| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Aewrik |
Posted - 25 Sep 2007 : 14:17:06
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?p=13522389#post13522389
Reading post 4 made me lose hope for everything d20.
If this is WotC's mindset, there won't be a 4e FR to *roleplay* in; there will be a FR to have combat encounters in.
I must ask you, who think that there are too much mechanics, and too little... content in the 3e supplements:
What is roleplaying to you?
I've grown up with roleplaying, and the only time I've encountered this kind of thinking, is when playing wargames. Warhammer Fantasy/40k, LotR Stategy, Necromunda, Mordheim, and the like, where rules are used to judicate the outcome between two player opponents. Of course D&D Miniatures has more detailed fights, but it still shouldn't revolve around combat.
I'm going to translate one of my early journals from FR to illustrate my point. Not right now, but I'll post it in a few hours.
A curious note game balance there: that group had a Drow monk (Amnesiac with a rather... uncomfortable past. ECL3), a Curst (A previously powerful wizard, in search for his soul, ECL6 (plus the skills of a wiz23)), a kobold "dragon slayer" (ECL2), a Minotaur (castout, since he during a raid refused to slay the kobold. ECL9).
We had a great amount of fun with that mini-campaign. I'll post the journal, in a few hours.
Come to think about it, the way Thomasson talks about the windwalk spell, is almost as a ruling tyrant, oppressing the past as if it could weaken his position. (Much like Tengil in the Brothers Lionheart, or the Fire Nation in Avatar: the Last Airbender). |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Skeptic |
Posted - 17 Oct 2007 : 18:12:39
quote:
Originally posted by aravine
I'm sorry guys, but I think we're going a little off topic. correct me if I'm wrong, but I beleive the subject was "what is roleplaying", not "what is the max HP fora wizard with con(-) and could he technically beat a blue dragon?"
Okay, let's try to revive that topic carefully...
The difference between a board game and a role-playing game ? The shared imagined universe.
That would be a simple and not confusing definition of an RPG : A role-playing game is a game in which there is a shared imagined universe. |
| Aravine |
Posted - 17 Oct 2007 : 18:02:56
I'm sorry guys, but I think we're going a little off topic. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I beleive the subject was "what is roleplaying", not "what is the max HP fora wizard with con(-) and could he technically beat a blue dragon?" |
| Aewrik |
Posted - 02 Oct 2007 : 00:20:48
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Aewrik
If I remember correctly, you stop gaining hit points after a certain level in AD&D, right?
I mean, a wizard with high con (+3), could theoretically have 140hp at level 20. I mean, that's as much as a juvenile blue dragon. Could the wizard actually survive a worse beating than a dragon?
Uh, your math is wrong. Only warriors could get more than +2 hit points, in AD&D. And the CON bonus cut off at level 10, for wizards. So a 20th level wizard could have, at most, 70 hit points - 4+2 for every level from 1 to 10, and then a single hp per level after that.
Your points are otherwise valid, though. 
Yeah, I was referring to 3rd ed, where wizards gain 1d4+Con modifier every level.
AD&D is (in my opinion, as always) much better in many ways. Of course, THAC0 was a little complicated until I understood that the result was (1d20 - targets AC) against THAC0. And the saves feel more relevant than reflex, fortitude and will saves, since they aren't already represented with other numbers. Also, I think they're easier to motivate since they are typically (and feel very) heroic.
Skeptic: Yeah, I know :/
It's just depressing that the best campaign setting I've ever played in must be revised so often. Especially when the systems aren't very well motivated.
AD&D books are very hard to come by, and I can't bring my computer with me to the table, since I think it removes a little of the... realness (adj. for genuine, whatever that is... genuity? bah). AD&D is a little off limits, for that reason. $12 is really cheap for core rules, though (on paizo.com)...
I think I have found a DMG and PG for AD&D, however. I'm just going to see if I have to pry them from the owner's cold dead hands, or if he's willing to sell them to me ;)
Another good thing about AD&D, is that there isn't much interpretation of the stats needed. A basilisk yields 1,400 or 7,000 xp, and that's that. There is no advancement, and no random numbers (except hp, of course). In other words, the DM doesn't have to spend hours preparing things irrelevant to the plot. In other words, I can focus on the core of the adventure: the plot and roleplaying elements.
Perhaps the basilisk isn't the best example, but it supports my main point: the D20-system is the real advanced dungeons and dragons. For me as a DM -because of the rules- it's a labor, and not a game.
Good night :)
Early morning tomorrow... |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 01 Oct 2007 : 22:46:52
quote:
Originally posted by Aewrik
If I remember correctly, you stop gaining hit points after a certain level in AD&D, right?
I mean, a wizard with high con (+3), could theoretically have 140hp at level 20. I mean, that's as much as a juvenile blue dragon. Could the wizard actually survive a worse beating than a dragon?
Uh, your math is wrong. Only warriors could get more than +2 hit points, in AD&D. And the CON bonus cut off at level 10, for wizards. So a 20th level wizard could have, at most, 70 hit points - 4+2 for every level from 1 to 10, and then a single hp per level after that.
Your points are otherwise valid, though. |
| Skeptic |
Posted - 01 Oct 2007 : 22:44:22
quote:
Originally posted by Aewrik
And that's what so wrong. Trying to keep the balance in a game, where there are creatures based on mythology that portrayed the dragons as almost immortal beings gifted with the power to level cities and make kings bow in awe.
That was true in D&D until 3rd ed, in my opinion, when they started the massive project of trying to balance the game (which evidently failed, as they're creating a fourth edition, now).
What you are talking about can't really be done using any edition of D&D. Don't bash D&D for being what it is, a game mae for killing dragons in dungeons and taking their treasure. If you want to do something else with the game it's fine, but you're not under any waranty.
You can also try another RPG that may fit your style of play better. (Hmm I'm looking at the Dragon in the monster book of Burning Wheel, I think you would like it)
BTW, 4E banned the (IMHO, stupid) idea to build monsters with PC things, you might like that very much.
|
| Aewrik |
Posted - 01 Oct 2007 : 22:07:11
And that's what so wrong. Trying to keep the balance in a game, where there are creatures based on mythology that portrayed the dragons as almost immortal beings gifted with the power to level cities and make kings bow in awe.
That was true in D&D until 3rd ed, in my opinion, when they started the massive project of trying to balance the game (which evidently failed, as they're creating a fourth edition, now).
I mean, hit points are a very abstract value in D&D. How come that two persons with con 15 can take a different amount of damage? So what if one of them is more experienced in battle (or at book keeping), they still have the same stamina (as it is rolled on con, and not fortitude). One of them can take the pain better, and suddenly, he doesn't die when a dagger strikes him in a critical spot, while the less experienced one would collapse from the wound.
"Hm, we didn't think of that." So they cover it up by the "Coup de grace" rule.
If I remember correctly, you stop gaining hit points after a certain level in AD&D, right?
I mean, a wizard with high con (+3), could theoretically have 140hp at level 20. I mean, that's as much as a juvenile blue dragon. Could the wizard actually survive a worse beating than a dragon?
There are better ways of making a setting heroic, without having fighters being able to withstand an ancient red dragon's breath of fire while taking a shower in oil, or having a wizard who has never used his hands to fight with giving the town constable a good beating (it would be quite cool, but that's beside the point).
There are alot of things the D20-system can't motivate. And seing that 4th ed. will bear the D20 logo, It can't be better. As it seems, they mostly draw sharper lines and nerf, not adding much new content.
Of course, to all of this, you can apply common sense and let the poor fighter be turned into charcoal in the inferno, but that's not supported by the rules, which is what D20 is all about.
That didn't turn out as much rp-talk as a scornful comment :
Feels good to vent the frustration, though... |
| Skeptic |
Posted - 01 Oct 2007 : 21:32:09
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Part of the problem with dragons and D&D is something that has remained constant, throughout all the editions: a lot of DMs have a tendency to have the dragon sit around in its lair and wait for someone to come fight it. And then, when combat does happen, the DM keeps the dragon on the ground, not only allowing full PC access to it, but negating one of the dragon's biggest advantages.
In D&D, a dragon shouldn't be more dangerous than any other monster of the same CR.
Also, don't forget that the designers already lowered those CR to make them feared.
However, the fly speed is included in the CR. |
| Aewrik |
Posted - 01 Oct 2007 : 21:08:29
I've found the document, but it's alot to translate...
Perhaps someday you'll see how most dragons are played in Sweden : )
But you're right -- The dragon's greatest weapon is its superior intelligence. However, the image you get from many generic adventures (FR utilizes dragons to their full potential -- most of the dragons in Dragons of Faerûn are a testament to that), is exactly what you describes: they're just another kind of monsters waiting for heroes to defeat them.
I'd love to play with a DM that could portray a dragon "correctly" : ) |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 01 Oct 2007 : 20:03:05
quote:
Originally posted by Aewrik
Hah... I dug up my old dragon accessory for DoD, and... I think D&D should get some inspiration for dragons, there.
One type of dragon there, can dish out 24594 damage with their breath weapon. A normal human has 10hp in DoD, and the most über hero to ever have set his foot upon that world had at most (tata!) 50.
Comparing knights vs. dragons as David vs. Goliath, or -more popular- as peasant vs. a fully armed AH-64 Apache, just lost its meaning.
I would've liked if the dragons of Faerûn would've been as almighty (stats-wise) as they rightly should be : )
I have a file I composed about dragons stowed away on a floppy somewhere... I'll see if I can find it and translate it. It's based on the very good information given in the Drakar supplement, and I've just added some of my own twists to make the dragons more... dragon-like.
Edit: Oh, and it's fluff, not crunch. I just used stats to give you a hint on the relative power level between dragons and the rest of the world.
I use dragons this way in FR, too. They're basically immortal, always.
Part of the problem with dragons and D&D is something that has remained constant, throughout all the editions: a lot of DMs have a tendency to have the dragon sit around in its lair and wait for someone to come fight it. And then, when combat does happen, the DM keeps the dragon on the ground, not only allowing full PC access to it, but negating one of the dragon's biggest advantages.
A dragon doesn't need a 25k hp breath weapon. A dragon simply needs to be played as intelligently as its score would imply. Once a dragon hits adult age or so, they should be very difficult for any group of players, unless those players are powerful, highly mobile, and have had plenty of time to prepare and stack the deck in their favor.
I've had a couple of people explain to me how their 10th level fighters were able to kill dragons by themselves. And these people were always bewildered when I replied "Not if I was running the dragon!"  |
| Aewrik |
Posted - 01 Oct 2007 : 19:01:14
Hah... I dug up my old dragon accessory for DoD, and... I think D&D should get some inspiration for dragons, there.
One type of dragon there, can dish out 24594 damage with their breath weapon. A normal human has 10hp in DoD, and the most über hero to ever have set his foot upon that world had at most (tata!) 50.
Comparing knights vs. dragons as David vs. Goliath, or -more popular- as peasant vs. a fully armed AH-64 Apache, just lost its meaning.
I would've liked if the dragons of Faerûn would've been as almighty (stats-wise) as they rightly should be : )
I have a file I composed about dragons stowed away on a floppy somewhere... I'll see if I can find it and translate it. It's based on the very good information given in the Drakar supplement, and I've just added some of my own twists to make the dragons more... dragon-like.
Edit: Oh, and it's fluff, not crunch. I just used stats to give you a hint on the relative power level between dragons and the rest of the world.
I use dragons this way in FR, too. They're basically immortal, always. |
| Skeptic |
Posted - 29 Sep 2007 : 03:57:04
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Which they might well tweak anyway.
Tweaking is fine, fun and part of the "gamer" experience.
Using D&D like Ed's group* or many others scribes here (I guess) is IHMO, a missed opportunity to discover some really interesting games.
*From what we know through THO. |
| Skeptic |
Posted - 29 Sep 2007 : 03:52:32
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Nevertheless, as to the question, "What if the person you are roleplaying leads a boring life?" Well, who really wants to play as a character who leads a ho-hum life? That takes away the whole point in playing...
That was a way for me to say that "playing somebody else life regarding of what kind of life he has" can be fun for a minority, but the majority prefer to be a protagonist of a story. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 29 Sep 2007 : 03:51:00
quote:
Originally posted by Skeptic
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
If they're having fun, who cares if it's "not really" D&D?
Well, of course there is no bad wrong fun 
But, maybe they could have a lot more fun with much less work using another game 
Which they might well tweak anyway. |
| Skeptic |
Posted - 29 Sep 2007 : 03:48:39
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
If they're having fun, who cares if it's "not really" D&D?
Well, of course there is no bad wrong fun
But, maybe they could have a lot more fun with much less work using another game |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 29 Sep 2007 : 03:47:16
quote:
Originally posted by Ugly is the new black
Believe me, Jon Q. Suzail is not impressed by anything we have to offer.
I think he would be. I think our modern world is pretty damn amazing (not always in a good way), and I live there.
Nevertheless, as to the question, "What if the person you are roleplaying leads a boring life?" Well, who really wants to play as a character who leads a ho-hum life? That takes away the whole point in playing... |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 29 Sep 2007 : 03:30:13
quote:
Originally posted by Skeptic
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
Well, it seems like I have made a bad job of playing D&D (and DM'ing it)up through the years; I have done everything wrong.
Well, D&D is probably not the best game for the major part of the posters here. (IMHO D&D isn't a really good game at all)
Also, you just did the best you could do with D&D because you didn't know anything else (it was the same for me!).
But if you always changed D&D rules to make it fit your playstyle in those years, why not trying something else ?
If they're having fun, who cares if it's "not really" D&D? |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 29 Sep 2007 : 03:17:26
quote:
Originally posted by Xysma
The whole marketing tactic of "all the previous editions suck in their own way, but 4e is really cool" really annoys me. Please, can you quit telling us how bad the game is? Up until GenCon you were 100% supportive of 3E and now it sucks? Get real. Focus on telling us what 4E has to offer rather than the deficiencies of earlier editions. Personally, I know how great 3E is and how it works perfectly for my group.
Let me also add that if this statement is for real:
"Chris doesn't immediately tell us to roll for initiative. That's a sign, right? We're gonna get a chance to negotiate with it, get the information we need to get to this city, and then kill the dracolich and get its phat lewtz."
...and not a joke, and this is one of the designers? 4E, count me out.
Does he also mention if 4E is going to be REALLY COOL? That's what's most important to me: how cool the game is going to be. I also want to hear about what my non-attack power options will be. |
| Aravine |
Posted - 28 Sep 2007 : 12:54:12
quote:
Originally posted by Skeptic
quote:
Originally posted by aravine
Roleplaying, to me, is the act of acting someone else's life.
Try to explain more what you like about it, I want to be sure about your favorite playstyle.
i like a more plot centered D&D, much like you would find in a video game such as final fantasy, or more relevently, Balder's Gate |
| Ugly is the new black |
Posted - 28 Sep 2007 : 04:29:49
Aewick, I agree with you 100%. I'm only trying to illustrate that the kinds of things Wooly was describing are not fiction to this guy; but rather, a very real part of his world. Maybe not his everyday world, but certainly, everything I described before happens around him on a day-to-day basis.
love,
nathan. |
| Aewrik |
Posted - 28 Sep 2007 : 04:02:20
Nono, of course not. There's one thing to point out, however: the things Wooly pointed out are everyday things for us. We don't think about them.
I can bet that for Jon Q. Suzail to buy this enchanted item for a grand 150 GOLD coins, he'd have to need it pretty badly. After all, cobblers aren't that well paid.
To point out the difference:
People don't use portals for everyday transportation, the way we use cars. Portals are not only dangerous, but often guarded.
People don't just come home and "flip on" their personal bard. What you're describing, seeing Major Images at shieldmeet, is probably what the cinemas were back in the 20s. Once every four years, or so.
And finally, even though Thayan enclaves exist, common folk don't go there, for several reasons. The first is, how prevalent magic may be, exotic things sparks fear into most people. I don't think that just because people may be comfortable with magic, they're comfortable with every type of character, or every type of ethnicity of the realms. After all, the Wizards of Thay shave all their body hair, tattoo themselves (often with demonic symbols), speak with a peculiar accent, speak above their potential customers' heads (in mulhorandi), etc. etc.
Furthermore, most people never see a gold coin in their life, and prefer safety before taking a loan to someone they don't know very well. Perhaps owning a magical item is seen with suspicion, for that reason? It could bring social complications.
Nobles are another matter, but Jon Q. Suzail is probably not born of noble blood.
At least, that's how I prefer to view the realms. Making magic too common, reduces its effect on the world. If the peasant on that farm the PCs pass by swoops around on a flying carpet, or has broomsticks carrying water from the well, the world becomes much less attractive.
Magic should be impressive and exclusive. The PCs are enjoying a great privilege in being able to acquire magic items.
Back to bed. 
EDIT: Oh, and on the peasant thingy, I would play it out more like "As you pass by a field, you can see how a farmer stops his plow, leans against it and shoots you a curious glare. You're not sure whether he is impressed by your shining armours, or barely wishing you off his land, but he seems to grit his teeth and curse softly he returns to, in his own field, proudly force the plow forward through the dirt."
Now back to bed... |
| Ugly is the new black |
Posted - 28 Sep 2007 : 02:33:49
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
So it's all relative.
Wooly, that's amazingly inaccurate.
For starters, that cobbler from Cormyr, Jon Q. Suzail? He's seen way more than just a little magic; he lives in a city guarded 'round the clock by a division of War Wizards. His king, Azoun IV, was just slain defending the realm from destruction at the hands ghazneths (magic-draining winged creatures of great power), hordes of wicked humanoids loyal to the Zhentarim, and a huge "devil dragon" named Nalavarauthatoryl the Red. Even as we speak, worg-mounted goblins are trashing his country. Realistically speaking, if you look at the history of Cormyr, chances are pretty high that somebody close to Jon Q. Suzail was eaten by a troll who wandered out of the Vast Swamp.
Dude, magic is that guy's entire life.
Furthermore, you think he's never dreamed of the kinds of things we have? Like "illusory" plays? Wooly, Major Image is a 3rd level bard spell that functions in three-dimensions, with full sound and smell. It blows television away. You think he's never seen one of those at Shieldmeet?
Travel faster than a horse? Wooly, he lives in a world where portals dot the landscape, allowing travel between to points at instantanous speeds.
A box that allows for communication across long distances? He could have the local Thayan Enclave enchant Whispering Wind onto any item he wanted -his own personal walkie-talkie- for like 150 gold at the most.
Believe me, Jon Q. Suzail is not impressed by anything we have to offer.
love,
nathan. |
| Skeptic |
Posted - 28 Sep 2007 : 02:07:56
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Hell, look how our lives would look to him. We get up, we drive to work, we go home and watch TV, spend some time on the internet, and then go to bed. But to Jon Q Suzail, who has never ridden anything faster than a horse, merely doing 45 mph to get to work is remarkable. A box that allows instanteous communication around the world? Amazing. Another box that shows us any of several hundred "illusory" plays, whenever we want? That's something he's never even dreamed of!
So it's all relative.
Wow, I was trying to find a good way to explain it and you beat me to it completly.
Sim games (like what can become D&D if you only remove competition in it) can be boring as daily life, because in such games (and that's the goal behind them) there is no metagame force to get things moving.
To rely on the fact that the "exploration" of the setting is in itself exciting, is in fact, not enough (IME). |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 28 Sep 2007 : 01:24:48
quote:
Originally posted by Ugly is the new black
quote:
Originally posted by Skeptic
quote:
Originally posted by aravine
Roleplaying, to me, is the act of acting someone else's life.
And what if someone else has a really boring life ?
Can lives even be boring in Faerun? I mean, really, you can't swing a cat in the Forgotten Realms without hitting a band of bloodthirsty goblinoids, a flying ship, or some ancient cult. It seems a bit silly, I'll admit, to think that every single person in Faerun leads a life of adventure, but ... they kinda do.
We're talking about a world where magic is real. Where hordes of dark creatures seethe underground, just waiting for the right moment to strike. We're talking about a world where dragons can (and do) swoop down and obliterate entire nations beneath torrents of flame. I mean c'mon, it's a place where, not even 20 years ago, the deities themselves took physical form and walked the earth among men.
That seems pretty interesting to me.
love,
nathan.
Well, yeah, by our standards. But to the standards of folk in the Realms, some of that stuff is old hat. A Suzailian cobbler, for example, has prolly seen magic, and may have witnessed some odd event during the ToT. But he's not met any gods, goblinoids don't go into his shop, and Suzail hasn't seen much draconic activity, of late. So he's prolly busy living his life, and not finding it all that exciting.
Hell, look how our lives would look to him. We get up, we drive to work, we go home and watch TV, spend some time on the internet, and then go to bed. But to Jon Q Suzail, who has never ridden anything faster than a horse, merely doing 45 mph to get to work is remarkable. A box that allows instanteous communication around the world? Amazing. Another box that shows us any of several hundred "illusory" plays, whenever we want? That's something he's never even dreamed of!
So it's all relative. |
| Ugly is the new black |
Posted - 28 Sep 2007 : 00:07:40
quote:
Originally posted by Skeptic
quote:
Originally posted by aravine
Roleplaying, to me, is the act of acting someone else's life.
And what if someone else has a really boring life ?
Can lives even be boring in Faerun? I mean, really, you can't swing a cat in the Forgotten Realms without hitting a band of bloodthirsty goblinoids, a flying ship, or some ancient cult. It seems a bit silly, I'll admit, to think that every single person in Faerun leads a life of adventure, but ... they kinda do.
We're talking about a world where magic is real. Where hordes of dark creatures seethe underground, just waiting for the right moment to strike. We're talking about a world where dragons can (and do) swoop down and obliterate entire nations beneath torrents of flame. I mean c'mon, it's a place where, not even 20 years ago, the deities themselves took physical form and walked the earth among men.
That seems pretty interesting to me.
love,
nathan. |
| Skeptic |
Posted - 27 Sep 2007 : 23:31:03
quote:
Originally posted by aravine
Roleplaying, to me, is the act of acting someone else's life.
And what if someone else has a really boring life ? |
| Aewrik |
Posted - 27 Sep 2007 : 20:34:05
Yeah. It's hard for a fantasy system to beat DoD.
And you hit the nail, really. The only combat oriented in DoD character creation is calculating your hitpoints. It's not at all like the D20 system (or the AD&D rules, for that matter). It doesn't focus on combat, even though it is quite prevalent in the setting. |
| Jorkens |
Posted - 27 Sep 2007 : 18:18:34
quote:
Originally posted by Aewrik
They used D100 up to third edition (the black box).
But yeah, DoD '91 (4th ed), and Chronopia (5th ed) are more like KULT rules-wise.
Trudvang dropped the levels, however. 6th ed. didn't sell well, since people thought it was too much D&D...
They have alot of RP-friendly aspects in Trudvang, but that's not what this topic is about : )
The old DoD is as close as you can get to D&D without going D&D, simply because there is no system/setting in between. Of course, I may have an very broad view as to what dungeon crawling is. For me, dungeon crawling is when combat is the highlight of an adventure (which is wrong).
I've had many great non-dungeon crawling adventures in Ereb Altor, from playing petty merchants, to demonologists travelling the Gray Halls. However, it often revolves around combat.
But I agree. "that kind" of dungeon crawling didn't exist before I purchased the D&D core books.
I'm not sure, but I think it has to do with the approach to roleplaying, or something.
If you compare DoD (up to fifth edition) with D&D, they're basically saying the same, and the rules revolve around the same things, but somehow, DoD has a completely different feeling.
Also, DoD is only fake high fantasy. Before being introduced to D&D, I had never owned a magic weapon, short of ordinary weapons enchanted with 'laddning' (storing magic in an item), or sometimes 'förtrolla vapen' (sort of like ordinary enchantments).
Of course, most groups had a wizard, but since magic is so incredibly expensive, they usually only knew two or three spells, until they introduced mini magic (sort of like cantrips). Also, magic is very taxing to cast.
That could be one of the things which sets the atmoshpere apart. In D&D, magic is so common that it's used in combat strategy and tactics. That wouldn't ever be possible in DoD, even though magic certainly is powerful.
I wonder if it might be the mystique which sets them apart...
And dragons : )
Dragons aren't just monsters in DoD. They're immortal, basically. A dragon is not a threat that you can deal with, it's a threat you have to adapt to and live with.
There is one major difference in my opinion between the two systems. All skills, including magic and combat, are handled more or less the same and can be used as a focus. The experience is what you learn when using your skills, thereby rewarding all skills alike. I have had campaigns with gamblers, fishermen etc, who are great at their skills and passable to bad in combat. The adventures will then be to their need. This is not something that fits D&D so will.
As for spells, with the use of pshycic power instead of memorizing single spells a wizard with three or four spells is still a force to be reconed with. Man I love that system . |
| Skeptic |
Posted - 27 Sep 2007 : 18:14:55
From what I read over the web, LARP are really different based on the part of the world where they are. I know a lot about LARP in Québec, but I can't say a thing about USA ones. |
| Kheris |
Posted - 27 Sep 2007 : 18:07:17
quote:
Originally posted by Skeptic
quote:
Originally posted by Kheris
However, to clarify my statement: I have never had anything resembling a good time with competition RPGs.
I didn't mean to sound like I was putting words in your mouth... Sorry
No problem.
Some years ago, I ran a pretty sucessful gamist fantasy foam-swords LARP.
The idea of the game was pretty clear : We will challenge the players in every possible way. That included many physical challenges, like a night-long kayak trip or keeping a candle lit during a night while monsters attacked to douse it.
Of course it wasn't perfect, because some players wanted to be "heroes" and didn't have what was needed to do it (they failed many challenges) but the satisfaction of those who suceeded was really great.
However, it wasn't purely gamist, because the stakes of the challenges were based on the theme of the campaign and/or the background of the characters.
That sounds like fun :)
I've never had the chance to LARP, but I've never been one for running around, so that may explain it |
| Skeptic |
Posted - 27 Sep 2007 : 17:34:00
quote:
Originally posted by Kheris
However, to clarify my statement: I have never had anything resembling a good time with competition RPGs.
I didn't mean to sound like I was putting words in your mouth... Sorry
No problem.
Some years ago, I ran a pretty sucessful gamist fantasy foam-swords LARP.
The idea of the game was pretty clear : We will challenge the players in every possible way. That included many physical challenges, like a night-long kayak trip or keeping a candle lit during a night while monsters attacked to douse it.
Of course it wasn't perfect, because some players wanted to be "heroes" and didn't have what was needed to do it (they failed many challenges) but the satisfaction of those who suceeded was really great.
However, it wasn't purely gamist, because the stakes of the challenges were based on the theme of the campaign and/or the background of the characters.
|
|
|
