This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.
The message boards have been upgraded. Please log in to your existing account by clicking here. It will ask twice, so that it can properly update your password and login information. If it has trouble recognizing your password, click the 'Forgot your password?' link to reset it with a new password sent to your email address on file.

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Catelf

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 78
Quote from: Spinachcat;1122674
What are you trying to emulate or achieve?

In the case of the unaimed bullet, the concern is that while the bullet is unaimed, thus has a low probability of hitting, it is also capable of significant damage, if not an outright kill.
Exactly this.
It is along with the idea that a natural Damage roll of 1 is always a fumble, and a natural roll of 2(and perhaps 3) always a miss.
So, an unaimed bullet would have something like D4+3 to D4+5 which would be well enough to score damage on most normal humans in low-grade armor if it actually hits.
Aiming would change the D4 to a D6, and actual skill would also raise it, and cumulative to D8.

The reason is that i aim ... (pun intended), to put the entire damage roll into One Roll per Attack, instead of Two or more (roll to hit + roll to damage).

An added problem with that second system though, is that an unaimed bullet is potentially able to cause as much damage as an aimed.
So perhaps there is another system, where the character simply roll to hit as per skill, and if it hits, the attack's damage goes always full against Armor, and if it is more, it wounds?
But in that system, there is no point in attacking anyone with superior armor.

So, as added realism? is found to be .. well, "un-gamey" theoretically, perhaps i shouldn't bother?

Two damage systems, both are vs target number (practically the target number is Stamina+armor like in World of Darkness, with those general stats as well).

The first one, is that you add Wielder Strength or Weapon Strength + weapon modifier + skill, and then turn the resulting value into a die, which are rolled and have to exceed the TN to cause damage.
Like, Strength 3 + Modifier 1 (knife) + skill 4 = 8, resulting in the roll of a D8, to exceed a total armor of, say, 4 (Stamina 3 + 1(leather jacket).)

The second one, relies on using how easy or hard to hit something it is as a base die, instead.
Like, It is actually hard to hit someone with the bullet from a rifle if you don't aim, so it would have a D4, while it is far easier to wound someone nearby with a sword, so it would have a D10, and on that, skill would make the die higher, and the potential damage would add or subtract to the total.

I keep wracking my head over what would be best.

Quote from: Omega;1118472
Freeform chargen in that there are no classes and your character is defined by their stats skills and such. BESM and Gurps are other examples of freeform classless systems. (though both at points introduced some templates and archetypes.)

That is simply "Classless", not "Freeform".
And no, Cowboys & Indians is Freeform Roleplaying, at its most basic form ... but it is not, technically, a roleplaying Game.
A freeform roleplaying game is if you .... well, take the aforementioned C&I and add a GM that rolls dice or let fights get resolved through Stone/Scissor/Paper.
That thing MIGHT go heavily into storytelling if the GM forgets that it is the actions of the characters that are important and not their story, though.

The clear advantage is that it is possible to cook up ANYTHING, when me and a few others played, we mixed things from Final Fantasy 8 & 9, Marvel Comics, Transformers, and even Urotsukidoji .... and Hellsing.
The drawback?
The result is a "you had to be there"-mess.

Quote from: Omega;1118463

 Its totally freeform.

* Then proceeds to describe an rpg that clearly IS NOT "freeform". *

.... Since when is an rpg without Classes "freeform"?

Pen and Paper Roleplaying Games (RPGs) Discussion / Woke-thulhu
« on: November 14, 2019, 02:26:27 AM »
Quote from: Omega;1113618
If only it were just hysteria and not company after company being slowly, or not-so-slowly, infested with these SJW idiots who invariably end up being more offensive those of us they are supposedly trying to "defend" than the people they demonize.

If only people on either side of the "Damn, i just want to game"-middle weren't overreacting, or even worse, hounding said middle for things that are a natural part of it, including trends.

Quote from: David Johansen;1112683
Races ae controversial .....
* Laughs *

Quote from: Omega;1112678
Sadly theres a growing push for app dependant board games now. Apparently because board gamers are too stupid or lazy to read the rules. And of course if you discontinue the app. The games useless now and you'll have to rebuy the game in a few years as 2.0. horray. Not.

Example I passed on the new Mansions of Madness as it requires an app to play. And the game is unplayable without it. Theres a resistance to this. But as more of these things come out its looking less and less likely to end unless theres a major failure or big refusal to buy. And cult of the new will buy it just because.

I bought the new Mansions of Madness boardgame for the miniatures ...
It isn't totally unplayable without it, but you DO have to do all the GM-work for it, as that is exactly what the app seem to do, from the description in the rules.
Sure, there is the thing that the app also tell the target number for combat rolls etc, but the monsters stats are noted on the cards in the actual game, soooo.....

But, i agree with your criticizm, even though i think the so-called "legacy games" are far worse atrocities when it comes to wasteful handling of material.
("Legacy games" boasts with that "No Game is ever the same, Literally!" because it has packs of cards that you do not unpack until later ... and because you are supposed to physically tear up cards as you play, as well!, and that might even be true for sections of rules and/or the gameboard and/or varying tokens ....
When all that could be done with GM-styled preparation instead of destroying actual set pieces !

Essentially, they seem to introduce GM-like things, without actually using a GM !

I guess the lack of responses means that there are no no-nos?
Especially not nowadays, and not on this site .... except criticizing others playstyles, that is.

Oh my, this might be a long reply from me, as there are a bunch of things to address:

First, i have seen the highly political issue from both sides.
Sure, you may also claim that it is an entirely non-political issue, as the ones flinging shit on each other is just a bunch of baboons, claiming to be "left" or "right", when in reality they are a mix of scammers, trollers, flamers, and wannabees ...
Well, there is indeed a bunch on the left and the right as well, that has fallen for the lies, or being pushed into either camp by rabid proponents from the opposite side.

Oh, and the two parties are flinging the shit on those on the other side of the fence ... the problem is, the fence is not where they think it is.
Their own extremists has over the years moved the fence to exclude more and more people, so by now, they are just as often flinging their shit on the large middleground, and even on people that used to belong to their own group ... (extremists eat their own, and so on).

More than a year ago, i hadn't been to a cinema for years(decades?), the last i watched might have been Ang Lee's HULK....
But then, i got the opportunity to go to the cinemas with someone else ... and the first two movies i chose, was (political) statements as much as that i actually wanted to see them.
The two movies were Alita(i refuse to use the full title, as the director put it in the wrong order) and Captain Marvel.
I truly liked them both, Despite what jerks and oversensitive types had claimed about them.
Yes, both sides have jerks and oversensitive types.
Now, do not insult me by thinking i've watched the Ghostbusters  ... ugh ... "reboot".
I haven't, and i do not plan to, either.
I'm looking forward to GbIII, though. ^_^

By now, you may grasp where i stand politically.
I say i'm a leftie, but that is mainly for the ideals, as i am fully aware that reality requires different political structures for different areas and different situations.

Is there a "culture war"?
If you call monkeys flinging shit on each other, and some protecting what they think is their territories from "the other side" as "culture war" ... then yes.
If not ... then no.
I'd say no.

If you're a die-hard fan, then you might buy things even if you don't really want those things, yes.
If you are less obsessed, though, then you may be more picky.
I'm extremely picky, but it happens that i buy things to see if they is as bad as they are claimed.
(By the way, in comics, the first iteration of "Unstoppable Wasp" sucked, the first iteration of Gwenpool (not counting #0) was actually great, first iteration of the "new Champions" was decent, but not great, the second thus far seem better, first iteration of Kamala Marvel ... was good, the second thus far seem good as well .... and in the recent iteration of Captain Marvel has thus far managed to squander the use of the Nuclear Man ... which was not very good.)

Essentially, i do as i like, and occasionally i end up buying rubbish, and occasionally, something proves to be far better than i expected.

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1106645
I love the series but it's not Hard Sci-Fi by any stretch of the imagination as it resorts to Handwavium constantly to push the story further.

Try to mention ONE well-known sci-fi that is "Hard Sci-Fi".
I doubt you will find even one.

Quote from: Omega;1106271
I would not even now consider Flash Gordon Science Fantasy.

It has fantastical elements. But it is all presented as some form of super-science. Same with Buck Rogers.

Problem is. There are people who dismiss ANYTHING that is not hard SF as fantasy.

Essentially, "Hard Sci - fi" do not exist and has never existed, as Asimov, Heinlein etc never were sci fi then, and as "true sci-fi" in that case would at best be "5 years into the future" ....

"Hard sci-fi relies on actual science" .... I have long felt something was wrong with statements like that, and i'm pretty sure why nowadays:
It seems, in that case, as if ALL sci-fi i've ever read and/or watched, was "soft sci-fi" or even space fantasy, but when i grew up, it was seen as science fiction, nothing else.
Jules Verne, Isaac Asimov, Robert A Heinlein?
All ranging from very soft sci-fi to Space Fantasy.
Yes, ESPECIALLY Asimovs Foundation Saga and Robot timeline.
Essentially, this whole thing is just nonsense!

No, i make my distinction between Sci Fi and Fantasy based on the amount of visible hi-tech and Space faring in hi-tech space ships vs low-tech or magic(and that magic may be hi-tech, but unexplainable to others) and how planet-bound the setting is.

John Carter or Flash Gordon is "Science-Fantasy" to me.
Star Wars, Star Trek, Andromeda, Babylon 5, and Transformers when they are on Cybertron is clear Sci-fi to me.

Design, Development, and Gameplay / Another game mechanic idea
« on: August 27, 2019, 04:03:04 PM »
Quote from: Stephen Tannhauser;1093402
I was thinking that rather than have a 1 turn a success into a failure (which is an immensely frustrating result, especially if the 2d10 scored particularly high), or a 20 turn a failure into a success, you could create a middle-of-the-road result called a Complication (on a success) or Fringe Benefit (on a failure).  Basically, this means that a success is mitigated by a bad side effect or twist, or a failure is mitigated by at least one partial benefit. Since using a d20 as your critical die means 1 in every 10 rolls, on average, is going to see fluke results, this might bring a slightly stabler feel to the middle of your results curve.
Personally, i utterly hate those "added complication" things, as it is often what triggers certain people to talk about "failing forward" and similar.
Now, even though i will suggest something that may seem as the same thing or at least similar, it is at least much easier to present:

The extra getting 20 mean you may somehow perform another action.
Essentially, whatever you did, you did it so effective or fast that you may do it again, or something else.
The extra getting 1 means you fumbled, tripped, dropped a weapon or a tool, or that a tool or a weapon got stuck somewhere during the action that may or may not have been successful.
Either way, you need to spend one action to recover the weapon or tool, or to stand up.
Notice that neither affect whether the original die was successful or not.
Also, the "added complication or bonus" is very easy to keep track of.

Quote from: Omega;1097739
It does not.

The colour of a persons skin, or their gender, or whatever, is absolutely irrelevant to a persons ability to write a good game or do a good piece of art, or run a company, or whatever.

Hiring someone solely because of their skin colour or gender or whatever is tokenism or filling some quota or worse yet, mere virtue signalling.

If the only reason you want to hire me is because I am handicapped then no that is not diversity. It is everything but diversity.

You want to reduce us to a set to collect. A quota to meet.

Some of us have had to live through this stupidity before and all this new "diversity movement" is is the same old gag all over again doing far far more damage than any good it such dehumanization could do. And now we are starting to see RPG companies wanting to enforce that at every table if they could. "Hey Bob? I got an extra cripple and nigger at my table. Wanna trade for that spare fag and gook you have so I can complete my Diversity Set?"

Maybee they will sell us in randomized boxes.

Yes it does, because it often mean that the person doing it have a different outlook on things.
Yes, that outlook may seem or even be superficial at times, but really, this is entertainment, and here, both surface and depth are key parts.

I actually don't mind "tokenism", because one has to start somewhere, and tokens is a start, it is what you do afterwards with those "tokens" that are important.
I agree that it cannot replace skill, but skill takes time to develop ... so where to put the line?
No Diversity?
Only Skill counts?
Meh, "Skill" is actually a bit hard to spot in game creation, unless it is the vague definitions of Great, Competent, or Sub-par, and even there things easily are confused with Style ...

There is over-focus or even downright obsession with "Diversity" in certain groups though, and ... well, they are a bit of a problem, but there is ALWAYS problematic matters, things to quarrel about.
If this is merely one of those things, then i do not care.

As for the "collectible" jokes ...
I guess i'd fill the "Furry" slot.
Or the Transgender slot.

There is always things to get insulted about, no matter who or what you are.
It is interesting, that the tables are a bit turned today, and you might feel like a pariah or nothing just because you are white, male, or straight hetero ...
It is not fun to feel like that.
And so people responds !
We just wanna be ourselves.
And i just go ... welcome to our world.
I'm technically a white male, but i'm actually a Furry Therian Otherkin Bisexual Transwoman ... and a bit trans-racial too (as if the Otherkin part weren't weird enough) ...
Yes, i'm a metal snowflake, special even among the weirdos, but you would currently not see that by looking at my current physical form.
I'm not happy, ... all the damned stereotypes ... oh, yeah, i have some weird mental problems too (of course i have to have that as well, why not, ...)
...Unless you are severely masochistic.
No matter your skincolour, ideology, gender, hobby, style or other thing.
It was just required some shit like this to get "normies" to end up on the receiving end of that feeling, and to perhaps understand, but really, none of us wanted this, not really.
...And those that did want it ... i can't say i blame them.

...Damn, sorry for the unwarranted rant ... i think?

* sighs *

Well, this is where we have to go from now, i guess.
There is no going back, we have to fix things now.
Preferably ASAP.

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1097737
Postmodernist asshole is an ideology, therefore it follows that people with the same ideology think alike, hence no diversity of thought.

Race/sex/sexuality ARE NOT ideologies, therefore belonging to any combination of those doesn't mean you think alike any other random person that has the exact same combination of those superficial traits.

And then you go back to ideologies "political angle", which goes back to my first refutation of your argument.

Now keep on trying to equate superficial immutable characteristics with ideology, please.

And now back to talking about why any character of any superficial characteristic should be a valid target or none can be.

Well, we have a slight problem here.
One of them are you not grasping how diversity works, nor where it may show up, nor how much of obvious impact that it may leave.
Another is the risk of you reading things into what i write/say that i did not ... or at least did not mean.

And i am not going shitty doublespeak claiming that homogeneous forms always lead to diversity nor vice versa, i say that either are not automatically exempted from the other, a matter that should be obvious.

What i ALSO pointed out as obvious, is that an overhanging idea easily DROWNS OUT said variety/diversity, but that do not mean that it do not exist, mind you.

Also, i think that we both knows that there were a time when the "common man" claimed to KNOW that certain superficial characteristics were the same as having a certain ideology.
We should know today that THAT is not true, yet it still happens today ... in the west ... with Arabs, currently.
My point is that we are not immune to that sort of thinking!

I still claim to be a "leftie", but i know today that shit i "learned" while growing up, and even during when i was questioning things, were damned utter LIES, and the worst is that it was told as truths.
Not only lies about the left from the right, but also lies about the left from the left, lies about the right from the left, and lies about the right .... from the right ...

So, yes, there are Diversity within ideologies as well, and if you do not realize that, then you are merely lying to yourself.

And yes, i do address you specifically, because of the quote from Orwell that you (currently) have in your description, about TRUTH being revolutionary.
I like the quote, it is logical, and true ....
And because of that, i also do not like when you fall into the same trap as the one that you clearly do not want to drop in.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 78