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.
NOTICE: Some online security services are reporting that information for a limited number of users from this site is for sale on the "dark web." As of right now, there is no direct evidence of this, but change your password just to be safe.

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 - AsenRG

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 337
Quote from: Snowman0147;1079233
Can anyone even imagine a post D&D tabletop rpg hobby?

You mean, like in the countries where a game like CoC is the dominant market leader right now (France and Japan)?
Yeah, I've got no difficulties imagining it;).

That said, I actually agree with Pundit's points.

Quote from: Razor 007;1078326
Hey, I know this question is out there.....

I don't profess to have an answer; aside from allowing every character to play a Fighter / Magic User (Magus), and allowing them to choose from both Arcane and Divine Spell Lists.

Any ideas?

I'm pretty sure it's been done already:).

Quote from: tenbones;1066106
Welllllll... I'm not arguing taste. I can totally get behind this idea - especially between masters. I like the subtlety of it. In Avengers vs. Justice League there was a beautiful example of this between Captain America facing off against Batman.
It's not about taste:). I'm simply going by the rule of thumb that newbies end quickly by a rookie mistake, intermediate and advanced fighters would go on for longer and longer...but very, very good fighters, unless extremely well-matched, would act intuitively, capitalizing on what isn't even a mistake, but a temporary advantage - and wouldn't allow the opponent to recover from it:).
And using the Force makes you one of those very, very good ones authomatically, because it's the Force that's guiding you. Thus, Jedi and Sith should achieve it automatically.

That, and I just prefer to play out shorter fights in my games, unless it's going to be about the fighting;).

I'm just saying - it depends on the conceits of your game. I'm erring on the side of Wuxia-style being about super-powers in play as part of Martial Arts. While the realistic kendo-style is indicative of a more real-world tradition. If you have both, I tend to like the ease of power flowing upwards.
True, but the super-powers also make the above more easily achievable.
In that regard, my preferred game for Star Wars would be StarORE:p!

The question of course is: what do you want in your game where your Euro-centric cultures have martial arts? What traditions and cultures spawned them? What are those conceits? Once you lay that down, you can have all the cool shit people want from Asian styles without missing a beat. But you have to build it into your setting
I've always been building it into my settings, regardless of the cultures. When I was a young GM, because I loved that kind of things...and these days, it's just a reflex:D!

Quote from: tenbones;1066098
There is little Palladium can learn from Savage Worlds other than learning that sometimes less is more.

They could have learned this long ago, merely by watching a fashion show:D!
Now they just have to apply it to their game;).

Quote from: tenbones;1064414
For me the original "kendo style" should be representative of low-to-mid-level skill. Wuxia-mode is super-duper high-level.

IMO, it should be the exact opposite;).

Quote from: tenbones;1065639
Yeah. It's definitely not perfect. But it's the best system for me that is scalable to work very well for the most genres. I still believe you can create a system that emphasizes a genre-specific RPG extremely well. But they become insular in that way. You'd never want to use that system for anything else. I think D&D and it's derivatives largely falls into that category. Sure there's d20 Star Wars, Mutants and Masterminds - but there are systems dedicated to those genres that do them *better*.

Pound for pound - Savage Worlds does a *lot* of these genres very well because the core mechanics are cohesive enough that you can abstract anything you want from gritty grimdark stuff, to titanic god-mode supers fighting Kaiju while doing orbital bombardment from capital scale ships in orbit. Sure there is a little loss of fidelity - but not much. There is some mild math weirdness, but nothing compared to modern D&D and its current conceits.

I can actually *run* a Savage Worlds campaign that would cover 1st-lvl through 30th-lvl play that no sane D&D GM would ever want to do, and do it organically.

Good luck slogging through D&D5 post-15th lvl...

All true.
And you're right that it's one of the best systems to use for many OSR games. After all, much like them, SW is inspired by pulps in the first place...Fast, fun and furious - reminds you of anything:D?
It's no accident that Lankhmar and Solomon Kane were among the first properties for Savage Worlds;).

There's a number of things I like about Palladium, at least in principle. But the actual system always prevented me from playing it.
We're going to see what next year brings to the table, I guess;)!

Quote from: AsenRG;1064097
Gladly, when I've got more time:)!

Quote from: RPGPundit;1064221
I'll be waiting with baited breath. Until then, I'll assume you've got nothing.
Don't hold your breath, you might faint.
But I just might have the time tonight.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1062808
Here's the reasons:

1. In the east Technique was mythologized because each school was tied into a different philosophy or variant of a philosophy.
It's like as if there had been Roman Catholic Sword Style and Calvinist Axe Style.
That's, how to put it more mildly? Ah well: fake news:)!

Some schools in the East were tied to a particular philosophy. That was not, however, the most popular way of learning martial arts. I'm focusing on China in the following.

What were those ways, one might ask? Unless you were born connected to a strong tradition, the ways open to you were: joining the army, joining a school*, joining the bandits, joining a monastery/sect**, joining a secret society***, joining a family/settlement clan (usually by marriage, though other ways have been known), joining a roaming artists troupe, or joining the caravan guards. Of those, the army was considered to be the worst place, and the caravan guards were the best. No, sorry, it was not the monastery that was seen as the best:D! (And when Shaolin was seen as "the best", it was a major political center with vast lands, and its fighting monks were a veritable army, often armed with spears and sabres, like the regular army).
And apart from the monastery and some religious minorities/clans with their own martial arts, most of those arts were pretty much uninfluenced by "philosophy". Instead, they usually followed the usual Chinese approach where all religions were seen as more or less equal, and you prayed to whoever would get the job done (and if a righteous person, to your ancestors as well).

In short: In China, as well as in Europe, politics and economics were much, much more defining for martial arts than religion...though religion was involved - in both areas.

*Which was considered the same as the next point, according to many...including, very much, emperors and officials. There's a semi-famous quote from 1728 (the Yong-zheng emperor) issued an imperial prohibition specifically on martial arts.
The emperor condemned teachers as "drifters and idlers who refuse to work at their proper occupations" who gather with their disciples all day, leading to "gambling, drinking and brawls".
**Which, according to many people, was the same as the previous point. See: Stories of Judge Dee, any monks are automatically suspected of any crimes, child kidnapping (for ransom) very much included.
***Say, White Lotus. Can you say Triad, now? That's how things ended up for many secret societies: they became the Triads.

2. The martial arts in the east were, for most of its history, tied in with concepts derived from Chinese cosmology: Qi, Yin and Yang, the Eight Element, the Five Phases; in short, when you were doing martial arts you were also manipulating the basic building blocks of reality and space/time.
No, sorry, that's simply not true: not manipulating. You're following. You're not making "magic" by performing Single Palm Change (corresponding to trigram Heavens), you're allowing "magic" to work through you. And "magic" makes you a better fighter.
The same attitude was true even when "magic" in Chinese arts was written without quotation marks, say, before the Boxer Rebellion: you allowed the spirits of heavenly immortals to inhabit your body and they made you impervious to bullets...supposedly. At least that's what (a big part of) the Boxers believed, and accounts of their ceremonies confirm it.
Also, the same is true even today in magical ceremonies of martial arts schools in Southeast Asia and elsewhere.

There were also exponents of a different approach among the Boxers - some simply wore magic talismans by the master boxers, which also had to make them invulnerable. But those were, according to accounts, just the result of non-martial arts related "spells", usually ritual ones... in RPG terms, that's just "buffing" and "items creation":D! (Though admittedly, it might have been even more common...and probably even less efficient).

In the west this wasn't going on; instead at most you might have been able to say some really great religious fighter was 'inspired/blessed by god' or something like that. But he wasn't a freaking wizard.
As demonstrated above, it isn't true of Eastern arts.
In the West, however, there was Thibault. The one who wrote the famous treatise about using the secret geometry and occult principles in fencing. His work wasn't new, it was just one of the few that went in much depth about this approach. So, if you can say someone was "manipulating the Universe with the tip of his sword", he's got as much rights to the title as any Eastern master. (Except he was an European and studied in Europe).

Of course, you can claim that the pop-culture view isn't nearly as informed, and you'd be right. But your post concerned the reasons why the pop-culture sees things a particular way...and your suggested reasons are wrong.

Instead, I've got a better suggestion why Eastern arts are seen as magical, while Western ones aren't: because for pop-heroes in the West, guns replaced magic. The Eastern heroes wield "magic" and combat techniques. The Western ones have combat techniques and guns. Cue the first Batman, Shadow, and so on.
And, as Bob Breen says in his book on fighting, "some strikes come in and out of fashion according to what is predominantly seen on the screen". The same thing would apply to magic - and in the West, it was a constant trend for centuries.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1065596
Gymkata is funny. But then, so is Capoeira, and that's real.
For one thing, we agree;)!

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;1065230
Something new is coming out soon from them.


Quote from: Itachi;1065176
The problem in bringing up the videogame medium is also that, at this point, "RPG" is more of a factor that's been applied to a bazillion titles that wouldn't fit exactly the delineated box of the genre but that portray key characteristics of it as immersion, simulation systems, choices & consequences, etc. sometimes even better realized than what the so called "RPGs" do.

The STALKER series being a good example here. It's basically a first person shooter only with a myriad systems for simulating survival in a harsh environment, like trackers for sleep, thirst, hungry, radioactive contamination, etc. Besides portraying a setting whose people/fauna act by seeking their needs and goals dynamically/in a non-scripted way. All this result in an emergent environemt that, frankly, puts most so called "RPGs" - both in electronic and tabletop format - to shame in regards to simulation.
Haven't played that, but sounds a lot like a decent Traveller campaign:)!

Quote from: Itachi;1065184
I hated those once too. These days though, I don't hate any individual mechanic. Instead, I hate games that says something on the tin but don't back it up in actual play, regardless of mechanics used.
Yeah, those too;)!

Mechanics I hate most:)?
Quickly-escalating "ablative" HPs.
Challenge Levels.
Those should be the main ones;).

Quote from: fearsomepirate;1064795
Video game RPGs largely fall into one of two categories:

1. The world levels up with you (most Bethesda games)

2. The world is gated or guided such that the monsters you meet are nearly always close to your level in difficulty (most JRPGs, Divinity: Original Sin, etc).

Exceptions are rare. You are probably going to list several of them in response.

1. Exceptions include some of the best-selling CRPGs.
1.1. It seems that you're right that combined, the rest of them are more numerous.
1.2. Possibly because that's the lazy approach.
2. And that's why most CRPGs suck compared to at least decent TTRPG sessions!

Articles / Wuxia campaigns
« on: November 18, 2018, 12:25:19 AM »
Quote from: nDervish;1064496
Well, parrying and dodging/evasion are the obvious alternatives, both of which are well-represented in most wuxia.  They're your primary defenses in most BRP-family RPGs (and plenty of others, BRP is just what my head is in at the moment), with armor only playing a role after an attack connects because you failed to parry or evade it.

If you need examples, those would be the d6 system, the newer editions of Traveller (everything after CT, in fact, though I'm not sure about MegaTraveller), GURPS, EABA, Warhammer (at least 2+, I'm just not sure about 1e), BoL, Exalted, Pendragon, Flashing Blades...oh, wait, and most other games not related to the D&D family:D.
In fact, the initial statement about "most games using armour for defence" is only true if most of the games one has seen are D&D-derivatives;).

Quote from: Bruwulf;1063144
Insomuch as they can't control what you literally believe, sure.

That's a relatively small concession on a discussion forum, though. "You can think whatever thoughts you like in the privacy of your own head, just don't ever let us know about them" is at best frustrating, and more realistically it's an omnipresent threat, a dialectic Sword of Damocles if you will.

It's also literally how the communist regime worked in Eastern Europe. TBP adopting this as part if its policy is bad news for the hobby, IMO.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1063823
You'll need to explain. Because while there were certainly a few styles that were barely or non mystical, most styles were derived from Taoist, Buddhist or Confucian schools of mysticism or 'internal alchemy'.

You'll also need to explain this.

Gladly, when I've got more time:)!

Quote from: RPGPundit;1062816
I really couldn't say.

Because of the NDA, right:D?

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 337