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 - Azraele

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 36
1


Additionally, our playtest adventure, Blood from God's Eye, has been newly updated with more art and newer rules for your still-completely-cost-free consumption. Enjoy you beautiful mutants!

https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/316011/Lone-Wolf-Fists-Quickstart-Blood-from-Gods-Eye

2
We did try that but didn't find it very functional. Also, The One Ring has different stances / positions that confer various bonuses and penalties. But in both cases these systems didn't work in combination with miniatures. (That's not a problem for me, but my group gets lost without a tactical visualisation.)

Part of that is because playing with miniatures is at cross-purpose to the kind of design you're asking for, which helps to enrich a purely descriptive combat space. The development for tac mini's games went off in a different design direction, like 4th edition or 13th age (both fun as hell to play with minis, but difficult without). L5R 4th edition has some development in the "take a stance and it gives you benefits/tradeoffs" direction too, but again, it's designed to be lightweight and playable in a theatre-of-the-mind style way; it'd probably be extremely tedious in put miniatures out for it.

As a bit of advice, you may find something like Fate's "Zones" concept to be a good bridge of the gap, because it combines simple mapping with meaningful description. You may be able to use that rules-tech with a game like those mentioned upthread and get the best of both worlds. I wish you luck in your quest at any rate; when and if you find your grail, I hope you'll share it around so your fellow questers can benefit from it as well.

3
Quote
I'd prefer that. Sword fighting in D&D has always seemed lacking to me. Which is a shame considering how much of your time you spend enganged in it as a fighter.

Burning Wheel has a famously involved and tense combat system where the participants secretly choose dueling stances and attack gambits prior to striking, complete with a rich chart of outcomes for different strategy match-ups and mismatches.

It totally falls apart depicting anything aside form 1-on-1 duels. There's an unfortunate rule of diminishing returns to this level of detail.

Ultimately the question becomes, do you want more tactically intense swordfights between fewer participants, or less engaging but more epic-scoped encounters?

I mean, there's thankfully a game for either answer and probably one for many along the spectrum of the extremes. But there are real trade-offs when we're talking about using our simple meat-computer-brains to make something function at a table.

4
Okay one more bump

First of all, WE ARE FUNDED BABY YEAAAHHHHH so get ready to be able to buy this game even if you've slept on my KS (you jerk!)

But also, had a fantastic session tonight that is mildly punctuated by crying toddler (all the best are!) but is nonetheless incredibly informative about the rules and very listenable and fun!


5
Hey you mutants! Just dropping in to tell everybody that my second Kickstarter for Lone Wolf Fists, ROUND 2, is underway! If you're a fan of old-school style games, but ALSO a fan of robust kung-fu action, then this game is for you! I've got LOTS of goodies that you can download FOR FREE to see if the game is to your taste, as well as a Discord, the Fistoverse, where my small legion of fans will welcome you with open Fists and A any Q's you may have about our little project of pain!

It's funding through the merry month of FISTMAS, so ring in the new year the traditional way: By BEATING THE PREVIOUS YEAR TO DEATH!

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/lonewolffists/tian-shang-lone-wolf-fists-0




6
One last good necrobump: our round 2 Kickstarter has begun, if any ya'll fans of FISTS want to get your asskick on in the post apocalypse.

Also, general Q&A if anyone wants to pick my brain about the game.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/lonewolffists/tian-shang-lone-wolf-fists-0

7
Darrin buddy, don't listen to the haters. There is no more scathing indictment of a tabletop roleplay game's merits than a single member of it's fanbase being a jerk to you decades ago. These knuckleheads are just butthurt that you so epically owned them.

Keep fighting the good fight you absolute legend.

8
Yeah; I think I might make the ability to ride sans roll attached to your background (so if you're Fremen, it's routine to you and a perk of being born on Arrakis). With offplanet characters, they gotta do the ritual... But probably only once, then after its routine. I think I may simply track "worm tameness" or some such, and call for a steering roll of some variety if it gets exhausted or enraged.

9
Man, awesome replies thus far.

Re: the consequences of failure. I'm not sold on the OSR style really leaning towards the "roll to success" model that's being pursued here. Save-or-die is pretty standard in how old games are played; players still open doors and chests and go into dungeons, so I don't buy that they'd avoid worm-riding if death was on the line IF the reward justified that risk.

And, let's be real here, it totally does. Who doesn't want to ride a living tank-juggernaut straight into an enemy base and completely demolish it?

What would more likely happen is exactly what I want: that players wouldn't take that risk casually. Sure, you might go under: but if you succeed? You're a legend.

I also feel like if, rather than death, you simply took say, 6d6 crushing damage and got a new save to dig your way to safety, you'd have higher-level characters (especially HP-rich fighter-types) more willing to roll the bones more frequently as their danger of death from that damage diminished. That seems to track with what we see of the Fremen, so I'm generally pleased with that paradigm.

In terms of the roll: Mathematically, multiple rolls risking failure encourage failure. So if the consequence for failure is damage, then that danger needs to be present only ONE roll. I think some variant of

Call worm> mount worm> rig worm

Might be best, because then there's a bit of ritual to the stages which can give us pauses to build tension. Especially OH! If the call worm action determined how big of a worm you called? Like maybe I could do a little encounter chart, and maybe you get to roll more or bigger dice behind the screen depending on how well the call roll went?

Then we lump the danger of crushing damage on that mounting roll, and possibly allow multiple attempts to harness/steer (so you could possibly save a bad final roll, but it would get more chaotic and dangerous if you continued to screw up).

.... Yeah, that feels pretty good. I feel like post-rigging, they're pretty docile. Nothing really added by putting in further rolls (although maybe I could give them some kind of morale or something? They're still big creatures with some volition, after all). But those three feel tonally right, and like they'd get the *feel* right.

I'm all on board for further ideas folks, but I think I've got the skeleton of what I'm gonna use for my game now.

10
Quote
Ohhh, that does sound amazing. What does the wizard do to get gold/xp in this case? Is it from spending money on building his own dungeon or research?

They get XP for building their wizard tower and for magical research (including making magic items and casting the most powerful magic, which is ritualized and very expensive). Technically they don't get XP for building dungeons, but they *do* get XP for harvesting the monsters inside for magical components. They can also get XP from weird stuff like arbitrage trading and levying taxes on serfs that farm the land they protect with their strongholds.

So if you hang up your pointy hat in regards to dungeon-diving around tenth level or so, there's still a long retirement into wizard-king-ness awaiting you, with consistent slow power growth. This also doubles as a nice way to keep magic items significant, as they become something of an arms race between rival wizards and help to drive late-game play (at least that's how things shook out in my last fantasy campaign).

11
1) Characters get XP from acquiring gold. Not keeping it. It's party treasure, and the gold and XP are split as evenly as possible. If a character doesn't want their share of gold, they still keep their share of XP. Simple.

2) Use the economics of the fantastic Adventurer, Conqueror, King system (ACKS), which actually accounts for how obscenely wealthy characters spend gold and has an economy that can handle the ludicrous piles of GP you can dump into it.

Actually, doing as you're doing is what lead to me eventually just exclusively running ACKS. It just works so much better than 5e for what I want out of a game.

In regards to doing lots of cool stuff but not leveling up: GP for XP is inherently goal-directed. It assumes that you risk danger for gold (by dungeoncrawling) and that superior play is derived from reducing your risk to acquire said gold (by being sneaky and clever, for instance).

You may find that these assumptions don't make for the kind of game you and your group enjoys; this is perfectly fine. It's not a style that sits perfectly for everyone (my group eventually got sick of having tons of radical sessions like you're describing pass without getting any XP, for example). If you find this to be the case, I'd again point you to ACKS, which does a wonderful job of giving more powerful characters (ie: those who are too good to dungeoncrawl anymore, the pantywaists) alternative ways of generating revenue that are fantastically in-character for the classes.

For example, wizards can conduct magical research, build wizard's towers, even stock their OWN dungeons to attract exotic monsters (to harvest for spell components!). They get the gold and XP they need to continue advancing in power WHILE deepening and redefining the setting. Highly, highly recommended.

12
This thread does what it says on the tin: I'm running a Dune-themed game for my friends. Clearly, the following situation will absolutely occur:



Certainly SOME kind of roll is called for here, I don't want them worm-riding willy-nilly. But what? I'm tempted to do something halfway between the 1e grapple/ thief climbing rules (since they're both d100-based, some variety of synthesis could work) but I feel like this deserves more... I dunno, gravitas?

What are your thoughts, braintrust? How do you translate sandworm-riding into Old School sensibilities?

13
I've still got my copy of the Iron Kingdoms RPG. The complaint that it's a mini's game is a very valid one, but I actually bought it because I had a bunch of old IK minis I needed to put to use because the game was such a swingy mess and it's fandom so intolerable that I didn't have another use for the investment. I think the issue is that the designers solely and exclusively focused on the combat mechanics and had no concept of interacting with a world beyond that (digging vanishing foxholes, like upthread, are the least of your worries).

Another hiccup was the setting; there's reams of backstory with no apparent connection to steampunk wizards slamming their robot golems into each other. It's turgid and doesn't link to setting elements that show up anywhere in the book (there's like five afterlives? And the relationship of the gods to their followers is... Unintuitive, to say the least of it).

It hurt the game's career with me that I got it about the same time as I started getting into the Adventurer Conqueror King System, and ACKS blew it out of the water. Things I didn't feel as missing from systems got introduced to me, like domain management and clean game processes, and it really brought their absence in a mediocre wargame retrofit like IK to the fore and drove me away from the system.

14
Quote from: GeekEclectic;1133043
How are you handling loresheets? They were one of my favorite parts of the older games. My only minor complaint is that there wasn't something like a mini-index of loresheets in the character creation/advancement section. It would have been super helpful to see them all, with perhaps a sentence or two description along w/ the page reference, at a glance.

Delicately. I admire loresheets but I dislike two important aspects of them:
1) Spending your advancement resource on anything other than advancing your character's capabilities
2) Adding elements of setting to a character outside of interacting with it

In both cases, you're approaching the game as a story (in a removed sense) rather than immersively (through the actions of your character). It thwarts the sense of exploration the game attempts to foster with its dungeoncrawl-reminiscent exploration mechanics.

Let me put it succinctly:  if you can tell what's behind a door before your character opens it, why would you open it?

Similarly, why would you go somewhere interesting (with all the danger and pacing of a journey through a post-apocalyptic hellscape) when you could simply purchase an entanglement from a huge list of meta-resources? The first (the opening of the door, the journey) is the playing of the game. The second is meta-game; building your character from a list of options.

I'm of the philosophy that the best time to do that is chargen. Which, you'l note, is essentially opposed to the technology that loresheets are offering.

But I can't harden my heart entirely to them; they're a charming part of why I loved LotW, and they present the setting in terms of something attainable and real to players (I can't tell you how much it lit my mind on fire to be able to "grab" Tiger Soul's loresheet from back in WotG!).

So now you entangle yourself in things by interacting with them, but they unlock character-advancing options. For example, swear allegiance to a major clan, they're considerably more likely to give you access to their territories, armory, of course their secret fighting arts... Ditto for individual masters, or basically anyone/thing that can teach you Kung-Fu.

Which means you effectively unlock loresheets as a kind of reward for interacting with the world. Your advancement options are predicated on what's available from that interaction; you want to get some new super-moves? Gotta go where they are and dig them out.

(Of course you start with some too. Also, you can teach others your knowledge. What price do you extract for that? This lets you use them to do things like enhance the value of followers or bargain politically, territory that didn't have a lot of mechanical support in those earlier games)

So, like I guess with everything else, I changed them to fit the new game assumptions and pacing mechanisms. But man, how dumb would I have been to toss them out entirely?

15
Quote from: remial;1132797
I wasn't trying to be a negative nancy, or anything, I hope the game is funded, hell I'd LOVE it if it were funded. WotG and LotW were games that I thought were really cool, and for there to be another one in the same vein, has me really excited.  I pledged as much as I could afford (probably more than I can really afford, but who needs food anyway?), and if I could, I'd cover the entire cost myself.  I only asked because I've backed several games on Kickstarter that sounded cool but never met their goals, and they just faded away never to be seen or heard from again.

It frustrates me that cool games like yours don't get enough attention, but pathfinder books that are the same damn thing as every other pathfinder book can be crapped out on a weekly basis, and meet their goals again and again.

Once again, I apologize if my earlier question came across as negative, but I worry overly much about the worst case scenario.

Wat

You don't got to apologize to me dude. I'm cranky about the failing KS thing but not at my fans; you guys are the high point! Every single interaction with a fan of this game has restored my faith in humanity and ya'll been overcoming your shyness in droves messaging me about how great the game is, and how much you love it, and how excited ya'll are for it.

It's been incredible.

You weren't coming off mean. I'm just pissed I don't currently have better news for you.

Give me a little bit. My pasty ass still sun-sick from the marching I did yesterday (that I stole homework and sleep time for, paying for that now). Once I get caught up and a refreshing night of sleep, I'm gonna figure the next move to make this game happen to whatever degree it possibly can.

I mean by all means I'd welcome a fiscal miracle but, assuming it don't come to pass; I ain't letting all this work go to waste.

Keep your nose clean, True Believer; it wouldn't be the game it is unless it could weather it's own apocalypse.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 36