| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Thulcondar |
Posted - 16 Sep 2008 : 17:50:03
Forgive a new member's question, but I was wondering if anyone here has ever tried to run a Realms campaign with a game system other than (A)D&D. I'm not talking about different editions of D&D, of course, but something like Castles & Crusades, GURPS, Lejendary Adventures, etc.
Thanks,
Joe |
| 22 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Skeptic |
Posted - 24 Sep 2008 : 21:38:32
quote:
Originally posted by Thulcondar
Thanks much for the thoughtful replies-- it's exactly what I was aiming at.
Give a look to :
Riddle of Steel
Burning Wheel
The Shadow of Yesterday
Donjon
Primetime Adventures
|
| Thulcondar |
Posted - 24 Sep 2008 : 17:39:28
Thanks much for the thoughtful replies-- it's exactly what I was aiming at.
Joe |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 22 Sep 2008 : 21:20:39
quote:
Originally posted by Icelander
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Oh gods, here we go again... Can we stick with the topic, please?
How is discussing what kind of game system best fits the Forgotten Realms off topic on this scroll?
Because the discussion had veered away from being anything about the Realms. The original post asked if anyone had tried any other systems with the Realms. The discussion that resulted was comparing game systems in general terms. Hence, it was off-topic -- and some of it was stuff that's already been seen here many, many times. |
| Skeptic |
Posted - 22 Sep 2008 : 15:53:13
quote:
Originally posted by Icelander
We are both sharing our view of how these systems work for us when running Realms campaigns.
My personal "goal" is to have a system that will produce during play, the same kind of fiction I can find in FR novels.
I can't say it will never happen with D&D or GURPS, but the chances aren't good.
Don't forget where I put the emphasis, it's critical.
Spoiler for the latest Woody Allen follow :
In Christina, Vicky, Barcelona there is a wonderful thing that I would want to see in a RPG session.
When everyone expect Christina (Scarlett Johansson) to have sex with the handsome spanish artist, she's sick, that is completly "out of character", but in fact, what "Christina's player" is doing is turning around the narrative in a much more interesting situation, because with her character off scene, Vicky, soon-to-be-maried, must spend the rest of the week-end with the handsome spanish artist. |
| Icelander |
Posted - 22 Sep 2008 : 14:36:57
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Oh gods, here we go again... Can we stick with the topic, please?
How is discussing what kind of game system best fits the Forgotten Realms off topic on this scroll?
I favour a simulationist ruleset, which I find removes the distraction of metagame thinking and thereby allows the motivations and history of characters to come to the forefront and hopefully lead to the emergence of an organic story. Skeptic is on the side of a narrativist system, which he feels is superior in presenting thematic choices and thereby yielding a more tightly structured story in play.
We are both sharing our view of how these systems work for us when running Realms campaigns. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 22 Sep 2008 : 14:20:00
Oh gods, here we go again... Can we stick with the topic, please? |
| Icelander |
Posted - 22 Sep 2008 : 04:53:00
quote:
Originally posted by Skeptic
A meaningful story is a story that resolves (words are not mine).
Real life is simulationist, but we still manage to find meaningful stories in it.
Seeking a resolution to loose ends is one of the primary ways that a player can affect the game. I don't think that the system or GM needs to force this, if the players desire to see something through to a resolution, they'll do their best to accomplish it.
quote:
Originally posted by Skeptic
Tactical games like D&D and simulationist game like GURPS both have problems delivering meaningful stories in play. One solution, like you said above, is to have the DM to force one, another is to write one after play, with much editing.
Why should delivering 'meaningful' stories be a goal at all?
Delivering fun is my goal when I play, I get meaningful stories when I read books.
quote:
Originally posted by Skeptic
Not so long ago, I too dreamed of the narrative magicaly emerging of play, but now I'm glad I'm free of it.
A narrative always emerges. What one thinks of it is a matter of taste.
But it's not necessary for the final product to be worth anything in an artistic sense, as long as people have fun playing. Basically, I don't believe that what makes a good novel necessarily makes a good game and vice versa.
quote:
Originally posted by Skeptic
And it doesn't feel like writing a story by committee (what do you think of the Waterdeep novel ?),
Two people is not a committee, but I get what you mean. In general, the more people involved in a creative process, the more muddled the vision and harder the task.
As a story, I found it inferior to Ms. Cunningham previous novels. As a game supplment (which is what I bought it as), I found it superior to her other books. This may be due to the fact that I find Ed a mediocre novelist but a brilliant game supplement writer.
quote:
Originally posted by Skeptic
because the rules of those games (like Burning Wheel) are written to be exciting decisions mechanisms.
Windows is designed to be a reliable software operating system.
Intentions aren't end results. |
| Skeptic |
Posted - 22 Sep 2008 : 04:38:02
quote:
Originally posted by Icelander
That depends on what the definition of 'meaningful story' is.
If we mean 'a coherent narrative', then I disagree. If we, however, demand that 'story' is defined more restrictively, perhaps as 'narrative driven primarily by the use of literary devices', then I can agree on that.
I just don't think roleplaying is improved by the insistence on such stories. Either such storylines come from the GM, which sacrifices too much player freedom for my tastes, or the stories are written by committee, which I've found is a good way to ensure that the end product is awful.
I prefer the story to emerge accidentally from play. Mechanisms designed to artificially produce a narrative from the roleplaying experience feel stilted to me.
A meaningful story is a story that resolves (words are not mine).
Tactical games like D&D and simulationist game like GURPS both have problems delivering meaningful stories in play. One solution, like you said above, is to have the DM to force one, another is to write one after play, with much editing.
Not so long ago, I too dreamed of the narrative magicaly emerging of play, but now I'm glad I'm free of it.
And it doesn't feel like writing a story by committee (what do you think of the Waterdeep novel ?), because the rules of those games (like Burning Wheel) are written to be exciting thematic decisions mechanisms.
Edit : emphasis on what kind of decisions. |
| Icelander |
Posted - 22 Sep 2008 : 04:29:33
quote:
Originally posted by Skeptic
I have no problem saying D&D will often not deliver a story in play, but GURPS have different serious ones. As you say, exploring characters and setting is "easier", but that's not enough (in average) to get a meaningful story during play.
That depends on what the definition of 'meaningful story' is.
If we mean 'a coherent narrative', then I disagree. If we, however, demand that 'story' is defined more restrictively, perhaps as 'narrative driven primarily by the use of literary devices', then I can agree on that.
I just don't think roleplaying is improved by the insistence on such stories. Either such storylines come from the GM, which sacrifices too much player freedom for my tastes, or the stories are written by committee, which I've found is a good way to ensure that the end product is awful.
I prefer the story to emerge accidentally from play. Mechanisms designed to artificially produce a narrative from the roleplaying experience feel stilted to me. |
| Skeptic |
Posted - 22 Sep 2008 : 04:18:38
quote:
Originally posted by Icelander
As opposed to 'miniatures game system driven', sure. I've always found GURPS mechanics all but invisible in actual play and the characters and world emphasised.
I have no problem saying D&D will often not deliver a story in play, but GURPS have different serious ones. As you say, exploring characters and setting is "easier", but that's not enough (in average) to get a meaningful story during play.
|
| Icelander |
Posted - 22 Sep 2008 : 03:42:12
quote:
Originally posted by Skeptic
quote:
Originally posted by Icelander
I use GURPS to run Forgotten Realms. In my opinion, it fits much better than D&D, which as a miniatures game always seemed foisted upon the story-driven Realms.
GURPS in the same sentence than "story-driven" ? 
As opposed to 'miniatures game system driven', sure. I've always found GURPS mechanics all but invisible in actual play and the characters and world emphasised.
No character ever has an ability that makes no sense for him in setting terms because the system demands it and there is no difficulty inherent in presenting any NPC Ed creates within the system.
As long as I have a firm idea about the personality and history of the character, I can run him in GURPS without ever having to stop and write up a formal character sheet. I can't do that in D&D. |
| Skeptic |
Posted - 22 Sep 2008 : 02:26:00
quote:
Originally posted by Icelander
I use GURPS to run Forgotten Realms. In my opinion, it fits much better than D&D, which as a miniatures game always seemed foisted upon the story-driven Realms.
GURPS in the same sentence than "story-driven" ?
To answer the OP, I just received my Magic Burner book (Magic supplement for Burning Wheel) so I'll try to do a BW FR game sooner or later. |
| Yasraena |
Posted - 22 Sep 2008 : 02:20:59
I've used Rolemaster 2nd Ed for my current campaign that not only encompasses the Realms, but others as well. The campaign is basically like a fantasy version of 'Sliders', in that the Archmage of the group has the ability to create gates to different prime planes, he just can't control them yet. So when he creates one, they have no clue as to where it leads. They're Realms based characters, but so far they've been to Ravenloft, Dark Sun (played through my versions of the Arcane Shadows and City by the Silt Sea adventures) and are currently in Greyhawk playing through my version of the 3rd Ed module, City of the Spider Queen. But in my version, the drow don't worship Kiaransalee. They worship Yog-Sothoth. The Book of Vile Darkness plays a large part in their powers and abilities. Pretty intense so far. |
| Icelander |
Posted - 19 Sep 2008 : 13:47:42
I use GURPS to run Forgotten Realms. In my opinion, it fits much better than D&D, which as a miniatures game always seemed foisted upon the story-driven Realms.
It also allows me to portray NPCs precisely as I see them and as they are described, without worrying about how many hit points the old sage must have in order to have accumulated so many skill points. |
| Mkhaiwati |
Posted - 19 Sep 2008 : 04:02:37
quote:
Originally posted by Vangelor
Rolemaster would work just fine. I ran a campaign in college using that system in my own home setting, and subsequently transposed noble houses/intrigues/guilds I made up for my city to my Waterdeep campaign. The flavor and richness and depth of the Realms are their strength. Game mechanics are arbitrary, so sure one can play the setting under different rules if one likes.
At one time, the ICE webpages had a lengthy fan-made article on conversion of FR to Rolemaster rules. I remember seeing a comment about (paraphrase) "getting it before it is forced down by WotC" (I wonder why? I can only speculate that it crossed the lines somewhere in a bad way). It isn't there anymore, which is sad as I was kinda wanting to see what was done for RM immediately after the 4e announcement. I had a bad feeling I wouldn't like the changes. I think the author was Christopher Adams.
I think.
If my memory is still intact after the Spellplague.
|
| Leon_Stryfe |
Posted - 19 Sep 2008 : 03:55:25
Well, we've used Pathfinder a time or two (although, I not certain if that falls under a D&D edition or not...) with great results. We've also tried D20 Fantasy, as well as Swords & Sorcery and Throne (I believe thats what it was called, anyway) with less stellar results. We've thought about using a either GUPRS or the HERO system, but we've yet to try it. |
| evildmguy |
Posted - 18 Sep 2008 : 16:17:01
I used Alternity for an FR campaign and was happy with it.
edg |
| Amarel Derakanor |
Posted - 17 Sep 2008 : 16:02:49
I've used the Orbis-system for two campaings; The first, in Cormyr, and the second, in the Savage Frontier. It worked splendidly. |
| Shottglazz |
Posted - 17 Sep 2008 : 14:37:58
quote:
Originally posted by Vangelor
Rolemaster would work just fine. I ran a campaign in college using that system in my own home setting, and subsequently transposed noble houses/intrigues/guilds I made up for my city to my Waterdeep campaign. The flavor and richness and depth of the Realms are their strength. Game mechanics are arbitrary, so sure one can play the setting under different rules if one likes.
Nice to see someone else recognizes the versatility of this excellent game system... |
| Vangelor |
Posted - 17 Sep 2008 : 10:46:34
Rolemaster would work just fine. I ran a campaign in college using that system in my own home setting, and subsequently transposed noble houses/intrigues/guilds I made up for my city to my Waterdeep campaign. The flavor and richness and depth of the Realms are their strength. Game mechanics are arbitrary, so sure one can play the setting under different rules if one likes. |
| crazedventurers |
Posted - 17 Sep 2008 : 10:33:37
quote:
Originally posted by Thulcondar
Castles & Crusades
Thanks,
Joe
I use the C&C rules for my campaign. They incorporate the best bits of the 3E OGL with a nod to how the D&D game used to be back in 1E/2E era.
Easy, fun and flexible, what more could a DM or players want?
Cheers
Damian |
| Neil Bishop |
Posted - 17 Sep 2008 : 08:33:17
I've been planning to run a campaign using Savage Worlds but, while having done some of the conversion work, I haven't quite had the chance to do so yet. |
|
|
