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 - hgjs

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 36
Help Desk / Hey, tech guys, I'm getting ghost pages
« on: August 23, 2009, 04:42:28 AM »
Could you give a link to a thread where the issue occurs?

Pen and Paper Roleplaying Games (RPGs) Discussion / Favourite Genre
« on: August 15, 2009, 04:57:05 PM »
Quote from: One Horse Town;320877
I know most of us like a bit of variety, so it might be difficult to answer the poll. But which one do you find yourself most naturally fitted to in both enjoyment and results?

My favorite genre of fiction is sci-fi, but in terms of the most enjoyable campaigns I've been in, fantasy would be first with sci-fi a close second.

A great post I saw on another site.  This pretty much sums up my own experiences.

Quote from: David J Prokopetz
To hear certain segments of the "role-playing, not roll-playing!" crowd define it:

Min-maxer: A player who understands how the game's rules operate.

Munchkin: A player who favours the style of play that the game's rules encourage and facilitate, as opposed to the style of play that the game's self-promotional text claims the rules encourage and facilitate.

Power-gamer: A player who wishes for his or her character to be competent.

Quote from: boulet;312344
Just out of curiosity : is it a case of players who want to try DitV but don't care for the "West that never quite was" or a case of Warhammer lovers who wanted to try a different game to explore their favorite setting ? (I guess, it may be more subtle than that)

Basically, after discussing the game the feeling was that if it could do mormons with guns it could also do wandering Inquisitors, and we found the latter more interesting.

None of us is hugely familiar with the Warhammer 40k setting, although we have all played the wargame.  It was somewhat on our minds due to the recently announced sequel to Dark Heresy from Fantasy Flight.

Here are the house rules we have going so far.

"I am a Dog", page 25
Obviously, instead of either having "I am a Dog" as a Trait or a Relationship with the Dogs, the player character substitutes an appropriate organization ("I am an Inquisitor").

The word big is replaced with oversized, and the word "excellent" is replaced with "covered in spikes."  This is intended to produce a desired aesthetic.  (Also: crap items do not count as crap if being used by an orc.)

The d4 bonus for "guns" instead goes to all weapons capable of fucking up someone in power armor.  So not knives or hunting rifles, but yes to chainswords and bolters.

Instead of having a 2d6 coat, the player characters have some 2d6 item that serves as a symbol of their authority and position.  (This could be an Inquisitor's robe, a very large hat, etc.)

We're still determining appropriate ceremonies to replace those in the book.  To an extent we'll play it by ear: if someone comes up with a 40k-ish sounding ceremony, we'll just say "that's a ceremony."  We're not trying to necessarily make a one-to-one correspondence with the ceremonies in the book; we're just trying to get a few predetermined ceremonies for flavor.

So far we have calling on the name of the Emperor, reciting sacred texts, and making the sign of the Astronomican.

Instead of the most serious level of fallout being for Guns, all weapons capable of fucking up someone in power armor (i.e. all weapons that get an extra d4) count as guns.

Demonic Influence
This is the section that isn't entirely firmed up yet.  I'm thinking the progression would be,

Doubt: Chaos Influence zero d10
Failure: Chaos Influence 1d10
Chaos Attacks: Chaos Influence 2d10
Heresy: Chaos Influence 3d10
Witchcraft: Chaos Influence 4d10
Planetary-Scale Chaos Incursion: Chaos Influence 5d10

As you might guess, we are using (more or less) the rules for Dogs in the Vineyard, except set in the Warhammer 40,000 universe.  The characters are Inquisitors: the PCs are a Catachan ex-guardsman, a fairly young Inquisitor, and a more-machine-than-man priest of the Adeptus Mechanicus.

Today was our first session.  It was brief, because it was interrupted for food and because some of us had dinner arrangements, but it was long enough to explain the premise and get through character generation (including everyone's flashback conflict).  I felt that the flashbacks were a good way to get people familiar with the system in a way that just a description might not, and I'm letting people make changes to their sheets based on their experience before we start for real next week.

The Catachan guardsman's flashback scene was trying to hunt a Catachan Devil (opposed by the Devil itself).  It was a rather straightforward fight: the guardsman tracked it through the jungle then chopped it apart with a chainsword while avoiding the monster's claws.

The Adeptus Mechancius' flashback was trying to put down a rebellion.  The central event was trying to overrun a factory the rebels had seized control of before they managed to start churning out armored vehicles.  The rebels sabotaged the troop transports; the adept repaired them.  The adept refitted the transports with reinforced frontal armor to withstand fire; the rebel leader's spies learnt of this, and deployed IEDs along the various routes to their factory-base.  Then the adept used his robot servants to sneak ahead and disarm the land mines: the rebel leader was out of dice at this point, so the Imperial Guard offensive reached the factory unimpeded and slaughtered the unprepared rebels.  I thought it might have been cool for the rebel leader from the flashback to have lived hideously scarred and bent on revenge, but the player explicitly killed him off in his victory narration.  (Killing the leader was definitely within the stakes he initially declared.)

The Inquisitor's flashback was a first contact incident with Tau.  His goal was peaceful negotiations: I decided that his opposition wasn't the Tau negotiator, but the commander of the ship he (the Inquisitor) was on.  The commander ordered his men to open fire on the Tau ship while it was attempting to communicate.  The Inquisitor countermanded the order and tried to pull rank as a member of the Inquisition, saying that overriding his authority would be heresy.  The commander was unimpressed, and pointed out that negotiating with xenos was blatantly heretical, and threatened the Inquisitor himself with the ship's Commissar.  (In game terms he "turned the blow," which is rather bad for the other player.)  At this point the player was running out of dice, so he allocated one of his unspent Relationship dice to the commissar, and declared that the two of them went way back.  ("You know me, and you know that I know what I'm doing.  By the way, say hello to my sister for me when you see her.")  The Commander then pointed his pistol at one of the gunners, and told him to fire or he would burn him down on the spot.  The Inquisitor's player didn't have high enough dice to stop this outright, so he was able to interpose himself between the crewman and the controls and cause him to hesitate, but the Commander then shot the crewman in cold blood.  The Inquisitor then finally drew his own weapon (gaining more dice) and pointed it at the Commander, ordering him to stand down.  Since the Commander was out of dice, he had no choice but to acquiesce, and the Inquisitor was able to answer the Tau ship's hail and conduct peaceful negotiations with the ambassador.

Help Desk / Ignore Function v.1.2 - any hope of implementation?
« on: July 03, 2009, 02:55:27 PM »
Quote from: Windjammer;311683
So here's my question. Is it technically possible to develop an ignore function which puts posters on ignore, as soon as they engage one particular other poster? I mean, it can't be impossible to implement, right? Say, everytime Stormbringer quotes Seanchai (or vice versa), I want that post to be blanked when I peruse these forums.

Of course it's not technically impossible.  I guess the real question is whether there is the demand to justify the feature, and whether it would create an excessive burden on the server.  (I'm guessing 'no' to the latter.)

Quote from: gabriel_ss4u;310238
hmmm.... once again, the GM knows of things going on you as a player most likely don't.

While that's true, I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.

depends on how good the character is at it too. A char. with a low warfare can come up with a great ambush from the 'player's' idea, but if his 'stuff' gets in the way, or the other player's char. stuff helps him, or has better warfare, it is not clear-cut.

I agree.  I phrased it poorly, but what I meant was, if the character has low Warfare then the GM will take it into account during the attempt and perhaps the ambush will fail: the target will detect the character due to something he didn't quite manage to hide, or there will be a way out that the would-be ambusher overlooked, or any number of things.

You can think this all you want, but to me, these are the attitudes that create players who constantly bicker with their GM.
If you have no trust in the story or GM, then you should find another way around it in game-play or find another game.

I'm not sure what attitudes you're talking about.  Your comment about not trusting the GM is a bizarre non sequitur.

Your view seems consigned to murder as an only attempt...

I'm not sure why you got that impression, since I didn't say that anywhere.  I said I see the game as fundamentally competitive.

Quote from: SunBoy;310172
Yeah. Remember that, in Amber, any character can reach any place in a matter of seconds, so "being 500 yards away with a rifle" hardly counts as a smart maneuver. Furthermore, amberites can supposedly "sense" or somehow "feel" other real beings while in the same shadow... it's not a very often applied rule, but it's there. So I don't really think it counts as outsmarting someone.

Yes, it is very difficult to effectively ambush a high-Warfare Amberite.

That's why, if somene pulls it off, it means that they've managed to thoroughly outmaneuver the other player.

Quote from: gabriel_ss4u;310165
Is that so? Even if the player who set up an ambush sucks at ambushes, and the player being ambushed is adept at sensing and avoiding ambushes according to character stats????

If the player whose character is trying to set up the ambush sucks at it, his character probably wouldn't have succeeded.

But when a sense of 'player vs. GM' turns into 'player vs. player', I think the essence of the game is being lost.

I disagree with this entirely for a game like Amber.  It's not a traditional party structure game; it's members of a royal family struggling against each other for position.

My feeling is that if one player managed to set up a circumstance where he's ambushing a target without any ranged weapon from 500 yards away, he has thoroughly outmanuevered the other player and *ought* to win.

Give that 79% of Americans are Christians, it surprises me that they had to get fake ones.  That's not even trying.

Quote from: Cranewings;309181
I just wish there were additional degrees of it. I feel like if one person has the high ground and a spear, the person he is fighting should be damn near helpless. The +1 doesn't cut it. Neither does an attack of opportunity.

Is there a good term for this kind of absurd overcorrection?  It's a common trend I see in houserules, to identify a phenomenon but over-amplify it to the point where the houserule makes the game less like the source material (whether stories or real life).

Quote from: Hackmastergeneral;309809
There were wizards in the real world?

Quite a few, although most didn't amount to much.  Even today there still are many people who claim to practice what amounts to magic, and gain significant amounts of money or power by doing so. ;)

News and Adverts / Free Speech RPG message board
« on: June 17, 2009, 08:26:19 PM »
I've checked it out too, and likewise with you best of luck.  If it succeeds it shows your forum fills a valuable niche.  If not, it doesn't necessarily mean you were wrong: forums can founder for a variety of reasons.

(I approve of the site's endorsement of Traveller as the best RPG in the world.  I do not consider that question to have a single right answer, but there is a set of RPGs -- and I feel Traveller is one of them -- for which one could make a good argument.  Picking one of those shows me that someone can recognize quality, while picking something else makes me question whether they and I have anything in common as roleplayers.)

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 36