View Profile: Nagol - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:07 AM
    The micro, especially as a synth-ascended or machine empire is extraordinarily annoying. I can handle it until I get to about 100 colonies then I throw in the towel. That generally takes me the first 100 years or so. What is even more annoying, the only tool offered to reduce micro, population controls, burns 25 Influence per colony to activate. So I'd need to spend ~50 years of Influence...
    9 replies | 143 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:42 AM
    I've shelved it for now. My preferred style is large and populous galaxies with "wide" growth. The current game supports this very poorly.
    9 replies | 143 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Tuesday, 16th April, 2019, 01:41 AM
    Burnham is less a Mary Sue (though her competency is wide-ranging and generally top tier) and more a Chosen One. She's multiple Chosen Ones. First, Chosen because of her mirror-universe analogue's history with the former captain and empress of the mirror universe and now because of her mom and time travel stuff. Whatever the situation, she ends up having a special relationship to its heart...
    266 replies | 9448 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Friday, 5th April, 2019, 04:26 PM
    It's not the system assuming group play. The scenario framing provided group risk. That was deliberate and appropriate for the situation the PCs had developed. I would suggest that, for the CHAMPIONS case, had the sneakiest PC decided to break in and free just his loved ones without the mook becoming wise to the issue, the group would have had somewhat the same basic reaction though more...
    105 replies | 3077 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Friday, 5th April, 2019, 04:01 PM
    Dragon Dice?
    62 replies | 2804 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Friday, 5th April, 2019, 03:56 PM
    Neither were about pacing. The Ars Magica campaign had about a 5 minute conversation with the lady before one player got antsy and worried the person on point was being too circuitous as opposed to the other players who thought she was being careful and delicate, as urged. The CHAMPIONS campaign the players were aware of the danger to several PC loved ones. The group had decided a direct...
    105 replies | 3077 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Friday, 5th April, 2019, 12:59 AM
    I thought it was cool. The other players were much less impressed especially with the fallout. In effect, they had a complete failure of their gambit. They lost what had been developing into a promising relationship and created hostility where they were working for friendship. It took years of time before the lords of the region would trust them to deal honestly. A more violent example...
    105 replies | 3077 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Friday, 5th April, 2019, 12:24 AM
    Here's a simple example from an old Ars Magica game. The players had determined through the surreptitious use of magic that the local lord and lady had no heirs because the lady was suffering from a common form of infertility that is fairly trivial to solve with magic. The PCs conferred and agreed that this would be a sensitive and delicate topic, particularly since the local clergy had...
    105 replies | 3077 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Thursday, 4th April, 2019, 10:53 AM
    I'm a very long time DM who very occasionally gets to play. I find there is limited correlation, at best. As a player, I'm happy to play in humour campaigns/systems. As a DM, I avoid them as much as a I can. As a player, I strongly dislike systems where the expectation is characters will slowly worsen and die/go mad/something worse and will pass on playing. Though not my first choice for...
    20 replies | 674 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Monday, 25th March, 2019, 10:10 PM
    The provided code to claim Morrowind doesn't seem to work :( YAY it works now!
    4 replies | 308 view(s)
    0 XP
No More Results

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
3,515
Posts Per Day
0.66
Last Post
Anyone Else Play Stellaris? Yesterday 11:07 AM

Currency

Gold Pieces
18
General Information
Join Date
Wednesday, 8th September, 2004
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0

Tuesday, 16th April, 2019


Friday, 5th April, 2019


Thursday, 4th April, 2019


Page 1 of 6 123456 LastLast

Saturday, 6th April, 2019

  • 02:55 AM - pemerton mentioned Nagol in post How to deal with death in RPG?
    The root is not generally about pacing.I didn't suggest any general root. It made a suggestion about a particular issue in a particular context. Nagol provided more information in response (fleshing out the meaning of "slowly") which corrected my misapprehension. The root is that GMs can, with effort, come up with some really cool stuff, but sometimes players don't engage with that stuff, or they choose to disengage once they have already bought in. <snip> You might say, "Well, I never use elements in my games that I can't prep rather quickly, so this is not an issue for me."I would, and did, say that - like S'mon - I don't have disappointing sessions. Some posters appeared to be sceptical of this. I'm not sure what you have in mind by "really cool stuff"; and I'm not sure what your threshold is for disappointment. Just having a look through my 4e prep folder on my computer, there are 60-odd files. There seem to be about 4 that (as best I recall) I never got to use: a fey forest encounter, a haunted fey swamp encounter, an aboleth encounter and an epic-tier shadowdark encounter. Each of these might be an hour or more of...

Friday, 5th April, 2019

  • 11:36 AM - pemerton mentioned Nagol in post How to deal with death in RPG?
    To the extent that Nagol's Ars Magica example is meant to be a negative example, the issue would seem to be one of pacing. WIth the Champions example, again to the extent that it is meant to be a negative example, the issue would seem to be that the one player was able to make a choice that resolved the stakes for the other players. I think that can be a big issue, especially in systems that assume group play and so group win/loss.

Monday, 10th December, 2018

  • 04:51 AM - Lanefan mentioned Nagol in post Echohawk's Collector's Guides Broken?
    Lanefan, if you're still around, do me the favour of trying the matching link in my post #16 (it's the 2nd link)? Nagol - there are three links in post 16. The first and third ones work fine for me. The second, or middle one, gives me the same error I noted above.

Wednesday, 24th October, 2018

  • 02:04 PM - Blue mentioned Nagol in post Deleted Posts
  • 01:37 AM - pemerton mentioned Nagol in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    ...by improving in class ability. I think the answer to your "captain as henchman" question is trivially obvious, but at the moment I'll leave it as something for the interested reader to resolve. A more interesting question is whether a PC or henchman fighter enjoys the command abilities of a NPC captain if appointed to such a role. The rules don't tell us. I would suggest that they do, but that's an extrapolation from the rules, not an interpretation of them. It's a white room scenario pemerton. Knocking out the 20 goblins killing the townsfolk does nothing as the will just get back up and kill more. What is the party going to do? Leave them out in the middle of the forest to wake back up? It's not feasible to carry them to town. Carrying them to town will just result in the town killing them anyway, which will introduce the fighter to meting out death indirectly.I gave an actual play example upthread (from a different system, but no different in principle in this respect). Nagol gave an example. I can't remember the colours of the walls where I was playing, and don't know about Nagol's case, but white paint or not these are reports of actual play. As far as the goblins are concerned: (i) why is it not feasible to take them to town? (ii) where do the rules say that they will be killed in the town? (iii) handing someone over to someone else who then murders them typically is not a case of meting out death? (iv) why can't the PCs take an oath from the goblins to renounce their evil ways (thats what the PCs in my 4e game did on more than one occasion)? You seem to have an incredibly narrow conception of what is possible - presumably you think most of the above is house ruling, but I don't know where in the rulebooks you're taking your narrow conception from. In the game the PC has already hit and killed the opponent. Then, AFTER the player has found out that fact, the player can suddenly have the PC time travel back to before damage was rolled and decid...

Tuesday, 16th October, 2018

  • 11:28 PM - pemerton mentioned Nagol in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    To be perfectly honest, it didn’t really occur to me that this would be contentious.That surprises me! Although there are a wide variety of approaches expressed on ENworld (I'll point to eg Aldarc, TwoSix, Nagol in this thread), there is a default or dominant approach which is that RPGing = the GM establishes a fiction (which typically will take the form of some sort of "story") and the players' role is to work their way through that fiction. Hence any suggestion that players should exercise some control over establishing the fiction will be contentiouos.

Saturday, 13th October, 2018

  • 02:18 AM - Hussar mentioned Nagol in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    ...s the PC to be effectively "hands off" the element as well. So Background element of a factional membership/patronage/code of conduct could only remain on the Background so long as the PC is behaving in ways that are considered appropriate. A paladin of devotion can't go around burning down orphanages that were otherwise minding their own business; the player doesn't get a free pass from inappropriate behaviour. It's more of a "Don't ask; don't tell" situation. The DM won't bring situations into play specifically test adherence to the oath and the player will play generally compliant with the oath. A Warlock's patron might have him performing actions in downtime in the background, but the table won't be spending time on furthering the Great Old One's goals in the world. Sauntering my way through a lot of pages. This is a busy thread. But, it is good to see that someone here gets precisely what I'm talking about. If you don't like how I describe things, I suggest rereading Nagol's posts. He puts it perfectly well, gets the point immediately and can likely answer any questions better than I can.

Saturday, 22nd September, 2018

  • 04:13 AM - pemerton mentioned Nagol in post Burning Questions: What's the Worst Thing a DM Can Do?
    ...ly 1 surprise die rolled for the party, using the best die (eg one ranger means the whole party is surprised only on a 1 in 6) - so 5e in this respect seems consistent with that strand of D&D tradition. You see, I'm still not sure that in Iserith's example that this would grant an active check. Or weather this counts as 'Keeping Watch' and therefore, in Iserith's mind, is still passive.I've asked him about this and so hopefully will soon learn! As for the example 'with context', take the example in isolation for a moment. There's a few contextual factors that might change the needle here but I they also change the purity of the example, I guess. Whatframing do you think underides the mechanics as set out?What I'm getting at here is my version of iserith's "telegraphing". When I GM, I don't do telegraphing in that way - rather, the telegraphing comes from what the PCs put at stake via the build and play of their PCs from the "story"/narrative point of view (see also my reply to Nagol not far upthread).
  • 04:09 AM - pemerton mentioned Nagol in post Burning Questions: What's the Worst Thing a DM Can Do?
    Heh. I tried to say this in another thread and got dogpiled for it.To be fair, you got dogpiled for saying that it's a game creation engine in which the adventure/scenario is the game that is created. That's not what Nagol said - he pointed to a feature of adjudication of player-declared moves in RPGs.

Monday, 10th September, 2018

  • 09:14 AM - pemerton mentioned Nagol in post X & O For More Fun
    If one person doesn't like horror films we don't invite that person on those occasions when we're going to see one. it's really much closer to the group having a horror movie night and someone else trying to change the genre.I don't have much to add to Nagol's reply. Turning up to play a RPG isn't, per se, turning up to be reminded of some unpleasant or traumatic personal incident that you're rather not (re)engage with as part of your leisure time. To use the spiders/bugs example that has been brought up a few times in the thread: is turning up to play a RPG ipso facto agreeing to be freaked out by bug narratives? I don't see how it is, and I don't see how it's any sort of "tyranny" or "entitlement" to ask the group to step back from that.

Friday, 8th June, 2018

  • 03:23 PM - Manbearcat mentioned Nagol in post Flipping the Table: Did Removing Miniatures Save D&D?
    Of course if it's the level of abstraction that is the issue with SC's for a few/some/many... a better explanation wouldn't have really helped. Some people just want finer granularity and tighter action association in their task resolution and mechanics. I definitely have some sympathy for this position (not because I hold it personally). Players like yourself and @Nagol have been very consistent on this point throughout many conversations over the years. If a gamer has strident Sim priorities and/or they have Sim priorities localized to their D&D play, then 4e's genre-logic and scene-based considerations/techniques (dramatic arc, escalation, narrative causality, fail forward) are going to be problematic, no doubt. And if you try to eschew all of these fundamental components to 4e scene-based play and smuggle in Sim priorities/approaches in their stead, the game is going to push back very hard. You're likely going to end up with boring, stale Skill Challenges where the situation doesn't change dynamically (or much at all), no dramatic arc arises, and it looks/feels like "an exercise in dice rolling." Our conversation many years ago (it was a good one) regarding "the gorge" is probably the benchmark for the dissonance you're ascribing to the game experience for you (and others like you). When your mental framework is predicated upon one very part...

Saturday, 14th April, 2018

  • 04:28 AM - pemerton mentioned Nagol in post What is *worldbuilding* for?
    Pre-authored the secret door is there for PC's and NPC's to discover or stumble across even before it is "established" (At least in the way established has been used in this thread)...as an example that jumps readily to mind, in some games elves, whether PC's or NPC's would have a chance to detect said secret door just by passing near it, I'm not sure how an ability like this would work in a game where a secret door is never pre-authored it would either mean the ability is virtually useless and never discovers a secret door or it is rolled for every time they enter a room leading to a strange overabundance of secret doors in the world, often in illogical or strange places. Abilities like this definitely seem like a reason to favor one over the other. Nagol has already said some stuff in reply to this; I'll say a bit more. The PCs "stumbling across" a secret door really means that, at certain points, the GM tell the players that their PCs notice a secret door. These moments of telling can be regulated via a complex interaction of pre-authored and pre-mapped architecture, movement rules that require tracking the PC movement on the map, and rules for determining whether or not a PC notices a door when within 10'. That's how AD&D does it. But there are other ways to generate moments of telling. One of the PCs in my Burning Wheel game has the Dreamer ability: as a GM, I'm obliged from time to time to narrate portentous dreams that this PC has had. In effect, the player has paid a modest amount of PC building resources to impose this obligation on the GM. An elven ability to notice secret doors could be handled somewhat similarlly. As far as NPCs stumbling across a secret door - I'm not 100% sure what you have in mind, but that seems ...

Tuesday, 13th March, 2018

  • 11:08 PM - pemerton mentioned Nagol in post Any Dungeon World players here?
    I would have pointed you to Cambelll and Manbearcat, but that already happened. I think Nagol also GMs Dungeon World. And I belive AbdulAlhazred has some experience. chaochou is an Apocalypse World player/GM and so might have something to contribute too. I've played it a little bit, and have a general grasp of its approach and methods, but am far from an expert.

Wednesday, 7th March, 2018

  • 03:04 PM - pemerton mentioned Nagol in post What is *worldbuilding* for?
    ... be useful if you can answer if you've been swayed in any way. If there are any decent answers to the question you posed in the OP. What is worldbuilding for? If you reply to me, I'd hope you would not cut this question out a third time. I think it'd genuinely be interesting to see your take on it after hundreds of pages of this thread. Certainly there must have been some take away for you?I answered this a long way upthread, I think in multiple posts. A range of answers have been given. Worldbuilding provides material for the GM to share with the players as triggered by their moves - this is generally described as "exploration". On the GM side, this can be a creative exercise. On the player side, it seems to be described mostly in terms of immersion. "Immersion" in this context seems necessarily to involve someone else telling fiction to the player, but that characterisation has been resisted to quite a degree. Worldbuilding provides the players with "levers" to do things - Nagol is the main poster to have talked about this. It hasn't been fully analysed in this thread, but there are multiple ways this could play out. One is in what I would call White Plume Mountain style - worldbuilding provides material, by way of fictional positioning, that the players can directly engage to proffer solutions to the puzzles they are faced with (I call it WPM because the paradigm, in my mind, is removing doors from their hinges so as to "surf" down the frictionless corridor over the pits with super-tetanus spikes). Another, which is less OSR-ish/WPM, and probably therefore more typical in contemporary RPGing, is that the players - by engaging with the "levers" - trigger the GM to narrate stuff in ways that go beyond pre-authoring. When this really starts to reflect player pro-activity, I think that we may see a transition to player-driven play without anyone in the game having to get self-conscious about it. Now that I think about it, AbdulAlhazred has, quite a way upthrea...

Tuesday, 27th February, 2018

  • 06:27 AM - AbdulAlhazred mentioned Nagol in post What is *worldbuilding* for?
    1) principles play would be to curtail action negation through secret backstory. If it's never used, there's not point. No, instead, that was about the mere existence of secret backstory being enough to mean that the DM will not only occasionally veto a declaration, but that they will instead veto every declaration that doesn't fit their 'choose-your-own-adventure' novel backstory. This is clearly false. Well, that wasn't actually the question/commentary. The question was "if it is never going to use it to veto an action declaration, then why does it exist at all?" You COULD answer that, straight up, by providing some sort of reason. In fact some fairly plausible answers HAVE been presented. Nagol for instance suggested that a type of mystery story, and a type of exploration would both benefit from secret backstory or hidden world elements (which is a bit different but COULD be hidden backstory, they're pretty close anyway). I posed some questions, which we may yet examine :) 2) I don't think player-centered games provide all of the same depth of play experience. I think they provide a different play experience, one that can also be deep. This is a point that many have agreed upon, the chess vs checkers argument. The playstyles incorporate different approaches and goals and so can't provide the same experience because they aren't tuned to do so. You can mix and match a bit, but it's mostly importing some traits into a mostly DM or mostly player driven game. I think they can do different things. I actually tend to think that GM-centered play with hidden elements is MORE limited, but there are questions of aesthetics here and nobody can claim they own the final word on it,...

Monday, 26th February, 2018

  • 05:28 PM - pming mentioned Nagol in post Settling a player argument with Suggestion
    Hiya! So Charm Person lasts 1 hour per casting. Once it expires the person you charmed knows you charmed them and may not be all that receptive to you twisting their free will in this fashion. How does that days...weeks...months thing work in this case? I'll answer that for Nagol. He is/was playing 1e AD&D. In it, how long the spell lasted depended on the Intelligence of the creature charmed. If you were some sort of super-genius (19+ Intelligence), the duration was 1 Day. If you were dumb as a rock (3 Intelligence) it was 3 months. If you were of average Intelligence (10 Int, lets say), it was 3 weeks. Yeah...1e Charm Person is nothing to sneeze at. ^_^ Paul L. Ming

Saturday, 24th February, 2018

  • 10:17 PM - Lanefan mentioned Nagol in post What is *worldbuilding* for?
    ...ans appropriate to their characters. Yet here we have a player who would rather use exploration and wise information gathering in order to go where the action isn't; in effect mitigating or sometimes entirely denying the DM the opportunity to frame these dramatic scenes as long as doing so allows character goals to be met, missions accomplished, etc. This to me is an important form of player agency that is entirely denied by 'go where the action is'. I rather badly waved at this idea a long way upthread; I'll try again here, using the example from pemerton 's game where the PCs were looking for a reliquary, and met some angels en route that showed them the way to get there. As written, the PCs conversed with the angels after which pemerton-as-GM went where the action is and framed the scene in the reliquary; and things proceeded from there. (note this might not be the best example to use but it's one I can remember the gist of without having to dig around) A player using Nagol 's approach loses out on gobs of agency here: - s/he doesn't get the opportunity to explore the approaches to and surroundings of the reliquary before arriving at the drama; which means - - s/he doesn't get a chance to explore the area around the reliquary to determine whether there's more than one possible approach or exit - - s/he doesn't get an opportunity to pre-scout the reliquary itself via stealth or scrying or whatever other means might be available in order to assess its occupants, threats, hazards, etc. - - because of this lack of knowledge s/he isn't able to mitigate potential risks or prepare for a potential encounter via pre-casting spells, downing potions, or whatever other means might be available - before all this, s/he also loses out on any opportunity to explore whatever might lie between the angel encounter site and the reliquary - by bypassing this the GM has arbitrarily decided there's nothing there of relevance rather than allowing the players to find ou...

Friday, 16th February, 2018

  • 02:23 AM - pemerton mentioned Nagol in post What is *worldbuilding* for?
    On fiction and existence: this is a response to Ovinomancerr, Nagol, Lanefan, Michael Silverbane and chaochou. To begin: reading, listening, imagining etc are real processes that take place. Imagining involves causal processes in the brain. Listening also involves processes in the ears. Reading also involves processes in the eyes. I am taking the above to be uncontenious, so if you disagree you're going to have to let me know explicitly. There is more to these processes, too, which I will get to below. The process in the brain when these things - reading, listening, imagining - occur involve the linguistic capacity of the person to a high degree. I'm not really across the science of this, and am going to describe it in more colloquial terms: the person who is reading, listening or imagining forms and entertains ideas. Assuming that they know what they are reading, listening to or imagining is a fiction, however, then they don't form beliefs (other than prsently irrelevant beliefs, such as "I am now reading Hound of the Baskervilles"). ...

Wednesday, 31st January, 2018

  • 09:52 AM - pemerton mentioned Nagol in post What is *worldbuilding* for?
    ...see the PF AP style as a descendant of this style. CoC is my favourite RPG to play in this style (with an evocative GM, and in modest doses). Then there is the "indie"/"no myth" style I like. There are variations in this style - eg I tend towards rather strongly scene-framed approaches, whereas eg Dungeon World is a bit structurally looser than that, with the GM decision-making a bit more on the micro-/granular rather than "big picture" side of things. But for the current thread these differences can be glossed over, I think. Then the "half-style": the one that is Gygaxian in some ways (pre-authored setting, but no fudging) but which has a scope and an approach that therefore makes player learning (through repeat attempts, use of divination resources, etc) hard; and makes the GM's role in choosing what to foreground about the setting much more important than the player's less mediated, more direct engagement with the dungeon map and the dungeon key. I think this is where you and Nagol probably fall (in terms of this thread - I'm not saying this is who you are as RPGers). I'll go this far in this post: I think this fourth style can tend to slip into a version of the 2nd ed style. Now just like there are variants in the "indie"-style, there are variants in that 2nd style. I'm running them together because the difference don't loom large for me (given my conception of player agency). Eg in a PF AP the players may be literally on a railroad (first encounter A, then encounter B, then C, etc). Whereas in some others that I'm putting into this category, the players can choose whether they go to A or B or C. From my point of view, though, the choice of A or B or C - if it is still a choice among things to be told by the GM - still makes the game a GM-driven one. The players just trigger which bit of his/her pre-written stuff the GM tells them. I think the fourth style can tend to slip into the "choose A or B or C" version of the second style. Without the clear stru...

Monday, 29th January, 2018

  • 02:15 AM - pemerton mentioned Nagol in post What is *worldbuilding* for?
    ...erate some of those answers: * Worldbuilding - designing a setting - is a worthwhile artistic and/or intellectual pursuit in itself, that bring pleasure/satisfaction to the GM who engages in it; * The game can't proceed without setting, and one way to get it is for the GM to write it in advance; * Some players don't want to write setting, and so the only way to get it is for the GM to write it, and this is easier done in advance; * Some players want to know that the GM wrote up all the fiction in advance, because that supports their immersion. And the OP itself offered one answer - to confront the players with a maze/puzzle (the dungeon) to beat. The OP also suggested that, as the setting becomes a "living, breathing world" which exists mostly in the mind and notes of the GM, rather than maps and room keys that are - through various, mostly conventionally-established moves - cognitivtely accessible to the players, the maze/puzzle rationale tends to be lost. I think Nagol doesn't agree with this, which is what our discussion in the thread is currently about (though it's moved on a bit from my starting maze/puzzle way of framing the matter). By declaring that playstyles other than purely player-driven content amount to "being told a story by the GM" you very much are saying that other playstyles aren't viable as a co-operative play experience. I haven't delared that those playstyles are "being told a story by a GM". I have asserted that certain aspects of play, which are often presented in metaphorical terms ("the player explore the setting") or in in-fiction terms ("the PCs travel from A to B") actually - when we analyse them as the play of a game among actual people sitting around a table - consist of the players triggering the GM reading them stutf. This is how a typical CoC scenario works, for instance, and most of the Planescape modules I can think of (Infinite Staircase; Dead Gods). It's how the Alexandrian's "node based design" and "three ...


Page 1 of 6 123456 LastLast
No results to display...
Page 1 of 61 123456789101151 ... LastLast

Wednesday, 17th April, 2019

  • 11:20 AM - Zardnaar quoted Nagol in post Anyone Else Play Stellaris?
    The micro, especially as a synth-ascended or machine empire is extraordinarily annoying. I can handle it until I get to about 100 colonies then I throw in the towel. That generally takes me the first 100 years or so. What is even more annoying, the only tool offered to reduce micro, population controls, burns 25 Influence per colony to activate. So I'd need to spend ~50 years of Influence gain to stop the micro -- assuming no new colonies, megastructure construction, diplomatic actions, war claims, or anything else that consumes Influence. The game performance, never great, took a nose dive under 2.2 and although the devs have improved it from its worst, it still sucks. I start seeing a slow down within the first hundred years. -- mostly connected to galactic population count. Ah yeah I tend to get collusus and blow up planets instead.
  • 03:41 AM - Zardnaar quoted Nagol in post Anyone Else Play Stellaris?
    I've shelved it for now. My preferred style is large and populous galaxies with "wide" growth. The current game supports this very poorly. Wide is easy. Or do you mean the micro?

Sunday, 14th April, 2019

  • 03:10 PM - Morrus quoted Nagol in post What's RPGNEWS.com?
    Is there a point to logging in? I could not see any "personalized" features like forums, interactive applets or the like. Not much. There are other features hidden away (a forum, comments, groups, etc) but they’re not linked from the menus.

Sunday, 7th April, 2019

  • 06:34 PM - Eis quoted Nagol in post D&D Products That Were Never Used By Anyone?
    Dragon Dice? oh man a friend of mine at work and I would come in early to our retail job and play dragon dice in the breakroom....it was always fun when the B Dalton had new sets and it NEVER failed to get people stopping and wondering wth we were doing good times

Saturday, 6th April, 2019

  • 02:23 AM - pemerton quoted Nagol in post How to deal with death in RPG?
    It's not the system assuming group play. The scenario framing provided group risk.That second bit is what I was trying to get at with "resolving the stakes for the other players". I think a system that allows that to happen - D&D certainly has this feature, and so does Rolemaster, Traveller, CoC, etc, because they don't have mechanical devices for separating consequences from the extrapolation of in-fiction causation - generates expectations for how the group should work at the table. Either, as S'mon has suggested, intra-group dissent/unravelling is accepted (and the obvious risk here is degeneration of the game) or else there are strong norms about respecting group decision-making. Upthread I said "My players are consscius of the need to manage group tensions, and are sensitive also to whether or not the game depends on 'party' play (see eg 4e D&D, which is, vs Burning Wheel or Cortex+ Heroic Fantasy, which is not)." That's pointing to the same general issue.

Friday, 5th April, 2019

  • 04:18 PM - pemerton quoted Nagol in post How to deal with death in RPG?
    Neither were about pacing. The Ars Magica campaign had about a 5 minute conversationThis is a case of me misunderstanding your desscription of "The PC was slowly bringing the conversation around to the issue." The CHAMPIONS campaign the players were aware of the danger to several PC loved ones. The group had decided a direct frontal assault was too risky and spent maybe three minutes working out a plan when on player decided that's not an approach his character would take and he unilaterally did the whole out in the open call out.This seems to reinforce my suggestion that "the issue would seem to be that the one player was able to make a choice that resolved the stakes for the other players." And it seems to reinforce my suggestion that this can be a big issue, especially in systems that assume group play and so group win/loss.
  • 12:38 AM - S'mon quoted Nagol in post How to deal with death in RPG?
    Here's a simple example from an old Ars Magica game. The players had determined through the surreptitious use of magic that the local lord and lady had no heirs because the lady was suffering from a common form of infertility that is fairly trivial to solve with magic. The PCs conferred and agreed that this would be a sensitive and delicate topic, particularly since the local clergy had been pushing a strong "magic is wrong" angle (caused of players at the table using Whimsy Cards). They elected the only female mage to delicately broach the subject. The PC was slowly bringing the conversation around to the issue. She had determined the lady was interested, but was fearful of the price that would be demanded by the mages. The players were told the lady knew of faerie deals and how "free" means "will cost anything I need in the future". Another player was getting antsy that the discussion was taking too long and decided to move things along: "We can guarantee you will have a ch...

Tuesday, 12th March, 2019

  • 09:30 PM - Deset Gled quoted Nagol in post Probability distribution for 3d8 (keep one)
    anydice.com is what you are looking for. *edit* output [highest 1 of 3d8] output [lowest 1 of 3d8] output [middle 1 of 3d8] Very cool site. Side note, I discovered while playing around that using [middle] with certain even/odd dice combos will skew higher than I original expected. I.E [middle 3 of 4d6] will return {6,6,6,1} as 18, not 13.

Sunday, 3rd March, 2019

  • 03:20 PM - Morrus quoted Nagol in post Problem Creating O.G.R.E Table
    Hey there, when I'm trying to create a table with O.G.R.E. the website is showing the fill-in boxes for the table all mixed up, so I cannot see which boxes are for what kind of text or what kind of boxes are even there. This problem is showing with different kinds of browsers (Chrome, Edge, Silk, Firefox). Zooming/unzooming view doesn't help. Any ideas? Yeah, it looks like the layout is borked there. Another thing to add to the long list of things to fix! :) Morrus may be able to provide a better perspective, but I suspect O.G.R.E. is about to be pulled as the board changes from vBulletin to... something else (Discord maybe? I haven't noticed any new updates recently) Xenforo. That's the forums though; at the moment the plan is to leave the old site up, less the forums.

Friday, 1st March, 2019

  • 04:25 AM - Umbran quoted Nagol in post Why does the stigma of the "jerk GM" still persist in our hobby?
    There are more potential players than available DMs. Some of these players are willing to put up with jerk behaviour... Also note - bad behavior often creeps up over time. Player may not recognize how problematic the behavior is, as it began small, and got larger over time. Like easing into cold water, each step is not so shocking, and you grow accustomed to it...

Saturday, 23rd February, 2019

  • 04:55 PM - togashi_joe quoted Nagol in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    I am a fiirm believer that no gaming is better than bad gaming. I've left a lot of games over the decades. I left games over DM restrictions that made no sense. For example, one game of 1e, I created a Magic-User as did a second player. We each got some interesting spells and wanted to trade with each other. The DM said we couldn't; apparently he wanted our spell lists to remain unique so our PCs were distinct. So I left. I left games when it became obvious the DM was interested in playing my character. "Your character wouldn't do that." is a sure sign I'm leaving. I left games when the DM was obviously not into running. Cancelling with limited notice, getting started very late, obviously unprepped and unprepared to run when games actually went ahead. I left games over DM behaviour towards the players. I've seen both blatant favortism and antagonism and abandoned games for both. I left games when player-to-player animosity got too much whether I was personally involved ...

Monday, 10th December, 2018

  • 04:51 AM - Lanefan quoted Nagol in post Echohawk's Collector's Guides Broken?
    Lanefan, if you're still around, do me the favour of trying the matching link in my post #16 (it's the 2nd link)? Nagol - there are three links in post 16. The first and third ones work fine for me. The second, or middle one, gives me the same error I noted above.

Saturday, 8th December, 2018

  • 06:27 PM - Kiraya_TiDrekan quoted Nagol in post Echohawk's Collector's Guides Broken?
    Here's a direct link to the 1e guides (I got it from using your original link, and clicking on the link in the right column). http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?332821-1st-Edition-AD-amp-D-Collector-s-Guide Does that work for you? I bring it up fine in Edge and Chrome. That worked. How did you do that?

Monday, 3rd December, 2018


Saturday, 24th November, 2018

  • 08:13 PM - Imaro quoted Nagol in post 4e Compared to Trad D&D; What You Lose, What You Gain
    Most secondary consequences are somewhat inconsequential by themselves. Their primary purpose is to provide a change to the environment by introducing either a new threat or making a current problem worse. Since SC construction was all over the map when I was paying attention to 4e, I can't say if the advice ever crystallized, but a random encounter both drags attention away from the primary challenge thus potentially removing one or more key participants from working towards the main goal and places some possible pressure on hit dice loss -- one of the few areas where resources did not recharge each encounter and thus became one of the key areas to attack for SC. From what I saw, tossing in a random encounter as a result of failure was a general win for the table -- those that didn't have a strong role in overcoming the primary challenge (and thus were less engaged in working it) got something else to focus on. Hmm... I guess. This just seems incredibly weak for a consequence (even wi...
  • 06:47 PM - Imaro quoted Nagol in post 4e Compared to Trad D&D; What You Lose, What You Gain
    The third type, the players are offered no real incentive or disincentive and random encounters are effectively a small aspect of the environment. Triggering an encounter is unlikely to cost non-encounter recharging resources and may trigger a milestone event for the group that is helpful. Few resources aren't encounter recharging and easily replaced in the field. Any losses are likely inconsequential for the participants. How do you find this thought lines up with the fact that a wandering monster encounter is often suggested as a consequences for failing a SC... if resource loss is likely to be inconsequential, why is this considered a valid consequence?
  • 08:12 AM - Azzy quoted Nagol in post Email Notifications
    There's a bunch more under General Settings in the same area under Messaging and Notification. I thought I had those, but apparently I didn't. I'll try that now. Thank you.

Wednesday, 31st October, 2018


Thursday, 25th October, 2018

  • 11:21 AM - Sadras quoted Nagol in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    Because that is a noun and has no adjective complement. At least enlightened is a complementary (and complimentary) adjective. :lol:
  • 11:11 AM - Sadras quoted Nagol in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    Yes. You exercised supreme control over the world and its inhabitants and only relented to allow something once you were mollified. Sounds pretty par for the course to me. I'm not sure I'd put that spin on it (relented). This site is clearly an indication we all view things differently. :) Me: Dan we need a narrative of how you got to 10th because of ....(consistency with the remaining PCs) Dan: How deep can the rabbit hole go? Me: Pretty deep. Dan: Because something kinda dawned on me. Something pretty crazy.... Sends me his pitch which includes Kelemvor (FR deity of the dead) as well as a prose of a conversation between PC and the Deity. Me: Yes. Great Idea. Dan: Now I'm really excited.


Page 1 of 61 123456789101151 ... LastLast

Nagol's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites