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.

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
The magic system in the current beta is kind of a hybrid of Vancian magic and a point-based system. You have your typical Vancian spells, but then the different mage traditions get what are called Arts that are powered by a pool called Effort. Arts are less powerful generally than spells, but still allow a mage to be magically useful after they've blown their spell wad for the day.
I can see why, as a historian, Pundit has his panties in a wad over this...just pure bullshit being pumped out by retards that some gaming companies might use to shape their products. It's amazing to me that it only takes a few moronic tweets to shape policies.
Going to back this, even though I probably won't ever play it. Guys like Crawford need to be supported so RPGs don't totally turn into SJW circlejerks.
Pen & Paper Roleplaying Games (RPGs) Discussion / Re: Forgotten RPGs
« Last post by Brad on Today at 10:45:16 AM »
I, too, have a copy of High Fantasy, along with Adventures in High Fantasy, got them both for $5 at a model train store in Austin circa 2000. Same store also had all the GURPS Conan books, but I passed them up for some stupid reason.

No idea how obscure these are, but I was digging around and found Ninja Burger, Ork, Aria, and Reich Star. Gonna go through all those boxes soon...
The dildo that is Social Justice, is about a mile long.  And every one of these huge gaming companies is competing to see just how much of it they can stuff up their collective asses.

Their acrobatics will only undermine them as smaller, hungrier, designers create better stuff because they deliver what the gamers want.
Seriously stay safe and heal up.
I think that a great deal of the disconnect between RPG bards and their historical or legendary antecedents is due to a lot of what makes up a bard’s role and cultural significance being largely up to RP, rather than something that can be properly defined in terms of class features. A lot of what a bard can do in terms of storytelling, news and entertainment is stuff that pretty much anyone can do with just a few interaction, knowledge and performance skills. You don’t really need an entire class based around it, specially if you stretch the term “Bard” to mean “anyone who gathers lore and spreads news”.

Celtic bards are a different deal because they fulfill a religious role in a tribal culture relying on oral traditions to pass down their history. And even then they’re basically just wizards with lore keeping, poetic and oratory skills. They could arguably be clerics or druids instead, but the arcane/divine dichotomy is a D&D invention with no historical antecedents (every single historical mystical tradition, including those purporting to be “magicians”, has a spiritual component) and the sort of stuff legendary celtic bards are portrayed as doing sounds more like “wizard” magic to me in D&D terms, so I’m more inclined to say they’re wizards (and even more inclined to just fold all spell casting into a single class, but that’s another tangent).

Either way the point being that Celtic bards are mechanically full spell casters (wizards, clerics or druids) with a “Bard” kit rather than a stand alone class. This is one of the pitfalls of trying to work every single possible role into its own separate class, rather than working with a handful of core classes and expanding on them with 2e-style kits (or subclasses, professions, whatever you wanna call them) that grant them a couple of extra abilities to fulfill a specialized role, which is more effective and requires less bookkeeping.
The problem is and I see why Pundit keeps bringing this up is that rpg companies and other companies in general listen to those crackpots. It's one thing iif like in the past they were ignored. Not only are they catering to them the companies while losing money doubledown insisting that the sJWs are their core market and telling everyone and anyone who disagrees to politely duck off .
Here's the difference:  The fighter is mechanically simple.  There is really nothing in the mechanics to support the archetype except "can hit things" and "can take some hits".  The bard has specific bits taken from a kitchen sink from several different archetypes.

You're either arguing apples and turnips, or defining the word "archetype" as meaning "pre-AD&D character classes."  Leaving aside that quite a few gamers don't play D&D, there is nothing about archetypes that is defined by only two elements.  Just as well, or thieves, mages and clerics -- each with broad baskets of skills and powers -- would be SOL too.  That TSR botched the mechanics in 1980 doesn't invalidate the concept.

But sure, let's reduce minstrels/performers to their lowest common denominator.  With a nod to the posters above, they "know stuff," "entertain people" and "charm people."  That's not a whole lot.  Can some fight well?  Sure, if they're designed to do so. †  Can some cast spells?  Sure, if they're designed to do so.  For my part, I define ten broad adventuring archetypes for which I provide templates for the faint at heart.

† Disclaimer: I've been GMing point-buy systems for almost 40 years now.  None of the above is incongruous, IMHO.
Pundit, please stop reading Twitter. While I'm sure that it gives you a lot of laughs, the concentrated stupid of that communications mode just makes everything more dumb. I believe that Twitter does indeed cause brain damage.

And end his raison d'etre? NEVER.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10