Prime Requisite (ST for fighters, IQ for wizards, WIS for clerics...) was above certain levels, you'd get a multiplier to earned experience throughout the game. So actually valuable eventually if you live, but extremely abstract. Taken in the context of players picking (or lying about) their attribute values, it means they pick to get more XP than players that picked/rolled a lower value for their prime requisite.

attribute minimums I believe only occur in AD&D. OD&D has the following attribute bonuses and penalties:
Prime  requisite  15 +: +10% xp
Prime  requisite  13  or  14: +5% xp
Prime  requisite  8 or  7: -10% xp
Prime  requisite 6 or  less: -20% xp
Constitution  15  or  more: +1 hp/hd (not level)
Constitution  13  or  14: Will withstand adversity (roughly equivalent to 100% system shock)
Constitution  of 9 -  12: 60% to 90% chance of surviving (see above)
Constitution  8  or  7: 40% to 50% chance of survival (see above)
Constitution  6  or  Less: -1 hp/hd
Dexterity above  12: Fire any missile at +1
Dexterity  under  9: Fire any missile at -1
Intelligence above 10: +1 language/pt.

Greyhawk added stat effects that roughly approximate AD&D stats, although it looks like it does not add any class minimums.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;973144attribute minimums I believe only occur in AD&D. OD&D has the following attribute bonuses and penalties:
Prime  requisite  15 +: +10% xp
Prime  requisite  13  or  14: +5% xp
Prime  requisite  8 or  7: -10% xp
Prime  requisite 6 or  less: -20% xp
Constitution  15  or  more: +1 hp/hd (not level)
Constitution  13  or  14: Will withstand adversity (roughly equivalent to 100% system shock)
Constitution  of 9 -  12: 60% to 90% chance of surviving (see above)
Constitution  8  or  7: 40% to 50% chance of survival (see above)
Constitution  6  or  Less: -1 hp/hd
Dexterity above  12: Fire any missile at +1
Dexterity  under  9: Fire any missile at -1
Intelligence above 10: +1 language/pt.

Greyhawk added stat effects that roughly approximate AD&D stats, although it looks like it does not add any class minimums.

You forgot to list Charisma, which had a bonus ranging from -2 to +4, and significant effect on the number of hirelings.

How many people really rejected the wider bonuses that were in the Greyhawk supplement in 1975 and every subsequent version of the game? Besides Gronan and the people who quit playing D&D before 1975?

Quote from: Skarg;972952My (ancient/incomplete/probably-flawed) memory of White Box D&D was it had no formal effect but there was a minimum attribute value to be each class, and if your Prime Requisite (ST for fighters, IQ for wizards, WIS for clerics...) was above certain levels, you'd get a multiplier to earned experience throughout the game. So actually valuable eventually if you live, but extremely abstract. Taken in the context of players picking (or lying about) their attribute values, it means they pick to get more XP than players that picked/rolled a lower value for their prime requisite.

XP adjustments is probably the most significant effect, but that underlines my point for a guy with straight 18s. Those 18s that aren't in his Prime Requisite(s) aren't as big a deal, and not close to as big as I could score by faking all my rolls in Stormbringer.

Back in my early D&D days, the biggest threat for the guy who showed up at the table with straight 18s would be the unbelieving scorn of the rest of the party. Going into a dungeon with a group of people that already resent you is not a good plan.

Quote from: rawma;973176You forgot to list Charisma, which had a bonus ranging from -2 to +4, and significant effect on the number of hirelings.

You're right. Chalk that up to brevity. Here it is:
Charisma Score Maximum # Hirelings Loyalty Base
3-4        1      -2
5-6        2      -1
7-9        3      
10-12     4
13-15     5       +1
16-17     6       +2
18          12      +4

QuoteHow many people really rejected the wider bonuses that were in the Greyhawk supplement in 1975 and every subsequent version of the game? Besides Gronan and the people who quit playing D&D before 1975?

I don't think we have a real way of knowing. However, both are worth knowing, because OD&D and OD&D+GH are pretty vastly different playing experiences (In my mind, at least as big as the difference between any TSR-era editions).

Quote from: Baulderstone;973199XP adjustments is probably the most significant effect, but that underlines my point for a guy with straight 18s. Those 18s that aren't in his Prime Requisite(s) aren't as big a deal, and not close to as big as I could score by faking all my rolls in Stormbringer

The XP bonus wasn't that big a deal either. One energy drain, cursed item or being dead for half an adventure or so and that bonus got ate up pretty quickly. All of that is pretty frequent in older editions.

The OP guy in this thread is hilarious. I mean, in an "I'd never actually want to meet this moron" kind of sense.

In AD&D there is enough granular benefits at the extremes that I wouldn't ever let someone choose straight 18s on down. The broad middling curve devoid of bonuses is where AD&D's strength laid for not worrying about stat differences in mixed company. A peak here or there amid mostly statistical human mean is far easier to play on without too much acrimonious player stat-envy.

Straight 18s I found also rather unplayable to expect players to meaningfully discover characterization of what is essentially the nascent demigod "Perfection of Man." I mean, I'd just laugh at the idea of some director cueing me up to play a role with the line, "You're the embodiment of mankind's peak of strength, wit, grace, and everything else. And, Go!" Sure you could just play yourself regardless of attempting to interpret the stats, but then why not shoot for a real challenge and try all 3s? Why bother with easy mode, n00b?
:p

Yes, NDA sounds kind of silly.

Maybe I should, but I don't necessarily see GM guidance in character creation as a red flag. Sometimes participation in thought out worlds requires anchoring the character some events, persons, or whatnot through background. Among a group of gamer-strangers, wouldn't the lack of GM involvement imply the lowest common denominator: an average American high-fantasy? If anything (any kind of character) goes, PCs don't really matter as there is no cohesive setting beyond the steeplechase? That society around the PCs, if there is one, will not react their actions beyond necessary plot-points: quests, clues and straight-forward rewards? So the game is about success as specified by rules?

I know one novelist GM. I haven't played in his campaigns, but those that have, have enjoyed them. Are novelists are better or worse GMs than other people? Are they micromanagers with their worlds (more often than not)?  

I think that James S. A. Corey's excellent "The Expanse" series is based on Ty Franck's  MMORPG (then table-top RPG) setting. IIRC Steven Erikson's Malazan series is based on his fantasy world (and he uses GURPS). I would have loved to play in their campaigns - although I don't much care for Malazan series.

Quote from: jahud;974564IIRC Steven Erikson's Malazan series is based on his fantasy world (and he uses GURPS). I would have loved to play in their campaigns - although I don't much care for Malazan series.

A lot of fantasy authors are GURPS players.

Quote from: jahud;974564...

Maybe I should, but I don't necessarily see GM guidance in character creation as a red flag. Sometimes participation in thought out worlds requires anchoring the character some events, persons, or whatnot through background.

Yes, or at least it ought to be established where they are from in the world and how they were raised & trained & came to be in whatever group they're in together.

QuoteAmong a group of gamer-strangers, wouldn't the lack of GM involvement imply the lowest common denominator: an average American high-fantasy?

Yes, or D&D, or something that's not really what the GM's world is.

QuoteIf anything (any kind of character) goes, PCs don't really matter as there is no cohesive setting beyond the steeplechase? That society around the PCs, if there is one, will not react their actions beyond necessary plot-points: quests, clues and straight-forward rewards? So the game is about success as specified by rules?

That's not necessarily so, in my experience. Though it's not what I usually do, I have run games where PCs can a pretty wide range of generic types without giving them much world background, but there is still an interesting dynamic world those PCs arrive in and get to try to do what they want.

Another issue with generic groups of PCs is that they may not make much sense to be in a group together, though generic adventuring character classes and lack of background is one way to help that.

QuoteI know one novelist GM. I haven't played in his campaigns, but those that have, have enjoyed them. Are novelists are better or worse GMs than other people? Are they micromanagers with their worlds (more often than not)?

The writers and other GMs with detailed or heavily-typed worlds that I've played tend to be pretty detail-oriented, but for the ones I've chosen to play with, it hasn't been a bad thing. They have different playstyles, as is not doing that. A player who really likes a different style may call it worse. Another may call it better. I think it also really depends on the GM.

Quote from: jahud;974564I know one novelist GM. I haven't played in his campaigns, but those that have, have enjoyed them. Are novelists are better or worse GMs than other people? Are they micromanagers with their worlds (more often than not)?  

I think that James S. A. Corey's excellent "The Expanse" series is based on Ty Franck's  MMORPG (then table-top RPG) setting. IIRC Steven Erikson's Malazan series is based on his fantasy world (and he uses GURPS). I would have loved to play in their campaigns - although I don't much care for Malazan series.

I play every Wednesday night in C.J. Carella's game. He has written superhero novels, modern fantasy novels (starting with _Shadowfall Las Vegas_ and now has a very successful military SF series going. He's a great GM. Of course, he was very involved in roleplaying games before he was a novelist. He created the Unisystem, wrote tons of GURPS material, wrote for Palladium and created the Buffy game and All Flesh Must be Eaten. I've been playing in his games (and GMing with him in my games) since the late Eighties.

--
Bill Reich
https://sites.google.com/site/grreference/

Quote from: jahud;974564I would have loved to play in their campaigns - although I don't much care for Malazan series.

Settings designed for tabletop games rarely make for good literature, as their priorities are different.  I consider the rise of gaming-derived-yet-not-actually-licensed fantasy fiction to be one of the worst things to happen to the genre in years.

Quote from: daniel_ream;974635Settings designed for tabletop games rarely make for good literature, as their priorities are different.  I consider the rise of gaming-derived-yet-not-actually-licensed fantasy fiction to be one of the worst things to happen to the genre in years.

I really tend to agree, though I'd make an honourable exception for China Mieville's Bas Lag novels.

Quote from: daniel_ream;974635Settings designed for tabletop games rarely make for good literature, as their priorities are different.  I consider the rise of gaming-derived-yet-not-actually-licensed fantasy fiction to be one of the worst things to happen to the genre in years.

I'm sure there are many examples of bad writing along those lines. Personally though, I could wish for good fantasy & sci fi writers to use more logic-based rules and roll some dice instead of choosing outcomes they think are cool and not bothering to make the way they happen make much sense. (e.g. the main thing I like about the Honor Harrington books is that they were written by a sci fi wargamer and the action often feels like a description of tactical game resolution and decision points, including the sudden unpredictable casualties.)

Makes you wonder if the guy from the OP wasn't George RR Martin, looking for another project to delay the GoT book series yet further...

Quote from: Gorilla_Zod;974649I really tend to agree, though I'd make an honourable exception for China Mieville's Bas Lag novels.

I'd agree. Of course, Perdido Street Station does suffer from being a book showing you a fantastic setting with a merely okay plot. The Scar has a much better balance though.

Quote from: RPGPundit;975412Makes you wonder if the guy from the OP wasn't George RR Martin, looking for another project to delay the GoT book series yet further...

The system he's using does check out. Maybe the NDA is just to keep people from hearing that he is spending time playing RPGs so he doesn't have to face more Internet indignation for not finishing his series.

I guess the weak point in this theory is the "role-playing over roll-playing" argument. Based on his works, Martin is clearly "a let the dice fall where they may" type of GM.

"Oh, you still haven't properly resolved your character's ambitions and story arc? Then you should have rolled better. Fuck you. You're dead."

*tears up character sheet and points player to the 30 GURPS books currently being used for character generation.

I kind of wish GRRM would start a GURPS campaign with the game position from his last SOIF book, and use that to determine what happens in the book plotline (ignoring, of course, the TV version).

It seems like it would be a bit tricky to continue writing a series that had been taken over by a TV production that changed your plot details and got ahead of you on the timeline. Another reason why I'd want to see a gamed-out version. But then, I pretty much always want to see gamed-out versions of things rather than "and then the special character wasn't killed by those oh-so-dangerous risks they took, because they're special... and then some thematic things happened...".

Quote from: RPGPundit;975412Makes you wonder if the guy from the OP wasn't George RR Martin,

Quote from: Baulderstone;975415The system he's using does check out. Maybe the NDA is just to keep people from hearing that he is spending time playing RPGs so he doesn't have to face more Internet indignation for not finishing his series.

But... maybe that's how he writes that series, and the NDA really is to avoid spoilers!

Quote from: Skarg;974887the main thing I like about the Honor Harrington books is that they were written by a sci fi wargamer and the action often feels like a description of tactical game resolution and decision points, including the sudden unpredictable casualties.

You are aware that he's just doing Hornblower in SPAAAAACE, right?  Most of the descriptions of combat are just Forester with the serial numbers filed off.

Weber worked on Starfire 3rd edition, and wrote a couple of campaign books for it (there's a scenario in one that was clearly the prototype for On Basilisk Station) but his grasp of actual tactics, given the fictional technologies he's proposing, is weak at best. Add in the constant overweening Mary Sue-ing and SJW diversity and I can no longer read them.  The HH series are a particularly poor example of logic-based rules and making sense, given that much of the world and plotlines are based on - if not exactly Rule of Cool, certainly How Can I Make This Feel Like Napoleonic Wars in Spaaaaace.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;975497But... maybe that's how he writes that series, and the NDA really is to avoid spoilers!

Maybe the NDA means you can't even tell people you played in his game, let alone what happened. That makes it easier for him to cover his tracks when he murders his gaming group after he completes each book to keep anything from leaking. Perhaps the long delay in books is due to him simply having run out of people to game with, which is why he needs to resort to ads.

Quote from: Baulderstone;975415"Oh, you still haven't properly resolved your character's ambitions and story arc? Then you should have rolled better. Fuck you. You're dead."

I lol'd.

Quote from: Gorilla_Zod;974649I really tend to agree, though I'd make an honourable exception for China Mieville's Bas Lag novels.

Steve Erickson's Malazan novels are based in a world he and a friend made for their D&D game in college. I think a RPG homebrew would be good for a book's setting, storyline not so much.

R. Scott Bakker of The Prince of Nothing series also based his early book series setting on his D&D game homebrew setting. Both are Canadian and write dark, violent epic fantasy so make of it what you will.

For that matter, Stephen Brust's Vlad Taltos series came out of his old D&D campaign setting.

Quote from: daniel_ream;975503You are aware that he's just doing Hornblower in SPAAAAACE, right?  Most of the descriptions of combat are just Forester with the serial numbers filed off.

Weber worked on Starfire 3rd edition, and wrote a couple of campaign books for it (there's a scenario in one that was clearly the prototype for On Basilisk Station) but his grasp of actual tactics, given the fictional technologies he's proposing, is weak at best. Add in the constant overweening Mary Sue-ing and SJW diversity and I can no longer read them.  The HH series are a particularly poor example of logic-based rules and making sense, given that much of the world and plotlines are based on - if not exactly Rule of Cool, certainly How Can I Make This Feel Like Napoleonic Wars in Spaaaaace.

It's not just Hornblower in Spaace. Yes, the technology and traditional tactics are clearly designed to be akin to age of sail combat, which does seem a little silly, and I did make me interested to see how the "wall of battle" conventional large-scale fleet tactics would really work. Most of the described battles are exceptions to the conventional tactics, with explanations about how what specifically happens really determines the outcomes, not theory. I'm a pretty skeptical detail-oriented person, and I didn't detect too much to complain about with in most of the actual combats and tactics presented. There were a few battles where I either questioned the tactics or wanted more description to understand who/what/why etc., but in general I thought it was pretty good (and would be interested to hear what objections others might have to the tactics).

Of course, yes the main story arc usually involves people not realizing the main character is right about stuff until she eventually gets vindicated, in various flavors and with various setbacks and intrigues. The "brilliant character versus nasty odds and intrigues" setup is a conceit but not one I mind all that much, as long as the details are well done and there's uncertainty and death and destruction all around, which there generally is (including a pretty healthy share of her getting blasted, not to mention her pals).

I'm not sure about what "SJW diversity" bugged you - it seemed pretty reasonable that so far in the future that female and multi-racial officers being normal makes sense. If you mean the "planet of the backward Christian-folks and their Space Texas planet" and the polygamous wives stepping into new roles to the sometimes-murderous outrage of the conservative elements, well ya I agree I kind of wish that whole culture didn't exist and I don't really care to hear about their social issues. Of course, the whole "decadent Peeps" part gets even more time, and is basically an assertion of the universal folly of socialism, which is pretty funny and sometimes annoying, but at least more interesting. There IS a ton of pages to setting fluff and description of how people say "hmm" and "um" a lot while sharing tea and hot chocolate, with no guarantee that violence isn't about to break out or that you might miss something if you skip it.

If there are much better examples of logic-based rules and making sense and non-thematic combat results without so much of the annoying bits, please recommend.

Is this a RPG or a book series? In sf social commentary is par for the course, whether lefty, conservative or libertarian. You won't be able to read much quality sf without some social commentary baked in.

Honor Harrington is a novel series. I read the first one ten+ years ago and was... unimpressed.  It sounds like it got worse?
 


Just out of curiousity, Voros... what's the social commentary of Flash Gordon?

Inquiring Minds, and all that.

Quote from: Skarg;975749I'm not sure about what "SJW diversity" bugged you - it seemed pretty reasonable that so far in the future that female and multi-racial officers being normal makes sense.

Seems to me it's likely the kind of thing that will come and go in cycles. Asabiya - group ethno-cultural cohesion - is very useful, and predicated on lack of Diversity, but the post-Vietnam US military seemed to make multi-racialism work at least for awhile. Militaries in dire straits like the WW2 Soviet Union have used female fighters successfully, and irregular militias have always frequently used them, but it seems rare otherwise - I think the jury's still out on whether mixed-sex-combat-unit militaries are viable generally.

I guess I'd expect to see futuristic multi-racial & possibly multi-species empires have lots of Diversity if they're like modern Western societies, but other societies might have a narrow warrior caste, or be mono-ethnic like the Dorsai mercenaries.

Quote from: S'mon;975812Militaries in dire straits like the WW2 Soviet Union have used female fighters successfully, and irregular militias have always frequently used them, but it seems rare otherwise - I think the jury's still out on whether mixed-sex-combat-unit militaries are viable generally.
.

Biologically it is absurd.  If a society loses half its male population, in one generation they will have achevied total replacement. If a society loses half its female population, in one generation they have... half their population missing.

Societies that put females on the front line, particularly in the young, military and (consequently) fertile ages, are demographically doomed.

Quote from: Baulderstone;975415"Oh, you still haven't properly resolved your character's ambitions and story arc? Then you should have rolled better. Fuck you. You're dead."

*tears up character sheet and points player to the 30 GURPS books currently being used for character generation.

Suddenly, the saga of Quentyn Martell, Protest PC, makes a horrible kind of sense.

Flash!  AAAA-aaah!  He's in his underwear!

Also, "Flash Gordon" is not "quality SF," it's "sword and planet adventure romp."  When Flash Gordon is dueling Ming the Merciless and they're using swords on the deck of a spaceship, this is NOT serious.

And I like it that way!  I like my entertainment lighthearted and escapist.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;975827Also, "Flash Gordon" is not "quality SF," it's "sword and planet adventure romp."  When Flash Gordon is dueling Ming the Merciless and they're using swords on the deck of a spaceship, this is NOT serious.

And I like it that way!  I like my entertainment lighthearted and escapist.

Same with Star Wars, which makes me wonder why people got hung up on the galaxy rotating. It is science fantasy.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;975827Also, "Flash Gordon" is not "quality SF," it's "sword and planet adventure romp."  When Flash Gordon is dueling Ming the Merciless and they're using swords on the deck of a spaceship, this is NOT serious.

And I like it that way!  I like my entertainment lighthearted and escapist.

Exactly. I love the old Flash Gordon strips and serials but they're hardly what anyone would refer to as 'quality sf' more science fantasy.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;975827Also, "Flash Gordon" is not "quality SF," it's "sword and planet adventure romp."  When Flash Gordon is dueling Ming the Merciless and they're using swords on the deck of a spaceship, this is NOT serious.

And I like it that way!  I like my entertainment lighthearted and escapist.

Lighthearted, entertaining, escapist  science fiction is quality science fiction.

And Flash Gordon is awesome whether he's drawn by Alex Raymond or played by Buster Crabbe or Sam Jones.

Quote from: Spike;975814Biologically it is absurd.  If a society loses half its male population, in one generation they will have achevied total replacement. If a society loses half its female population, in one generation they have... half their population missing.

Societies that put females on the front line, particularly in the young, military and (consequently) fertile ages, are demographically doomed.

In the past war hardly lead to the complete decimation of those fighting. The entire society was not mobilized to fight. In the modern era of total war many more civilians died in the world wars than the actual combantants, rendering your argument mildly absurd.

Quote from: Dumarest;975854Lighthearted, entertaining, escapist  science fiction is quality science fiction.

And Flash Gordon is awesome whether he's drawn by Alex Raymond or played by Buster Crabbe or Sam Jones.

Flash Gordon was not literature so the whole discussion is nonsense. Confusing comics for short stories and novels. Leigh Brackett and Burroughs would have been better comparisons but they are hardly free of sexual or racial politics are they?

Quote from: Voros;975883In the past war hardly lead to the complete decimation of those fighting. The entire society was not mobilized to fight. In the modern era of total war many more civilians died in the world wars than the actual combantants, rendering your argument mildly absurd.

Germany lost 75& of it's army and 46% of it's male population in World War 2, which renders your rebuttal completely absurd.

Quote from: Voros;975885Flash Gordon was not literature so the whole discussion is nonsense. Confusing comics for short stories and novels. Leigh Brackett and Burroughs would have been better comparisons but they are hardly free of sexual or racial politics are they?

Just because you dislike something doesn't make it "not literature." Plug away with your biases, though.

I doubt Brackett and Burroughs are considered "literature" either, but then again neither is most of science fiction.

And I don't care, as long as it's fun.

Quote from: DavetheLost;975958I doubt Brackett and Burroughs are considered "literature" either, but then again neither is most of science fiction.

I prefer Harlan Ellison's take on science fiction or speculative fiction. Due to its roots in pulp magazines, SF is actually the court jester of the literary world. Capable of capering about and poking fun at royalty all the while telling dangerous truths that many do not take seriously but are important as cautionary tales.

Quote from: Spike;975814Biologically it is absurd.  If a society loses half its male population, in one generation they will have achevied total replacement. If a society loses half its female population, in one generation they have... half their population missing.

Societies that put females on the front line, particularly in the young, military and (consequently) fertile ages, are demographically doomed.

Assuming that the majority of children are born to roughly monogamous coupling situations (i.e. not where each returning male soldier starts having kids with massively multiple females survivors), what difference will the gender make? It would seem that an equal gender distribution of survivors would be optimal.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;975965Assuming that the majority of children are born to roughly monogamous coupling situations (i.e. not where each returning male soldier starts having kids with massively multiple females survivors), what difference will the gender make? It would seem that an equal gender distribution of survivors would be optimal.

Maybe it would help if you didn't start with that assumption?

Quote from: HappyDaze;975988Maybe it would help if you didn't start with that assumption?

It's the right assumption for eg Post WW1 Europe.

But I don't agree with Spike's argument. A society that loses half its women, the other half have average 4 kids each and the population is recovered in 1 generation. Historically it was land carrying capacity that limited population (or in Africa disease). And most wars don't result in loss of half the combatant population.
But I think it's questionable whether a warfighting organisation generally benefits from including female combatants. My suspicion is that segregated units like the Kurds have can be combat effective and a net asset, but I suspect not so much for integrated units, with some rare exceptions (especially insurgent/guerilla units). And a lot depends on culture, some cultures like that of the USA seem particularly ill suited to including female combatants, whereas it works for the Kurds currently - but I suspect if they ever gained their own State this might change.

Edit: My own sci-fi-fantasy setting does of course include butt-kicking CSMC (Consortium Space Marine Corps) female Marines. Because it's cool. :D

Quote from: Spike;975942Germany lost 75& of it's army and 46% of it's male population in World War 2, which renders your rebuttal completely absurd.

Those numbers aren't enough data to determine anything about the overall casualties of WWII. They can't even be meaningfully compared to each other.

Guys, quit bringing the political shit into the RPG threads.

Quote from: Dumarest;975947Just because you dislike something doesn't make it "not literature." Plug away with your biases, though.

You're getting your panties in a twist over nothing. Literature means prose or poetry. It is not comics or films.

I'm not using the term as a judgement but as a description, obviously. Considering we've already had discussions on Burroughs, E.C. Tubb and Leigh Brackett, whose writing I clearly admire, why you would assume I meant anything snobbish is rather odd.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;976000Guys, quit bringing the political shit into the RPG threads.

Should probably just shut this thread down.  It's essentially an open thread without a topic.  No one even remembers the OP anymore.

Quote from: CRKrueger;976038Should probably just shut this thread down.  It's essentially an open thread without a topic.  No one even remembers the OP anymore.

Its about a GM requiring an NDA for players.  I remember just fine, thanks.

C'mon, Hulk... are ya getting senile?:p

Quote from: Spike;976059Its about a GM requiring an NDA for players.  I remember just fine, thanks.

C'mon, Hulk... are ya getting senile?:p

Ok, everyone's just choosing to completely ignore it when posting. :D

Quote from: Baulderstone;975415I guess the weak point in this theory is the "role-playing over roll-playing" argument. Based on his works, Martin is clearly "a let the dice fall where they may" type of GM.

"Oh, you still haven't properly resolved your character's ambitions and story arc? Then you should have rolled better. Fuck you. You're dead."

*tears up character sheet and points player to the 30 GURPS books currently being used for character generation.

Isn't he also on record as being a shameless min-maxer with a complete contempt for fluff choices that fits the character but will never actually be useful?

He doesn't seem to have applied that philosophy to his writing, though, since most of his characters (in ASOIAF and elsewhere) are if anything painfully suboptimal for adventuring. Then again, I suppose that assumes that ASOIAF is an adventure campaign and not a "survive by any means" campaign - being a big guy with a sword and a lot of visible power will let you kick ass and look awesome for a while, but it also seems to paint a really big "KILL ME, I'M A MAJOR THREAT TO YOU!" sign on your forehead... whereas taking a ton of Disadvantages and playing them to the hilt seems to be the way to survive long enough to wrack up enough XP to actually have a lasting effect on the setting... :p

Quote from: Baeraad;976162Isn't he also on record as being a shameless min-maxer with a complete contempt for fluff choices that fits the character but will never actually be useful?

He doesn't seem to have applied that philosophy to his writing, though, since most of his characters (in ASOIAF and elsewhere) are if anything painfully suboptimal for adventuring. Then again, I suppose that assumes that ASOIAF is an adventure campaign and not a "survive by any means" campaign - being a big guy with a sword and a lot of visible power will let you kick ass and look awesome for a while, but it also seems to paint a really big "KILL ME, I'M A MAJOR THREAT TO YOU!" sign on your forehead... whereas taking a ton of Disadvantages and playing them to the hilt seems to be the way to survive long enough to wrack up enough XP to actually have a lasting effect on the setting... :p

Tyrion actually seems to be a bit of a melee combat munchkin (on top of his other skills) in the sortie against Stannis' men at King's Landing.

Is GRRM actually on record as playing/running PnP RPGs?

Quote from: Skarg;976205Is GRRM actually on record as playing/running PnP RPGs?

Well... I think so, but it was a lot of years ago, so I might have gotten him mixed up with someone else.

Quote from: Skarg;976205Tyrion actually seems to be a bit of a melee combat munchkin (on top of his other skills) in the sortie against Stannis' men at King's Landing.

Backstab, +4 to hit, x2 damage. :D
He wouldn't do so great in a fair fight.

Quote from: S'mon;976367Backstab, +4 to hit, x2 damage. :D
He wouldn't do so great in a fair fight.

He does at the end of the second book. Tyrion leads a cavalry charge on is own initiative, at the tip of a spearhead formation. He kills a dozen or more men in a row without being seriously hurt, including at least three knights, face to face, with his axe.

Quote from: Skarg;976205Is GRRM actually on record as playing/running PnP RPGs?

The writers of the scifi book and tv series The Expanse based it on an rpg campaign. One of the writers was an assistant for GRRM, and GRRM, they say, played in that, though I don't know how long for.

But Martin is totally a gamer. I mean, look at the guy (https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/thumbnails/image/2014/06/19/11/George-RR-Martin.jpg).

Quote from: Baeraad;976162He doesn't seem to have applied that philosophy to his writing, though, since most of his characters (in ASOIAF and elsewhere) are if anything painfully suboptimal for adventuring. Then again, I suppose that assumes that ASOIAF is an adventure campaign and not a "survive by any means" campaign - being a big guy with a sword and a lot of visible power will let you kick ass and look awesome for a while, but it also seems to paint a really big "KILL ME, I'M A MAJOR THREAT TO YOU!" sign on your forehead... whereas taking a ton of Disadvantages and playing them to the hilt seems to be the way to survive long enough to wrack up enough XP to actually have a lasting effect on the setting... :p

It's hard to say. Clearly this is a world where one level 10 fighter is going to be killed by the other guy with an army, so political/asset-accumulation skill is as important as combat ability. It would appear that the optimal build is a Littlefinger-like-character. But even then, we're only really seeing the successful Littlefinger. Who knows what the survival percentages are between warriors (the Hound, the Mountain, Bronn), warrior-leaders (Robb, Jaime), sneaks (Arya, Jaqen), leaders (Cersei, Caitlyn), behind-the-scene-puppetmasters (Littlefinger, Varys), and whatever the heck Tyrion is (multiclass leader-sneak-warrior-puppetmaster-"king of wine and tits"?)

I would play the hell out of a game that had a "king of wine and tits" character class.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;976879I would play the hell out of a game that had a "king of wine and tits" character class.

I believe you speak for all of us on that...

Quote from: Skarg;976205Is GRRM actually on record as playing/running PnP RPGs?

Yes. Actually, the Wild Cards series that he edited was originally based on his Superworld campaign. cf.

QuoteOne could be flippant and say the Wild Cards began life with the roll of a die, but it wouldn't be totally accurate. Nevertheless, the initial seeds can be traced back to a specific date - September 20, 1983 - the day Victor Milán gave George RR Martin a copy of the 'Superworld' role-playing game as a birthday present...

There had been a small gaming community amongst writers in Albuquerque, New Mexico, for some time before George moved to the area in 1980. Walter Jon Williams, Victor Milán, John J. Miller, his wife Gail Gerstner-Miller, Melinda M. Snodgrass, Royce Wideman and Jim Moore would regularly get together of an evening and play either 'Call of Cthulhu' (based on the H.P. Lovecraft story) or the post-apocalyptic 'Morrow Project'.

George and his girlfriend, Parris, were invited to sit in and soon became a regular part of the group. However, the coveted role of 'grandmaster' was something George aspired to and it wasn't long before he decided he'd like to try running a game himself. Pretty soon it was a regular gig, but it was only when he opened the fateful birthday gift that things started to move forward for the group. George created a scenario for his new 'Superworld' game, the others created a bunch of characters to play with, and they were off and running.

cf. http://www.wildcardsonline.com/origins.html

Quote from: Skarg;975749It's not just Hornblower in Spaace.

It's entirely Hornblower in Spaaaace.  Word of God.  Everything about the series is an attempt to port the Napoleonic Wars into an SF milieu.

QuoteThere were a few battles where I either questioned the tactics or wanted more description to understand who/what/why etc., but in general I thought it was pretty good (and would be interested to hear what objections others might have to the tactics).

Most of the battles make no sense once you assume 3 dimensions, and zero gravity.  Harrington's tactics are mediocre at best given the situations as described, and generally involve her doing things that should have been obvious to any commander, but are routinely presented as novel, amazing new tactics.  Like just about everything else in the series, Weber is starting with the result he wants (Age of Fighting Sail in Spaaaace) and then trying to work backwards through technology and starship design to justify it.

There's a terrible, terrible self-published series called The Lost Fleet which is atrociously written but was done by an actual naval tactical officer, and he uses the series to explore fleet tactics in three dimensions with inertia and thrust vectors.  If you think the Honor Harrington books are good tactics, read The Lost Fleet.  It will show you a whole new level of sophistication.

QuoteI'm not sure about what "SJW diversity" bugged you - it seemed pretty reasonable that so far in the future that female and multi-racial officers being normal makes sense.

Not given the levels of hand-to-hand combat and extreme physical exertion the series portrays.  Weber had to make Harrington a heavy-gravity worlder and a genetically engineered supersoldier to explain her Mary Sue levels of ass-kicking; the other female characters in the series don't get the same benefit.  Also, did you notice that the Queen of Fake England is black?  It would be hard for you to miss it, since Weber goes to immense pains to point it out repeatedly.

That's the SJW problem - Weber starts with a result he wants, works backwards to try and explain how things came to be like this, and then holds the milieu up as an example how egalitarian things would be in Space 1815.

QuoteIf you mean the "planet of the backward Christian-folks and their Space Texas planet" and the polygamous wives stepping into new roles to the sometimes-murderous outrage of the conservative elements, well ya I agree I kind of wish that whole culture didn't exist and I don't really care to hear about their social issues.

Weber is from Austin.  That's all you really need to know.

QuoteIf there are much better examples of logic-based rules and making sense and non-thematic combat results without so much of the annoying bits, please recommend.

The aforementioned Lost Fleet series for tactics (and nothing else); David Drake's RCN series is Drake taking the piss out of Honor Harrington, although even there too many of the major characters seem like Special Exceptions to Every Rule.  And Drake's Hammer's Slammer's series should be required reading. Elizabeth Moon's Familias Regnant series is  a better take on women in an SF military, in part because her space navy places much less physical demand on its sailors. (That said, either Moon or someone she knows was raped as a child, because getting-raped-as-a-child seems to happen in every single one of her books, usually to the protagonist.  Fair warning.)

Interesting, thanks! I will (eventually) check out your recommendations. I forgot about the black queen-o-(not)-England, though I didn't care she was black as it seems reasonable that after so much history some things would be randomized, and I don't mind some level of making stuff be how the author wants until it gets painful there's a reason it would not be that way. So, the Manticoran situation annoys me less than the Andermani being space Austrians, which I also don't entirely care about. Harrington being genetically engineered and habitually training for decades when hand-to-hand-combat probably doesn't make a ton of sense to emphasize due to, y'know, ray guns, seems like a reasonable cause for being impressive at hand-to-hand combat, and also doesn't keep her from getting taken out and mutilated (although of course that becomes another way to make her more uber via bionics, but again at least that makes some sense).

I see and take your points, though I think you exaggerate a little on some of them. While yes it's partly blatant Age-o-Sail-in-Spaace including technobabble "shields work this way so broadsides and crossing the T is a thing", again that seems to me is the assumed situation but then the actual battles are mostly exceptions, and involve several other kinds of situations, although those too tend to be (often painfully) derivative ideas: WW2 carrier stuff, modern and near-future missile stuff, ECM/ECCM/PD stuff, WW2 Q-ship stuff, orbital inertia stuff, OODA-loop stuff. It is campy and it does annoy me that it's as you say - steal an existing idea and make a point about it, and then have things seem to justify that. But it's not just all Age-o-Sail - in fact I wanted at least one actual example of an actual "wall tactics" battle especially because I didn't see how that would actually work as described, and I don't think there ever was one that described rather than handwaved.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;975497But... maybe that's how he writes that series, and the NDA really is to avoid spoilers!

By Kek, I think we're on to something!