View Profile: Aldarc - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Today, 02:01 PM
    Yes that is less of an issue in 4e, potentially at least for saves and armor class using quick predictive thinking (Int) is enabled for those in a solid way. Some I have seen advocate bringing back Fort/Ref/Wil for 5e instead of having mostly unused saves. Perhaps they could allow initiative based on intelligence. While in 4e the foundation of value "in combat" is covered, they could have...
    33 replies | 1103 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Today, 01:37 PM
    Maxperson, you realize you have it backwards right? The tournaments came first THEN AD&D. AD&D was an attempt to codify what was happening at tournaments. That's why tournament play is actually mentioned more than a few times in the AD&D DMG. Look, we get it. You played AD&D with 3 people. Great. Can you not understand that that wasn't typical of the time? Tournament tables were MUCH...
    302 replies | 8131 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Today, 12:59 PM
    That's a helluva a lot of damage reduction, especially against a Tier 1 party. I don't think that's a game design issue, but, rather, a GM encounter design one. Both of which seem like an adventure design issues. Which is naturally a problem. Characters should also start play with cyphers. Maybe. There are other Cypher System games also produced by MCG that marginalize the need for...
    4 replies | 301 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Today, 11:18 AM
    Much better possibility than I thought actually (but it binds a lot of flavor things things like spell casting and a pet into the class too); The savant is closer but has a bad bad thing it takes all the way to level 6 before getting Brains over Brawn. (making it fundamentally Mad for basic functions ie attacking up until that point err oops)
    33 replies | 1103 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Today, 08:38 AM
    Why not? It's not like AD&D had a "core rules" divide. The modules were just as "official rules" as anything else. Now, if most modules were 2-3 PC's, then I might agree with your point. However, most of the modules were of the "6-9" characters variety. Dragonlance baselined with 8 characters. And, I would point out that this is precisely what I was talking about - people's...
    302 replies | 8131 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Today, 04:43 AM
    And a custom encounter power for the The Intelligent Fighter I considered making it against Reflexes.
    33 replies | 1103 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Today, 03:33 AM
    Everybody must get spammed...
    37 replies | 3461 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Today, 03:30 AM
    The idea was rather popular during the play testing if I recall. Another cost that we see in 5e is forgoing an attack ie conglomerating an attack it could take 2 of your attacks. You proabably do not do anything but this on your turn... without an action surge or something (maybe ok at really high level to do another attack) I would estimate you shouldn't be able to do it till 5e level 8...
    72 replies | 2011 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:40 PM
    Their design philosophy seems to be a game of mother may I See I can fail too.
    72 replies | 2011 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:11 PM
    Ah good call I noticed it first in the Players Handbook never saw any of the supplements but it was very evocative even the bits in the PHB. When the PHB mentions Belisarius it makes my face light up.
    62 replies | 1798 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:49 PM
    YES the number of fighters is not even interesting to me
    60 replies | 2041 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    60 replies | 2041 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:09 PM
    How about word count in system dedicated to explaining grappling as one axis?
    48 replies | 1458 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:10 PM
    I have variously encountered this issue as well, depending on party composition. One potential quick work around is to remove static damage and replace it with variable die damage. So Light weapons do d4; Medium weapons do d6; and Heavy weapons do d8. Or knock them up a die. See what works best for your group. This gives a bit more chance that some weapons can exceed typical damage reduction. The...
    4 replies | 301 view(s)
    3 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 01:15 PM
    failed that one. 4e was a bit conservative perhaps. Even some a cool move like "Come and get it" was such a short range that its pretty realistic. OK how about that for a challenge... do Come and Get it in 5e.
    72 replies | 2011 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 01:08 PM
    The fighter finally having the ability to actually defend could probably be mentioned (I know its in roles but this and warlord are two archetypes which were never mechanically fulfilled til 4e). However for me its pretty much mechanically everything with the above being just the iceberg tip and its almost easier to mention things I didn't like
    36 replies | 1159 view(s)
    3 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 12:57 PM
    The significantly static hitpoints and potentially bursty damage reminds me of RuneQuest but with the bursts somewhat more under player choice rather fixes the problems it had with not feeling heroic.
    253 replies | 27106 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:36 AM
    Yeah, I realized I said PC's and I should have said "characters". There would likely be 3-6 players and a mitt full of NPC's as well. At least, that's what the presumption was. Your the one telling me that the presumption was 4 PC's. That an encounter should have multiple dragons because I have so many PC's. But, that's not true. I had the standard number of characters that was...
    302 replies | 8131 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:01 AM
    You could add generic stances to enable the fighting desparately... etc.
    41 replies | 3979 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:59 AM
    IT was in some ways better but it was lost completely when 3e came out and it has been gone ever since. We are now moving chess pieces in turn and hoping interlacing out of turn actions will remind us of simultaneous action. Basically I have considered how to actually bring that simultaneous resolution back while allowing interesting choices -- a form of 5 pointed star roshambo might be a nice...
    41 replies | 3979 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:46 AM
    The difference though, I think is that you have a pretty wide variety of modules to choose from. Whether itís Tomb of Annihilation or Dragon Heist, you do get to see a pretty broad depth. It took a while to get that in the early days.
    17 replies | 736 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:43 AM
    But none of this changes the fact that Jayne was untrustworthy.
    229 replies | 5208 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:29 AM
    Whoops double post. My bad.
    302 replies | 8131 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:28 AM
    See this is why I have such a hard time taking you seriously Maxperson. You obviously never played adnd. 6-9 pcs was the standard group. Four pcs is a 3e thing.
    302 replies | 8131 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:22 AM
    Well. Thatís fair I suppose. If the group is allowed to execute your character for stepping out of line, then your alignment doesnít matter too much.
    229 replies | 5208 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Yesterday, 12:36 AM
    Arguably Battle==War Master==Lord It just doesn't quite do the job The maneuvers just cannot be used often enough and most lack tactician feel le intelligence driven / affecting whole party for ex and the fighter lacks an appropriate warlordy fighting style. I think it is silly to worry about it becoming a vehicle for the warlord its rather meant to be.
    72 replies | 2011 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Tuesday, 18th June, 2019, 02:57 PM
    4e: * The WARLORD * Power Sources and Class Roles: This led to 4e having the gumption and vision to pull the trigger on something that not even 2e could commit to doing : removing all divine magic classes from Dark Sun. * Class parity and balance * Scene/narrative-based mechanics (AEDU) * Martial classes had interesting and thematic tactical choices that were typically privileged to...
    36 replies | 1159 view(s)
    6 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Tuesday, 18th June, 2019, 02:39 PM
    I seem to recall that a lot of people also use Mythras, which derives from BRP, as a more generic Homeric fantasy sort of game.
    19 replies | 717 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Tuesday, 18th June, 2019, 02:27 PM
    Sure, but it does inform how I contextualize the conversation of this thread. I don't necessarily think, for example, in terms of a personal preference for "conversational" vs. "literary" narration, but, instead, in terms of communicating what's important in the game fiction for players to engage the scene. The stylistic aesthetic is of lesser importance than the pragmatics. This matter can...
    24 replies | 761 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Tuesday, 18th June, 2019, 12:46 PM
    I feel like the actual discussion in that thread was about the primary GM role that new gamemasters should focus on learning: scene-framing for player agency or literary performance. The whole conversational vs. literary narration bit was a red herring conversation that we unwittingly got roped into when literary performance camp asked us to conceive of GMing as a conversation without the...
    24 replies | 761 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Tuesday, 18th June, 2019, 10:52 AM
    Meh, the dragon had a non-zero chance of being asleep when you got there. :D And, again, given that level of a party, you've got so much fire protection that the breath weapon is a joke. And, let's not forget, we're cherry picking the biggest non-unique monster in the 1e monster manual here. Most other monsters were nowhere near this dangerous. There's a pile of variables here. My point is,...
    302 replies | 8131 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Tuesday, 18th June, 2019, 10:13 AM
    A subjective feel : Battle Ready makes creating a fighter feel slightly different like a tax on something a fighter should just have has been lifted. It also acknowledges that initiative can involve deciding/thinking and agressing faster which may be more reliable than reacting faster.
    33 replies | 1103 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Tuesday, 18th June, 2019, 10:05 AM
    Arguably in 4e a Dex Fighter til Slayer came out was basically a Ranger/Rogue Roleplaying baggage ensued. (although very flexible baggage) with honorable mention to certain builds which have it secondary. I said "justified" dump stat. EVEN if you forego control, abilities that work in one arena are enhancing the other as well. Statistically your attributes are more broadly valuable by...
    33 replies | 1103 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Tuesday, 18th June, 2019, 09:07 AM
    Heh. As the sort of genesis of this thread, thought I'd pop in. Yeah, I'll agree with pretty much everything said here. On one hand you've got those like me that cut their teeth on D&D modules. I did. I admit it. We were module junkies and most of my formative play years were spent running various modules. OTOH, you've got other folks who never touched one at all who likely have VERY...
    17 replies | 736 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Tuesday, 18th June, 2019, 08:39 AM
    Now, how exactly did you manage to get that couple of tons of treasure out of the lair without fighting the dragon? Again, why did folks avoid combat when the PC's after about 6th level were FAR more powerful than anything they were facing? And Ancient Huge Red Dragon had 92 HP (IIRC). That was about 1 round of damage output for a 9th level party of 6-9 PC's.
    302 replies | 8131 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Tuesday, 18th June, 2019, 04:48 AM
    The following shows the XML for loading the Battle Ready class feature in to the offline Character Builder. And yup it works ;) it also takes a modification of the base class. <RulesElement name ="Battle Ready" type="Class Feature" internal-id="ID_LAD_CLASS_FEATURE_BR1234" source="Martial Power III" revision-date="6/16/2019" > <Flavor>Most people react to the onset of a fight for you it...
    33 replies | 1103 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 02:23 PM
    I was considering some of this kind of flexibility Modify Eldritch Knight Arcane Weaponmastery at level 3 when you chose this subclass you have begun to integrate you spellcraft with your weapon use for purposes of attack and magic. Choose one mental attribute this attribute as your spell casting attribute. This attribute becomes the basis of your attack roll and a penalty to saving throws...
    21 replies | 571 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 02:15 PM
    Establishing expectations has a value I suppose even if you have to use the R word.
    31 replies | 917 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 01:36 PM
    LOL Martial Maneuvers
    64 replies | 1755 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 01:33 PM
    Very much this
    64 replies | 1755 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 01:00 PM
    Another ingredient to the mix which I didnt mention because it wasnt important at level 1 the Swordmage class had plenty of teleportation/blink magics Alex had a short range teleport attack once a day at level one but if he makes it to level 20 will have Omnipresent Assault where he blinks around the battlefield as a Ghostblade and launches an attack against every enemy in sight (no range limit...
    21 replies | 571 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 12:04 PM
    Well, kinda sorta. Sure, the total would only be a small percentage of kill xp. Monsters weren't worth that much xp. But, in order to get that other percentage - the GP value - by and large you did it by killing the monster that was guarding it. So, yeah, the percentages were mostly for treasure, I totally agree. But, in order to get that treasure, most of the time, the solution was to beat...
    302 replies | 8131 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 08:03 AM
    Ok, ok. I surrender. 1e players were renowned throughout the hobby, throughout all the history of RPG's as the greatest, most wonderful roleplayers of all time who never once picked up a d20 unless they absolutely had to and solved nearly every single encounter through spectacular exposition and wonderous words of wisdom. Now, with the revisionist history out of the way, can we get back to...
    302 replies | 8131 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 05:47 AM
    Okay So far Is this what we have From Eldritch Knight 3 Levels definitely has components which were basically just flavor in 4e - Weapon Bond to be specific. Savant: Smart Defense. 1 Level While you are wearing armor, you gain a +1 bonus to AC. In addition, while wearing light armor if you have one hand free, you gain a bonus to AC equal to your Intelligence modifier (up to a maximum no...
    21 replies | 571 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 04:13 AM
    Like a lot of things AD&D, it was pretty schizophrenic. For example, while you can talk about xp for "tricking" monsters being in the 1e DMG, you also have the training rules. A fighter that didn't fight was actively penalized by being forced to take longer to train and spending far, far more money on training, for example. In 2e, while there were "bonus Xp tables" again, fighters ONLY...
    302 replies | 8131 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 03:54 AM
    That definitely has the magical defender angle in there.
    21 replies | 571 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 03:53 AM
    Examined this closer and wow.... that is definitely the right direction
    21 replies | 571 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 03:19 AM
    Ah thanks yes flavor is definitely more important in that regards.
    21 replies | 571 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 03:17 AM
    I find it kind of weird that mage armor is Dex bound.... The battlemaster certainly has some cool bits to it. Their abilities aren't actually at will either. The white lotus riposte works somewhat better when you do not have so completely awesome armor but I really liked the idea of fire and force and lightning from my previous attacks bursting back at those who managed to hit Alek.
    21 replies | 571 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 03:03 AM
    It is kind of a work around but for functionality sake and not exactly the right flavor, but Dex it would need to be I like that you gave level recommendations that deserves a thumbs up in itself.. it seems weird to go level 4 without getting that level 5 extra attack though.
    21 replies | 571 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 02:53 AM
    Or perhaps its is a single arrow that returns to your bow knock or quiver after doing its deed. How common to make these things seem flavor oriented ie game world flavor. It might be very rare to the game world of course but all archer oriented heros have one variant or another ;)
    11 replies | 373 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 02:47 AM
    I do not see Iron Defender working for this character so much... but its Battle ReadyWhen you reach 3rd level, your combat training and your experiments with magic and have paid off in two ways: You gain proficiency with martial weapons. When you attack with a magic weapon, you can use your Intelligence modifier, instead of Strength or Dexterity, for the attack and damage rolls.
    21 replies | 571 view(s)
    3 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 02:10 AM
    Since I really like the flavor of Inspiring Leader how does it stack up in peoples opinions I have heard its borderline broken
    72 replies | 2538 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 01:40 AM
    The opposite of Green Flame Blade in 4e interestingly and yes it was one of his abilities. Green Flame blade could affect any number of enemies adjacent to the one you hit though I called it splash damage. Swordburst is another one of his favorites for clearing out adjacent minions and the like. I kind of like flavoring that one as more martial like a whirling dervish attack. That part...
    21 replies | 571 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 01:20 AM
    This speaks to the value of not forcing the choice
    72 replies | 2538 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 01:17 AM
    Someone called 5e feats more like Themes in 4e it made me blink a bit not mechanically similar at all but in context of what you just said I think is more about their story value, themes had a lot of story value (and somewhat like Paragon paths and Epic Destinies)
    72 replies | 2538 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 12:11 AM
    Not something I have read but that does count as homebrew to be honest. Though using level dipping style multi-classing is actually almost like the cost in some ways of 4e feats.
    21 replies | 571 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 12:05 AM
    Bladesinger has some ingredients the bladesong helps gets defense based on intelligence. (but might not be defender class without a fighting style to help maybe) Indeed I think the Paladin Smite ability is something i have heard suggested. I was suspecting a custom feat might be required basically a translation of Intelligent Blademaster - in 4e it was kind of a low impact feat and feats...
    21 replies | 571 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 16th June, 2019, 10:48 PM
    His name is Alek Cor'Daren (Shielding Aegis - an effective Defender - with some good multi-enemy effectiveness) He had a feat which allowed even his basic attacks (opportunity attacks and granted ones and the like to be based on Intelligence). This feat was part of his origin story and part of what made the character feel special so if necessary I can see how it might take a bit of home brew...
    21 replies | 571 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 16th June, 2019, 08:45 PM
    A lot of feel and flavor is influenced by rules sometimes however it seems the opposite is true. The explicit sources and roles in 4e were really almost entirely flavor in most ways ... however roles guided class and power design (ie they were a design paradigm not actually rules and they weren't hard fast determinants) and sources once in a blue moon actually acted as prerequisites.(but this...
    62 replies | 1798 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 16th June, 2019, 07:23 PM
    I see something you need to integrate with powers. You need a method to allow a big cool method to defeat the big bad without it being a fluke of chance -- we have a method already it's the nature of powers. Conversely a power might be useable against an enemy or set of enemies you out class without expending a power slot. @AbdulAlhazred
    41 replies | 3979 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 16th June, 2019, 05:15 PM
    Runequest (Stormbringer) was how I figured out no D&D ever was trying for simulating anything but heroic fantasy RQ had vivid combat that made you involved in attacks and defenses the advancement system was very oriented, where any attack might kill or disable in a stroke but your character never felt heroic. Gygax made an argument against critical hits which explains it. He said that Conan...
    255 replies | 24084 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 16th June, 2019, 04:27 PM
    Allow insight checks or similar to figure out what the capability of the adversaries are maybe add that effect into certain utility powers.
    41 replies | 3979 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Sunday, 16th June, 2019, 12:11 PM
    So the literary content of the written text (e.g., diction, structure, style, content) was deprecated by the tone and performance? What if the DM had not read the boxed text aloud - a rote performance - but had instead engaged in a more natural style that communicated the message of the boxed text without reading from it? What you say here suggests that something else that has not really been...
    1470 replies | 40361 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Sunday, 16th June, 2019, 10:03 AM
    I disagree. If your character is consistent, reliable, dependable and never impulsive, in what way is that character chaotic? What about any of those descriptors would lead an observer to the conclusion that this character is chaotic? As far as ďpolicingĒ goes, Iím not really sure where you are getting that. I guess my question to the player would be the same as my question to you - if this...
    229 replies | 5208 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 16th June, 2019, 04:09 AM
    It generally doesnt in 4e but they didnt lock down out of turn actions
    41 replies | 3979 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 16th June, 2019, 03:47 AM
    The warlord whose primary context is often for team work is very off turn as well to me the highly limited off turn action basically undermines that. I do like 5e movement system its pretty sweet.
    41 replies | 3979 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Sunday, 16th June, 2019, 02:49 AM
    I feel it makes the artificiality of turn based combat more obvious to me... in 1e action was planned but simultaneous. (relying on the DM to merge them)
    41 replies | 3979 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Saturday, 15th June, 2019, 04:00 PM
    They had in my opinion the best flavor text / class descriptions of any edition it's not my favorite edition but I can appreciate things from multiple ones. I think I can say terminology is separate from mechanics but what the hell In 3.5e I remember reading the Book of 9 Swords and finding the terminology was evocative Stances / Strikes and Martial Disciplines / Maneuvers (4e lost a lot...
    62 replies | 1798 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Saturday, 15th June, 2019, 11:14 AM
    you forgot the quotes "meaningful" .... because who rolled highest initiative is to me not very meaningful
    245 replies | 10109 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Saturday, 15th June, 2019, 04:19 AM
    I disagree. Observable behaviour is the only determinant of alignment. Intention means nothing in an objective alignment system. People are evil because the DO evil things. I can think nasty thoughts all day long but if Iím outwardly kind to everybody then dnd says Iím good.
    229 replies | 5208 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Saturday, 15th June, 2019, 02:48 AM
    I don't understand what you're trying to achieve. If you're not interested in the topic as it's been framed or discussed, or think the thread is unhelpful, you're very welcome not to post in it. If you think my threads involve code-of-conduct violation, you have the option of reporting them. Are you trying to pick a fight and have this thread shut down? Are you trying to clutter the thread...
    1470 replies | 40361 view(s)
    1 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Saturday, 15th June, 2019, 02:40 AM
    Riley37, you didn't answer my question as to what you think it adds to the thread to insist that Hriston said something that he didn't, on the basis of attributing a meaning to his words that they were not intended to bear, and which no reasonable reader of them in the context of their production would impute to them. As to your question about light, light isn't an endeavour of any sort. It's...
    1470 replies | 40361 view(s)
    2 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Saturday, 15th June, 2019, 02:19 AM
    It's not a Chrome thing as such. I use Chrome, and when I cut-and-past text into the website editor I don't pick up COLOR tags.
    26 replies | 511 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Saturday, 15th June, 2019, 01:34 AM
    Fast and Anti-climactic do just as much. Fast can also be just boring with mostly bags of hit points Fast is also anti-interesting choices for players.
    245 replies | 10109 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Saturday, 15th June, 2019, 01:10 AM
    When you have 3,724 feats Still using Trumpish math is not impressive.
    72 replies | 2538 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Friday, 14th June, 2019, 08:21 PM
    Not convinced that it worked.
    72 replies | 2538 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Friday, 14th June, 2019, 02:31 PM
    A recent thread about Healer being too strong and Durable being too weak has me wanting to bump this thread for more breadth.
    19 replies | 2576 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Friday, 14th June, 2019, 02:24 PM
    Giving more is almost always better than Nerfing ... The flavors of those are obviously the same.
    72 replies | 2538 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Friday, 14th June, 2019, 11:29 AM
    See, I've never understood this. Like I said, sure, in the early levels, say 1-3, I get it. You want to be pretty careful about not biting off more than you can chew. But, after that? Why would you avoid a fight? You were almost always guaranteed to win. The odds of losing a fight were pretty darn slight. And, even then, by 9th level, you have access to raise dead, so, big deal, you...
    302 replies | 8131 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Friday, 14th June, 2019, 11:18 AM
    Bad is different than trap though... trap is where something seems like it might be alright or has very compelling flavor AND is poor. Overly powerful is a form of Bad feat just as not so useful ones... arguably the overly powerful ones were often call feat taxes in 4e. and were often considered somewhat obvious 5e feat resources are arguably more expensive I am thinking what do they ...
    72 replies | 2538 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Friday, 14th June, 2019, 11:09 AM
    Really I have seen Umbrum warning people in the last several days.... and it must be "impossible" someone has had more than one account ?
    62 replies | 1798 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Friday, 14th June, 2019, 07:42 AM
    Lanefan, I'm not sure I agree with your premise. AD&D, while lethal at low levels, was not particularly dangerous at higher levels. Granted, save or die effects might have made it more dangerous, but, most save or die effects are not a result of combat - poisons, traps, that sort of thing. By the time the PC's were about 6th or 7th level, they were among the most powerful combatants in the...
    302 replies | 8131 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Friday, 14th June, 2019, 05:38 AM
    I've mostly played RQ III, although I don't think we've ever used the Sorcery rules. Characters have a lot of colour. Resolution is generally straightforward enough. The system is set up to make combat an important aspect of play, but it also tends to produce fairly brutal results. That's probably the biggest weakness of the system.
    19 replies | 717 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Friday, 14th June, 2019, 05:26 AM
    If someone says "All the cheese is gone" before the dinner party, and then the next day you and a friend are debating whether or not anyone has ever thought that there's no cheese left in the world, the person who said "All the cheese is gone" doesn't count as an example of such. It's not that they said as much but didn't mean it. It's that anyone who thinks that's what they said doesn't...
    1470 replies | 40361 view(s)
    3 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Friday, 14th June, 2019, 05:21 AM
    Seriously? Let's put to one side the fact that, contra Imaro, Hriston's post was in reply to Hussar, not to him. Here is the exchange between Hussar and Hriston: Hriston is refuting an express claim that "dungeon dressing" is a literary matter simply because it's non-mechanical, and also an apparent implication that the role and significance of dungeon dressing is a matter of evocative...
    1470 replies | 40361 view(s)
    3 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Friday, 14th June, 2019, 04:55 AM
    This post makes many assumptions about how a game might work. Many games don't require "adding to the game" (eg by way of new subsystems, or new modifiers, or whatever) because they have resolution systems that are relatively straightforward to extrapolate to novel situations. I appreciate that D&D, historically, has not been such a system - it emphasises particular subsystems rather than...
    48 replies | 1458 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Friday, 14th June, 2019, 02:19 AM
    Many of a themes effects were just power swaps.... not power upgrades but they might be represented in 5e as a type of 5e feat. Paragon paths might be a 5e feat as would Epic Destiny. Not sure if the 5e feat will convey them well. But they might be built that way.
    64 replies | 1755 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Friday, 14th June, 2019, 01:52 AM
    The character class descriptions were for me quite evocative
    62 replies | 1798 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Garthanos's Avatar
    Friday, 14th June, 2019, 01:47 AM
    I love that Elfcrusher still gets to have fun with his e-war...
    62 replies | 1798 view(s)
    0 XP
More Activity
About Aldarc

Basic Information

Date of Birth
January 19, 1985 (34)
About Aldarc
Location:
Vienna, Austria
Disable sharing sidebar?:
No

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
3,091
Posts Per Day
0.50
Last Post
Numenera: Third Time Wasn't the Charm Today 12:59 PM

Currency

Gold Pieces
2
General Information
Last Activity
Today 01:00 PM
Join Date
Wednesday, 12th June, 2002
Home Page
none
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0

9 Friends

  1. 76512390ag12 76512390ag12 is offline

    Member

    76512390ag12
  2. Afrodyte Afrodyte is offline

    Member

    Afrodyte
  3. darkbard darkbard is offline

    Member

    darkbard
  4. Garthanos Garthanos is online now

    Member

    Garthanos
  5. Hussar Hussar is offline

    Member

    Hussar
  6. Lord Mhoram Lord Mhoram is offline

    Member

    Lord Mhoram
  7. Mark CMG Mark CMG is offline

    Member

    Mark CMG
  8. pemerton pemerton is offline

    Member

    pemerton
  9. TheCosmicKid TheCosmicKid is offline

    Member

    TheCosmicKid
Showing Friends 1 to 9 of 9
Page 1 of 21 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Thursday, 20th June, 2019


Wednesday, 19th June, 2019


Tuesday, 18th June, 2019



Page 1 of 21 1234567891011 ... LastLast
Page 1 of 8 12345678 LastLast

Thursday, 13th June, 2019

  • 02:45 PM - Imaro mentioned Aldarc in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    I do the same thing actually. But this reasoning doesn't make much sense to me. The presentation is the same, you are just interpreting the presentation differently based on a mechanic. However I think we are getting pretty far afield of the crux of the debate. It really isn't about whether one is more important than the other. It is more about what kind of delivery/presentation/description people want. Some of us want a style that is natural, doesn't affect the manner or techniques of novel writing, some of us do want a more literary style of description. We've debated the meanings of these various terms. But I think if we make an attempt to understand the key difference arising, it centers around what kind of descriptions do you want from the GM and do you want them to be more or less literary (i.e. should they be evocative, sound like novel prose, employ literary techniques, etc or should they be more conversational and plain spoken). @Aldarc 's post above yours is definitely about which is more important... And contrary to what you've been saying it's been framed like that by quite a few posters in this thread. EDIT: Emphasis mine... IMO this would have been a much more interesting discussion topic

Monday, 10th June, 2019

  • 12:19 AM - Hussar mentioned Aldarc in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    ...ly established as part of the lexicon. Same with gaunt or sunken eyes when describing inhuman, otherworldly things. I would expect that certain words would be more common when playing D&D and others would be more common when playing Call of Cthulhu and still others when playing Marvel Super Heroes. Use of the word ďpsychicĒ in an X-Men campaign, for example....itís not a common word heard in conversation, but itíll certainly come up when talking about the X-Men. Again, use of adjectives isnít what Iím talking about. Theyíre descriptive by nature. I would agree with you that sometimes one choice of word can be more creative than another. I think this can happen even when itís not the focus of the speaker/writer. I think such examples are a bit tangential to the idea of craft. The question I guess would be, "why"? Psychic in an X-Men game of course would be common, as it would likely be a game defined term. Like "to-hit" or "githyanki" or "humanoid" really. But, where Aldarc gets it wrong, is that we're talking about situational language that makes sense in context. Obviously there are going to be all sorts of jargon terms in any specialized and stylized conversation. Listen to two baseball fans going at it and they're not even really speaking English anymore. :D But, we're talking about the other language choices. "Wield", "intricately", "gaunt" etc. There are plain conversation versions of these words and phrases, but, they are being left behind in favor of more colorful language. Why? As soon as you start injecting things like "eldritch" and whatnot, you're leaving conversation behind and moving along the scale.
  • 12:10 AM - Hussar mentioned Aldarc in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    ...e just making assumptions now...also I didn't say I preferred 1 over 2. I said 1 has more information, and there are definitely more analytically minded players who don't care about the flavorful description as much as they care about the info. And I don't think they are a small minority in our hobby. That said, you are right, these two descriptions are both pretty conversational, not literary. So the example is a bit puzzling anyways. Example two is just a bit vague. Again, I don't think this argument makes a whole lot of sense. We are talking about a conversational medium. Literary doesn't really seem like it would apply. you can try to run a game in a literary style. but I don't think it is necessary. Nor do I think it is particularly advisable. This is why I don't think we're as far apart as it might appear. I look at words like "intricately" and I think "literary" not "conversation" because the words "intricately carved" would almost never appear in a conversation. Aldarc above talks about a mechanic using technical language. Thing is, that's not really a conversation either. That's a mechanic imparting information to the customer, but, it's probably mostly one direction and if the mechanic dives too far into technical jargon, there's no conversation at all as the listener has no idea what's being talked about. Is it "literary"? Maybe not. But, it's certainly not conversation either. Aldarc keeps pressing me to prove that the language is literary. I'm not because the definition of "literary" is so nebulous. I don't have to. I only have to show that it isn't conversational to show that pemerton is wrong. And I CAN show that because the language that's being chosen, often deliberately chosen, is being chosen to evoke specific reactions and is language that would almost never appear in a conversation.

Sunday, 9th June, 2019

  • 07:33 PM - Imaro mentioned Aldarc in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    Let me ask a question to pemerton, Hawkeye, Bedrockgames and Aldarc. Would you use the same words/language/etc. to describe a remote village in the mountains for say a Ravenloft campaign vs a Four color superhero game like Icons? let's assume good faith in that the Icons village isn't supposed to be haunted or anything tht would make it more Ravenloft-esque.... EDIT: Meant hawkeyefan ...
  • 02:25 PM - pemerton mentioned Aldarc in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    Maybe because you have not made any assertions which are (a) sufficiently concrete for falsification testing (Karl Popper style)Popper has a (controversial) theory of what makes a claim, or perhaps a collection of claims, scientific. I'm not making a scientific claim. I'm making an aesthetic claim. So Popperian falsifiability has nothing to do with it. My claim is about the point of RPGing, what makes it a distinctive and worthwhile creative endeavour. Not far upthread Aldarc has given a pretty good account of my claim, so I'll add a few glosses to that. I am saying that entertainment in virtue of quality narration and performance is not what makes RPGing a distinctive and worthwhile creative endeavour. Rather, it's situation and resulting inhabitation and protagonism. I've said why I think this: because quality narration and performance are the weakest elements of the typical RPG experience (given the ready availability to most RPGers of genuinely quality narrations and performances), whereas protagonism in the context of engaging situation is the distinct thing that RPGs offer. When Hussar and Imaro say that they would quit games with ordinary-language descriptions because they'd find them too boring, my thought in response is that those games must have weak situations, or GMs who don't facilitiate protagonism. After all, both experience and reading lead me to think there's plenty of that going around. To elaborate on that last point: Hussa...

Saturday, 8th June, 2019

  • 07:54 AM - pemerton mentioned Aldarc in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    Equivocation requires intent. It's an attempt to conceal the truth, which requires the intent to conceal the truth, or to avoid committing, which requires the intent to avoid committing. There's no way around it. A wrong conclusion is just a wrong conclusion without other intent to change things.As I posted upthread, I don't know what your field is. I don't know how many logic or philosophy seminars you have attended. But the standard word used to describe a fallacious or sophistic argument that superficially appears valid, but in fact is not valid because a key term carries different meanings in different sentences of the argument, is equivocation. And the cognate verb is equivocate. That is what Bedrockgames and Aldarc are talking about. The fact that you don't notice that you're doing it doesn't make your argument any more valid.

Friday, 7th June, 2019

  • 04:21 PM - pemerton mentioned Aldarc in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    ...it doesn't interfere with the narrative flow and enjoyment of the game. The scene should be presented therefore in terms relative to the character's abilities . . . Players who want to climb onto your coffee table and jump across your living room to prove that their character could jump over the chasm have probably missed the whole point of the story. Commenting on this, Ron Edwards says that "I can think of no better text to explain the vast difference between playing the games RuneQuest and HeroQuest." Which is to say, there are some systems which make enginnering or cartographical precision central to resolution, but there are others that don't. Certainly establishing a call to action doesn't depend upon any general uniformity or specificity of imagination. I think it does require estagblishing the situation by reference to the resolution mechanics - the plaeyrs can't answer the call if they don't know, in general terms, how their characters might fare. Which goes back to Aldarc's point some way upthread: RPGs have ways of establishing the emotinal "heft" of situations that are quite different from the sort of evocative composition or performances that other creative endeavours rely upon In my 4e game, for instance, if the players are committed to confronting Orcus, and I - as I did, following a successful knowledge check by the Sage of Ages - tell them his stats, then the players respond with the apposite awe, fear, etc. I don't need to evoke, by deft narration, a sense of how terrible Orcus is. The stats do that work. Of course different systems open up and close down different sorts of possibiities in this respect. For instance, in MHRP/Cortex+ Heroic it is the state of the Doom Pool, as much as the stats of any individual antagonist, that conveys the significance of the present situation. And in Dungeon World or Apocalypse World antagonists don't quite have "stats" in the way they do in D&D or Cortex+, and so system conveys heft in different ways, sch a...
  • 06:10 AM - Lanefan mentioned Aldarc in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    I think it's possible to describe a situation without "painting a picture" in the literary sense. If I can't engage the players unless I "paint a picture" in the literary sense, then I worry that it's probably not a very good situation. You still need to paint the picture and make it all clear somehow, even if the players are already fully engaged. Why? Because if you don't you'll end up with players imagining or "seeing" the same situation in completely different ways both from each other and (worse) from you the DM, and reacting to it based on their own interpretation of what you-as-DM said. I've had this happen numerous times both as DM and player, where I (or the DM) wasn't clear enough and a player (or I) had a character react in a way that made perfect sense to the player but none at all to the DM: the DM - be it me or someone else - simply wasn't painting a clear enough picture and the player had the character act based on wrong info.
  • 12:12 AM - pemerton mentioned Aldarc in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    Now there is a zifnarb in your building. What do you do?Whow know? Tell me what it is. If you think telling me what it is necessarily requires literary effort, then what's your conception of teaching children the language? At some point in time, you have to drop the analogies and actually describe what's going on, directly. And, if you want to have any hope of hooking the players, you need to use at least some evocative language. Unless your game consists of nothing but retreaded material, where the context is already set, you need to actually paint that picture for the player. I think it's possible to describe a situation without "painting a picture" in the literary sense. If I can't engage the players unless I "paint a picture" in the literary sense, then I worry that it's probably not a very good situation. EDIT: Having read on, I see that Aldarc has made much the same points upthread. Also, I've spent far, far too long dealing with non-native English speakers who do not share our culture to take any description for granted. Every single reference you've made presumes a native English speaker (or near native anyway) with a deep grounding in western Judeo-Christian culture. As soon as you lose that background, none of your allegorical explanations are going to work. Imagine teaching D&D to ten year olds and you're trying to reference Men In Black - a 20 year old movie they've likely never seen. As hawkeyefan has said, what does this have to do with literary quality?

Thursday, 6th June, 2019

  • 08:28 AM - Hussar mentioned Aldarc in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    Not me. I learned my lesson last time. Nice Zifnarb. Niiiiiice Zifnarb. Here's some loot for you. Heh, you joke, but, the point is still there. Aldarc relied on comparisons - a warhorse to a Lamborghini to make the point. Or comparing the monster to the monster at the end of Men in Black. Only problem is, that presumes that the listener actually knows what you're talking about. If someone hasn't seen Men in Black or isn't a car person, then these comparisons fall flat. You wind up with a Darmok and Jelad in Tenagra situation. At some point in time, you have to drop the analogies and actually describe what's going on, directly. And, if you want to have any hope of hooking the players, you need to use at least some evocative language. Unless your game consists of nothing but retreaded material, where the context is already set, you need to actually paint that picture for the player. Sure, "There's a bomb" is going to get a reaction. We all know what a bomb is. "There's a bakudan" isn't really telling anyone anything, unless they happen to speak the language. At which time, you have to break out your wordsmithing anvil and ...

Tuesday, 4th June, 2019

  • 01:30 PM - pemerton mentioned Aldarc in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    ...ell-known genre territory, you need to build that context into the game so that it becomes familiar. This can be all the GM's job or it can be shared by everyone (collaborative world building).Well this certainly gets to the heart of it, or to the heart of something at least. I see two related questions. (1) Is worldbuilding done, and context established, for the players? That depends on the system and the table. My experience, going back over 30 years to my early years as a GM, is that players are more invested when the context is something that they have a hand in. This can be as simple as PC backstory that establishes a mentor/master. And this is something that can be done conversationally. For a somewhat formalised/proceduralised version see eg Fate Core, or PtbA games. But informal approaches have been used for a lot longer than those games have been around. (2) Does establishing context, and the resulting "pull to action", depend on evocative language/wordcraft? Like Aldarc not too far upthread, I tend to think that it doesn't. If the context is something that the GM delivers to the players, then maybe evocative language is required to get them to buy in. As I posted early in this thread, I think this makes the success of the enterprise rest on the weaker rather than stronger aspect of the game form (ie it depends on one participant's literary capcity, rather than on the shared generation of fiction which, as I see it, is at the heart of post-dungeoncrawling RPGing). But when the players help supply the context then I think the emotional investment comes from inside rather than outside (to return to a metaphor I used a while ago upthread). I've been thinking about some comments that appeared some pages back (around page 90, I think) regarding the importance of evocative descriptions in the game. Instead of just calling out die rolls and watching the hit points go down, it's helpful to describe the action from the perspective of the characters. I...

Monday, 3rd June, 2019

  • 02:46 PM - Hussar mentioned Aldarc in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    ...you are using it here almost interchangeably with other meanings. However, it has been my point ever since you misused your terms and repeated the categorical error. The problem is, while you are having this discussion about using different terms from different media, that's never actually been the point. Who cares if these things appear in cinema or whatever? It doesn't matter. The point is, none of these elements EVER appear in conversation. pemerton's basic point has been that it's the conversation of an RPG - the back and forth, plain language conversation during the game that drives the action and it's the situations and the content of the conversations that drives the emotional connection. Thing is, I've just shown that to be pretty much wrong. All the context of an RPG comes from the "not content" side of the equation. That's the side that Pemerton labeled "Literary". As in wordcraft, which, well, includes things like world building and whatnot. Like I said, Aldarc, I couldn't give a fetid dingo's kidney what you want to call it. It's really NOT the point. The point is, that it's NOT THE CONTENT side that drives the emotional connection of the game alone. It's the content IN CONJUNCTION WITH the literary (stuff that's not just content) that drives an RPG. That the stuff that's Not Content also appears in other media doesn't matter. IOW, I do not care that you can apply these same terms to other media. It doesn't matter because that's never been what I'm talking about with pemerton. You've gone off on your own little side thing here, and all you've done is cloud the issue.
  • 01:49 PM - Hussar mentioned Aldarc in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    ...harshly with even redder ink pen. Several flaws with your epiphany is that (1) you are equating the creation of context with the creation of literary text, and as part of that (2) you are repeating your categorical error that this narratological aspect of worldbuilding for RPGs represents a literary conceit. I'm not even sure if it constitutes a "conceit." A ltierary conceit is typically an extended rhetorical device. In contrast, worldbuilding is a process for creating or establishing the narrative context through an imagined world of fiction. (FICTION =! LITERARY.) I would say that world building is very much part of the literary creation process. In that you cannot really have literature without world building, or at the very least, setting creation. Yes, it's also done in movies and, well, any narrative form, true, but, remember, the contrast here ISN'T between literary and narrative. The contrast here is between literary and CONVERSATION. That's always been the problem Aldarc. You are arguing against something that has never been the point. The contrast, right from the opening of this whole thread has been between the "literary" and the "conversational" where it is the content of the situation that drives emotional connection, NOT anything to do with the literary. That these literary elements also appear in other media is beside the point because we're not contrasting different forms of media. Now, would you say that world building has any place in conversation?

Wednesday, 29th May, 2019

  • 08:58 PM - hawkeyefan mentioned Aldarc in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    Once you have the very basics, every things else is optional. I hate to snip so much of your interesting post....but I think I agree with most of it, and it can be boiled down to this bit above. What are the basics? Are there any that would apply to all of the myriad games you cited? Or most? Most is probably the best that can be hoped for. I think this is what Imaro and Aldarc have touched on. You had mentioned imagination, and I'd agree. I added buy in or willingness. What else can we list as core to the RPG experience?
  • 01:47 AM - pemerton mentioned Aldarc in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    And the author of the OP?What about me? Do you mean, what did I hope to get out of the thread? One's never sure in advance beyond "interesting conversation". But the discussion about storytelling and various modes, driven mostly by Aldarc and hawkeyefan, has been interesting. Hriston and darkbard have helped refine my framing of my point. That's helpful. And also led it in the direction of "advice to GMs", which led to some fruitful discussions with uzirath whom I've not engaged with very much before as a poster. And Manbearcat has pushed with some challenging posts about pacing that I haven't replied to yet. Ultimately, the reason I post on a discussion board is to have discussions.
  • 01:14 AM - pemerton mentioned Aldarc in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    ... @pemerton I do think literary endeavour exists within RPGs. Certainly when one looks at CR, the word usage by Mercer is important in order to immerse the players (and viewers) into the fictional world and the unravelling story. Many of us attempt to do same in our own games. All you have to do is look at Stephen Colbert's eyes as Mercer was wordsmithing away. It is important, whether you're writing a book for the enjoyment of millions or whether you're forming a tale together at the table for the enjoyment of a handful. They're both literary endeavours.This engages directly with the OP. Thank you. It seems like they are narrative endeavors or storytelling endeavors. I don't necessarily think that the word "literary" applies when we are talking more about story-craft or fiction-craft than the crafting of literature, even if we apply the technical sense of pertaining to written words. See, this? This right here? This is the goalposts on roller skates I'm talking about.But Aldarc is not me. I've already posted that some of the things Aldarc is distinguishing from literature I would, for my purposes as per the OP, characterise as literary endeavours. The world has room for multiple conversations! (And having just written this reply, I notice that Aldarc says something similar in the next post in the thread.)

Tuesday, 28th May, 2019

  • 12:02 PM - Sadras mentioned Aldarc in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    It seems like they are narrative endeavors or storytelling endeavors. I don't necessarily think that the word "literary" applies when we are talking more about story-craft or fiction-craft than the crafting of literature, even if we apply the technical sense of pertaining to written words. Ok you are making a distinction between story/narrative and literary. As a layman, I have to ask, is the crafting of a good story not part of crafting great literature? What are the differences? I can also understand @Hussar's frustration. See below. I thought it might be a discussion about whether or not wordcraft is a principal or essential means of evoking emotional responses in a RPG. The point of my OP is to deny such a claim. On the other hand, I believe that @Hussar affirms such a claim, as does @Imaro. I'm frankly not sure what @Maxperson thinks about it. @Aldarc, the bolded section (emphasis mine) could be utilised in any of the crafts you mentioned above. @pemerton here IS equating wordcraft with literary endeavours as he refers back to his OP, thereby introducing a new term and opening up the door to more rebuttle and confusion (hence the accusation of goal post shifts). For me wordcraft is important when attempting to convey certain images and framing particular scenarios to players to evoke certain emotions as reflected on my post using CR/Mercer as an example. The result being wordcrafting is important in RPGs, therefore literary endeavours are important to RPGs.
  • 05:43 AM - pemerton mentioned Aldarc in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    .... I'm frankly not sure what Maxperson thinks about it. Everyone agrees with you @pemerton.This isn't true at all. Unless you've changed your mind, upthread you asserted that the use of wordcraft and associated performance is a key means of promoting emotional responses in RPGing. Which is what I am disagreeing with. ************************ On the issue of "playstyle arguments/agendas", which has been flagged by Bedrockgames and darkbard: I think (and hope) it's obvious that my OP is putting forward a view about where the aesthetic merit and aeshetic power of RPGIng lies, and therefore a view about what the point of RPGing ultimately is. I recognise that others will disagree. That's not uncommon in critical discussions. I'm not 100% sure that I agree with Eagleton that these "deep structures" of aesthetic evaluation correlate to, or express, social power relations and any resultant ideologies. That's a further, and harder, question. But as I posted upthread in reply to Aldarc, I do think that these aesthetic preferences can be connected to broader trends in RPG design and RPG play. Some of Hussar's posts (about "plot wagons", and criticising player passivity) seem to me to imply a conception of RPGing where the GM brings the story and the players bring the expressive energy. Now maybe that's wrong, and Hussar is welcome to correct me if it is. But that conception of RPGing that I'm seeing there, even if not Hussar's, is I think quite a widespread one. I would associate it classicaly with White Wolf, Ravenloft and Dragonlance, and also with more contemporary "story-oriented" D&D. And it's what I'm pushing against in my OP.

Monday, 27th May, 2019

  • 01:12 PM - pemerton mentioned Aldarc in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    I have made it clear what I mean by a *literary endeavour*. I mean an endeavour that regards the formal quality of words - wordcraft[I], if you like - as its main, or perhaps one of its main, techniques for evoking aesthetic resonses. Without wanting to detract from any of Aldarc's excellent points, I would regard at least some film and theatre as [I]literary endeavours in this sense. So are poetry recitals. But cooking certainly is not; and nor are you Youtube instructional videos I was using earlier this year when I wanted to puree mango without a blender/food processor. Whereas the typical Nigella Lawson show probably does count as a literary endeavour in my sense. The pacing issue was first raised by Manbearcat early in the thread, and I stand by my reply to him as far as my particular contention is concerned.
  • 10:20 AM - Hussar mentioned Aldarc in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    Sorry, Aldarc, but, which definition are YOU using? Until such time as you and Bedrockgames actually tell me which definition you want to use, then we can't actually have any sort of meaningful discussion. Are we going to use Maxperson's broader definition or not? Pick one and we'll stick with that. You say that I'm making a category error. That's only true if we're using the broader definition. And, well, I do think it's a complete dodge to say, "Well, pacing exists in other media, so, it's not literary". That's not true. It IS literary, as well as other things. Now, since TV, movies, books, short stories, etc, all have pacing concerns, then, it's fair to say that any narrative form (which is what I was arguing with Bedrockgames about, not simply literary form) will have pacing concerns. They have to. Now, Bedrockgames claims that he does not pay any attention to pacing whatsoever in his adventure creation, nor during play. Now, I have to take him at his word for that, but, to me, t...


Page 1 of 8 12345678 LastLast
No results to display...
Page 1 of 100 123456789101151 ... LastLast

Wednesday, 19th June, 2019

  • 06:47 PM - Retreater quoted Aldarc in post Numenera: Third Time Wasn't the Charm
    I am curious about how much damage reduction your opponent had. If you were using a light weapon (+2 dmg) a minimum and got a crit on 17-20 (+1-4 dmg), then that is +3-6 damage. This is not including any other bonuses to damage that your abilities from your type or focus might confer. I'm not familiar with many monsters that have that much damage reduction, but I would need to double-check. I think it was 5 or 6, against a 1st level party. But still, having only a 10% chance to accomplish anything is a bad percentage. Sitting around waiting for my turn just to do nothing does not make a compelling game design. IME, the game isn't so much about combat but, rather, about discovery. Combat mainly serves as an obstacle for making those discoveries. In theory, yes. In practice (based on my XP), I'd say it's not. The two con games I played, both designed and run by Monte Cook affiliates, were both basically set up like D&D adventures. Ambushes in the first adventure that couldn't be avoided. I...
  • 01:08 PM - Garthanos quoted Aldarc in post Favorite things about your favorite edition: MECHANICS/RULES ONLY
    4e: * The WARLORD * Power Sources and Class Roles: This led to 4e having the gumption and vision to pull the trigger on something that not even 2e could commit to doing : removing all divine magic classes from Dark Sun. * Class parity and balance * Scene/narrative-based mechanics (AEDU) * Martial classes had interesting and thematic tactical choices that were typically privileged to magic classes. * Monster design: minions, monster roles, cool monster mechanics, etc. * Tiers of play including epic destinies * Saves as defenses * Rituals The fighter finally having the ability to actually defend could probably be mentioned (I know its in roles but this and warlord are two archetypes which were never mechanically fulfilled til 4e). However for me its pretty much mechanically everything with the above being just the iceberg tip and its almost easier to mention things I didn't like

Tuesday, 18th June, 2019

  • 01:28 PM - Imaro quoted Aldarc in post GM DESCRIPTION: NARRATION OR CONVERSATION?
    I feel like the actual discussion in that thread was about the primary GM role that new gamemasters should focus on learning: scene-framing for player agency or literary performance. The whole conversational vs. literary narration bit was a red herring conversation that we unwittingly got roped into when literary performance camp asked us to conceive of GMing as a conversation without the literary performance. We could and did, but that was still not good enough, and so here we are. That said, I tend to view most roleplaying as a constant state of negotiating the fiction. This is generally done conversationally between GM and players with mechanics often serving the function of a mediator of narrative outcome resolution. Sure, narrative prose can potentially add to the immersion of the game, but it is a non-causal relationship, so I regard it as a secondary concern when compared to the importance of scene-framing for players and as a player. What ultimately matters, IMHO, is that players un...

Sunday, 16th June, 2019

  • 05:23 PM - Maxperson quoted Aldarc in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    So the literary content of the written text (e.g., diction, structure, style, content) was deprecated by the tone and performance? What if the DM had not read the boxed text aloud - a rote performance - but had instead engaged in a more natural style that communicated the message of the boxed text without reading from it? What you say here suggests that something else that has not really been explored in the conversation much: that the premade "literature" fails to engage the DM who is running it for players. Normally, this has been framed from the presumption that the DM is engaged and we are instead focused on non-DM player engagement. In my experience, this is less about the DM failing to be engaged, and more that the DM has failed to learn the box text in advance and just reads it as he goes. If he had learned it in advance and was able to describe the scene with the box text as the guide, the players would have been more engaged.
  • 01:33 PM - Riley37 quoted Aldarc in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    ...een framed from the presumption that the DM is engaged and we are instead focused on non-DM player engagement. Well put. Thank you. Yeah, in this case the author and the DM at the table were different people, perhaps with different goals for use of descriptive language. For all I know, the people who wrote the module cranked up the formality of the prose style, for boxed text, on the basis of tradition - that is, perhaps they felt obligated to match the style of boxed text in whatever modules had formed their understanding of TRPG. As if a module had to provide boxed text with long sentences and lots of scenery-describing adjectives, or else it would not inspire respect, if you know what I mean. FWIW, the DM had found a story/module written for Starfinder, but was running it in the Warhammer setting, and some nuances of tone or scenery may have suffered some distortion in the process. Now I'm extra glad that I gamed today, and that I brought a recent example into the thread, because Aldarc picked up on something in the example! (I imagine that more value may ensue from Aldarc's point, than from the chain of (a) Hriston's declaration, (b) Ovinomancer's declaration, (c) my contradiction of Ovinomancer's declaration and (d) pemerton's counter-contradiction. Time will tell. And "value" varies by who does the assessment of value...)

Saturday, 15th June, 2019

  • 09:31 AM - CapnZapp quoted Aldarc in post "My Pathfinder Spoiler" Glimpses At Pathfinder 2
    But as I already showed, 5e also has ways to circumvent some of the restrictions on spellcasting, not all but a fair number. If PF2 were to only allow 5E levels of restriction-circumvention, I will sleep soundly at night.

Friday, 14th June, 2019

  • 06:21 PM - CapnZapp quoted Aldarc in post "My Pathfinder Spoiler" Glimpses At Pathfinder 2
    But what is the metric you are using? How close does the martial-caster balance in PF2 have to be for you to consider it sufficient? What if it is less than 5e but still far more than 3e? My concern is that LFQW will basically remain. Thank you for agreeing to the basic premise, by the way - that it has no place in a 2019 game. It takes a concerted effort to really banish LFQW (to 5E-like levels). Just reading about the basic rules for magic tell us nothing, unfortunately. All we can glean from that is that LFQW isn't assured. The important question is if any limitations can be circumvented by canny players. The two hot-spots will be high-level wizard (or equivalent, such as "prestige" class) abilities (look out for anything resembling "you may cast this spell without adhering to [X limitation]") and individual spell descriptions (can this spell be cast without [Y limitation], perhaps using a higher-levelled slot?) In other words, we need to know the entire system before we can...
  • 12:17 PM - CapnZapp quoted Aldarc in post "My Pathfinder Spoiler" Glimpses At Pathfinder 2
    Thank you for your reply. Why does it need to match it? Why can't approximate parity suffice? Of course it would. (Specifically: as I have said many times over, Paizo is free to accomplish this however they want. I certainly don't expect them to use the exact same mechanisms that WotC used)
  • 09:33 AM - CapnZapp quoted Aldarc in post "My Pathfinder Spoiler" Glimpses At Pathfinder 2
    LFQW matters to me, but I still don't think that you have a solid argument here. You haven't actually demonstrated or provided any evidence that your assertion in this last clause has any factual basis. I believe you are misunderstanding me. I am not attempting to prove anything. I am positing the following theory, or argument, or opinion even: "A game published in 2019 needs at least the same level of caster-martial equality as 5th Edition has proven can be done while still keeping the Dungeons & Dragons experience or its reception will consider it out of date". So far, not a single poster have belied this. Of course, you have responded many many times, but as far as I can see only because you don't like that I have a point - not once have you (or anyone else) actually said anything like "no, Pathfinder 2 will do fine even if martials remain glorified bodyguards to casters, like in every d20 edition from 3.0 to PF1".

Thursday, 13th June, 2019

  • 11:31 PM - CapnZapp quoted Aldarc in post "My Pathfinder Spoiler" Glimpses At Pathfinder 2
    I disagree. LFQW is still present in 5E - the utility power of wizards remains astronomical compared to fighters - but the curvature for wizards' power has been somewhat reduced, mainly through the removal of autoscaling, lack of bonus spells, reduced duration for buff spells, and newer concentration rules. Okay. So let's come up with another abbreviation if you don't feel 5E manages to avoid LFQW. Let's say 5E only manages to avoid WTFBBQ. Now reread my every post and every time I write "I hope Paizo avoids LFQW" or similar, in your mind replace it with "I hope Paizo avoids WTFBBQ" In other words, I don't care what you call it. 5E takes great strides toward caster-martial equality that d20 never even came close to. In 2019, any offering from Paizo better match that achievement.
  • 06:16 PM - Elfcrusher quoted Aldarc in post Systems You'd Never Play after Reading Them
    Hmm. Are you talking about 7th Sea 2e? That's the one with the kickstarter; 1e was published by AEG 15ish years ago? If so, I get you. I lurve 7Sea 1e and have kitbashed it and houseruled it for soecial applications. Also played it without knowing the setting much at all. But, 2e? Wasn't impressed and be much more likely to use a 1e bash than 2e. If you mean 1e, then you are a soulless monster, but I'm okay with that. Agreed. 7th Sea 2e felt kinda "meh." My gaming group in Austria loved 7th Sea 1e, but 2e left them feeling flat and uninspired to run it. Oh, yeah, I meant the 2e KS. My bad.
  • 03:33 PM - Imaro quoted Aldarc in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    That's probably because the entire basketball analogy was originally framed in terms of greater importance. ;) No it wasn't... I think you missed the point.
  • 02:37 PM - Imaro quoted Aldarc in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    I know, and what I said applies to that. EDIT: Not even worth it.
  • 02:31 PM - Imaro quoted Aldarc in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    This certainly shows you don't watch much basketball. Theatrics are definitely there. It's part of the dunks, the juking, the fade aways, the finishes, and playstyles of many players. Legendary basketball player Julius Erving (Dr. J.) even got his start in a league dedicated to the theatrics of basketball: the Harlem Globetrotters. ;) The analogy was with the game of basketball, not with how it's played in specific arenas...NBA & Globetrotter exhibitions (which aren't even an example of basketball being played). Unless we are now only talking about RPG's played for presentation to an audience...
  • 02:24 PM - Imaro quoted Aldarc in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    My take on this thread debate using basketball: What's more important in playing basketball, being able to dribble, shoot, and set up plays or developing a theatrical style to your gameplay. Yep and that's why no meaningful discussion is taking place between the two main sides of this argument. You see it as totally superfluous to the game while I and others see it as an integral part of the whole... of course if every time we bring up an example it gets put in the..that's not what we are talking about bin... but when a definite line is asked for it's brushed off as not really required (because of course the people who see it as superfluous all agree on where the line is...the superfluous stuff of course!!.... it's easy to see how such disparate views arise and understanding is minimal.
  • 02:21 PM - Maxperson quoted Aldarc in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    My take on this thread debate using basketball: What's more important in playing basketball, being able to dribble, shoot, and set up plays or developing a theatrical style to your gameplay. Bad analogy. This thread debate using basketball would be... What's more important in playing basketball, offense, defense, shooting or dribbling? Theatrics in most sports is nearly non-existent. It shows up a little bit after touchdowns, goals and such, but for most of the game it's not there. If you wanted to use a "sport" where theatrics and the sport might be on equal ground, go with the WWE. That contains enough theatrics during the entire event to contend with the content of wrestling.
  • 10:35 AM - CapnZapp quoted Aldarc in post "My Pathfinder Spoiler" Glimpses At Pathfinder 2
    When you're audience doesn't care, then why should Paizo care? Because CapnZapp thinks that it's the crisis of the ages? Look, I don't like LFQW either, but I think you are overblowing the issue, especially in terms of how many peoples (particularly new players) care about the issue. So LFQW does matter to you? Interesting, because my entire argument is that I believe it matters to every PF2 customer that has experienced 5E. 5e actually rolls back the LFQW balance changes that WotC made. (4E is the edition that fixed it. 5E is the edition that back-tracked on it with concessions.) I consider this a bad-faith argument. Who cares about 4th edition? It did a lot of things. None of them matter. It's also important to keep in mind that 5e is far from having "ruthless enforcement of the restrictions." Spell foci circumvent material components. The Sorcerer's Subtle Spell circumvents verbal and somatic spell components. War Caster allows for cirumventing somatic components. Many tables in...

Wednesday, 12th June, 2019

  • 07:15 PM - Mistwell quoted Aldarc in post Stargate RPG Powered By 5E Announced from Wyvern Gaming
    Ummm...IMHO, if you are changing 5e that much to make it work, you basically are creating a new system and a good sign that the original system is not necessarily a good fit. (FYI, I did read what the designer posted, and that only further supports my sentiment.) There are two issues in play: 1) Marketability, and 2) Mechanical fit. Going with any other system than D&D 5e is a MASSIVE hit to marketability. So you better have such a huge leap in mechanical fit that it just completely outweighs that marketability fit. On the other hand, if you can tweak the mechanics of 5e to fit "good enough" while retaining that big marketability fit, then you go with 5e. I think that's what is in play with this issue. And I think it's an error to assume that a big change to the skeletal mechanics is a bad idea. Spycraft and Mutants & Masterminds changed the landscape for 3e for the better. Some of the games you think are mechanically better fits probably wouldn't even exist without some grou...
  • 06:13 PM - Superchunk77 quoted Aldarc in post Stargate RPG Powered By 5E Announced from Wyvern Gaming
    Ummm...IMHO, if you are changing 5e that much to make it work, you basically are creating a new system and a good sign that the original system is not necessarily a good fit. (FYI, I did read what the designer posted, and that only further supports my sentiment.) Completely agree with you. On one hand you've got a very popular RPG system (5e) which works great for fantasy games (including Middle Earth). I can see the developers wanting to leverage the popularity of the system in an effort to garner more attention for their game. Fine. On the other, from a mechanics perspective, you're trying to bolt a fantasy RPG (5e) onto a modern setting (Stargate) that uses high tech gear, firearms, completely new combat tactics, and zero magic. To me that seems like a lot of extra work and risk for very little reward. That's almost like trying to play a Warhammer 40k game using the Ponyfinder RPG book.
  • 04:50 PM - Zardnaar quoted Aldarc in post Stargate RPG Powered By 5E Announced from Wyvern Gaming
    Ummm...IMHO, if you are changing 5e that much to make it work, you basically are creating a new system and a good sign that the original system is not necessarily a good fit. (FYI, I did read what the designer posted, and that only further supports my sentiment.) Not really they're using the 5E engine and probably having different skills and new classes to match the 5E genre. IDK if the basic idea though (hit point based class game) is actually that good for the genre though. And things like zats. Is O'Neil a level 6 Soldier, 4 officer for example. Daniel an archaeologist/soldier, Samantha a scientist/soldier, T'ealc pure soldier.


Page 1 of 100 123456789101151 ... LastLast

Aldarc's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites