Quote from: yosemitemike on April 28, 2024, 09:26:50 AMThe outrage marketing thing is obviously not working any more if it ever worked. 

Apparently for one company it did. And if it worked for one then sure enough marketing everywhere will push it. And they did.

WotC has been playing this since not long after 5e came out. Seed some preview of a new product with some trigger words and Pundit and others will advertise the game by complaining because sure enough people will buy the book just to see if it is as bad as these people are saying. And near every time its not.

Candlekeep is a big one. They dropped a few buzzwords and boom Pundit is all over it. But theres nothing in the book. They KNOW.

They are not going to stop until something blows up monumentally. And thats unlikely to happen as WotC plays it very cagey.

Marvel and Disney on the other hand are totally inept and blatant about it all. Has there been a single Marvel product in the last decade that has not somehow some way been blatantly woke?

Quote from: Crazy_Blue_Haired_Chick on April 28, 2024, 05:31:24 PMHehe, you have a point.

I don't want OWoD to ever take on Japanese or even any East or Southeast Asian mythology in their games. The Filipinos have dealt with enough bullshit already!

Too late. They already did. Kindred of the East and a full on campaign set in modern Asia with some bits lifted from my own RPG because they are hacks.

Gracias!

Allan.

My priority is usually Campaign --> Setting --> System, so I'll modify the setting to better fit the campaign, and modify the system to better fit either.

But I also have an unusual taste for running settings outside of their native system and vice versa. As I've said elsewhere, I've yet to find a perfect pair of system and setting where I'm totally happy with both.

Usually I would try to pick a system that complements the setting. But if it comes to it I think it is easier to modify aspects of the setting. I'm not opposed to house ruling, but it is more likely to lead to unforeseen consequences than changing details of the setting

Quote from: Omega on April 26, 2024, 06:44:02 PMThen O and AD&D were aimed at children too by that logic.

I dunno, I have to agree B/X DOES looks more "kiddified" than AD&D. Even though it clearly is/was not. I do know that when I was a kid walking through Toys R' Us, B/X and later BECMI were right next to the Milton Bradley board games while AD&D was next to the Avalon Hill wargames. And everyone knows AH >>>> MB for complexity, so of course that means it's better and for adults and stuff.

I got a "power tower" for $30 at an auction, basically it was some Amazon return. Also got a power rack for $100. You don't need to spend a ton of money at all. I also have a Planet Fitness membership solely for the stairclimber and water bed massage thing; they also have dumbbells up to 85# which is good for most stuff if you need a decent, quick workout. I've sort of given up on powerlifting for the most part, though, because every time I squat or press with a decent amount of weight my slipped disc manages to find some way to rear its ugly head. Mr. oggsmash here and his mutant son are making me lament the bygone days of being actually competitive...

I don't hate the RQ version of this, but I prefer some of the later spins on it.  Can't remember which parts of this are in later RQ versus MRQ versus Legend.

- You can only improve 3 things, no matter how many things you tried. 
- You still need to try things to improve them, but it's just a check mark. 
- The difference between failing and succeeding at improvement is +1% versus a random, modestly higher bosot (like 2-4%).
- The skills are more limited in number and more carefully curated to be useful--still a wide range but nothing so niche you can't try it.
- Skills start a little higher than early RQ--so trying something isn't a killer.

The effect is that most of the negatives others have mentioned above go away or are so muted that the only people who would object are those who hate the whole idea or really do want to control and balance every detail (in which case, point buy would be better).  It does even out over time.  In fact, the biggest effect is that people with starting scores can get them into competent range without too much trouble, and then advancement slows down--which is part of the point.

I don't like how any of these games handle percentage near/over 100, but that's a different critique, and often a side effect of doing a d100 roll under game of any stripe.
 

Oooo!  Sweet and thank you!

Having played a few d100/BRP games, I don't like this form of advancement. Others have pointed out several problems, chief among which, IMO, players will find any excuse to use certain skills just so they can advance. And if the GM isn't aware of the problem, the whole game devolves into the same 5 skills being used all the time because that's what the players are good at.

I much prefer simple point buy. A character could have been studying, practicing, or learning from another character, and we don't need to role play those activities, so just assume it happened and move on with the actual game.