CONAN LIVES! Info on the new Conan RPG

[pollico]

Well, it is the way THIS game works. It's THE SAME the first and the second examples: they are both a death. Nobody likes when their pcs die.

It promotes friction between GM and players in the same way that poisons, traps and enemies do.
"Eh, why your wizard threw a fireball when he could throw a sleep spell instead? Its not fair!, bad GM! Buu"

 

[modiphius]

When is this game suppose to be out? I am interested in seeing the final product. The threat mechanic sounds interesting.

When it's ready and because it's so important we're taking our time. However the goal is a PDF by Christmas, with a Kickstarter just before in Oct-Nov

Walter we recorded our Tuesday night session playing the playtest adventure this week we'll edit and post soon along with the version played around Howard's dining table. I played with 8 players and had a growing threat pool which I used steadily but didn't use as much as I could have, and still the player's had a hard time (actually because as some left we took them out of the story for the purposes of the test). As a result I didn't spend as much Threat as I could have, because I wasn't trying to kill off the players. Just as with a game of D&D I know how to keep them on the edge (the final two players nearly came a 'cropper with the finale) and pull the punches enough to make them fear death.

Threat is not this system that forces you to do anything. You can actually play much of the system without it, sometimes I used it to fire extra arrows from archers, made a slave master try to dodge an attack, a player character almost miss a jump and end up hanging off an edge, etc and still the players had a great time. I could have spent a lot more - going back again I'd have used some more for scene changes, more dodges from the enemies, or return attacks but it was all fun and people were getting wounded left right and centre so I didn't feel the need to.

 

[Water Bob]

Well, it is the way THIS game works. It's THE SAME the first and the second examples: they are both a death. Nobody likes when their pcs die.

It promotes friction between GM and players in the same way that poisons, traps and enemies do.
"Eh, why your wizard threw a fireball when he could throw a sleep spell instead? Its not fair!, bad GM! Buu"

Are you just being combative? You honestly can see how a player would accept his PC dying on the roll of the dice but feel picked on and bitter if the GM chose to use Threat Points to help end the character's life?

You don't see how a player could feel as if the GM were out to get him (when really, the GM just thought the narrative would be grand)?

If you can't see that, then you and I have nothing else to discuss on this topic.

Because, it's plain as day.

 

[Water Bob]

When it's ready and because it's so important we're taking our time. However the goal is a PDF by Christmas, with a Kickstarter just before in Oct-Nov

Walter we recorded our Tuesday night session playing the playtest adventure this week we'll edit and post soon along with the version played around Howard's dining table. I played with 8 players and had a growing threat pool which I used steadily but didn't use as much as I could have, and still the player's had a hard time (actually because as some left we took them out of the story for the purposes of the test). As a result I didn't spend as much Threat as I could have, because I wasn't trying to kill off the players. Just as with a game of D&D I know how to keep them on the edge (the final two players nearly came a 'cropper with the finale) and pull the punches enough to make them fear death.

Threat is not this system that forces you to do anything. You can actually play much of the system without it, sometimes I used it to fire extra arrows from archers, made a slave master try to dodge an attack, a player character almost miss a jump and end up hanging off an edge, etc and still the players had a great time. I could have spent a lot more - going back again I'd have used some more for scene changes, more dodges from the enemies, or return attacks but it was all fun and people were getting wounded left right and centre so I didn't feel the need to.

Get that game session posted on YouTube, and I will certainly watch it. Post a link here, if you please, so that I'll know when it's ready.



EDIT: And, you may want to post the video in two versions. One, showing the game play. A second one showing the game play but with commentary from you. It'd be nice to hear you, as GM, explain why you made the choices you did in the game, using Threat (but also explain the rules as they work).

 

[modiphius]

Well, it is the way THIS game works. It's THE SAME the first and the second examples: they are both a death. Nobody likes when their pcs die.

It promotes friction between GM and players in the same way that poisons, traps and enemies do.
"Eh, why your wizard threw a fireball when he could throw a sleep spell instead? Its not fair!, bad GM! Buu"

I actually like players fearing PC death - knowing that I'm willing to do it, I won't unless they're stupid but if they don't BELIEVE the GM will let their character die then the drama has little excitement. Now there is also great story telling in characters dying and it can be a fun part of the game as you start a new character, perhaps a relative, or a friend or just someone new. The world of Conan is brutal and it should be reflected. Call of Cthulhu has a very brutal system seeing PC's degenerate in to insanity, and it's a much loved part of the system that you just start a new character.

Perhaps we should all have a track record of how our last character died in Conan ?

 

[modiphius]

Sure I'll post the links here as soon as we can.

Good idea on the commentary - it might be a bit busy audio wise for that, I think a video version (mine was audio only) would allow that better as I can add subtitles and will bear that in mind.

 

[pollico]

Are you just being combative? You honestly can see how a player would accept his PC dying on the roll of the dice but feel picked on and bitter if the GM chose to use Threat Points to help end the character's life?

You don't see how a player could feel as if the GM were out to get him (when really, the GM just thought the narrative would be grand)?

If you can't see that, then you and I have nothing else to discuss on this topic.

Because, it's plain as day.

I see that one kill you only by the luck. It is impersonal, cold, lifeless.
The other is a drama device. We know it can enhance or activate opposition skills, but nothing like "kill a pc right now", thought.

So... It is the same. The GM has used HIS RESOURCES to challenge you.that is what I see. Can't you?

 

[Pickles III]

You mean this as a dig, but it really does hit the nail on the head. When I first heard about the new game, I had a big smile on my face. Then, when I heard all of these wonderful people would be working on the game, that grin turned into a big, ear-to-ear toothy grin.

Then I saw the awful, gimmicky, meta-game mechanic that is so rooted in the system.

My disappointment, as it dropped, could be heard on the other side of the planet.

My apologies - I was empathising to start with, then could not resist the cheap shot. I appreciate your frustration, I seem to remember it happening to me though I cannot remember in what context.

I do think you are letting your dislike for this style of game & love for the setting overcome your reason about whether it is bad or simply not to your taste though.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

I see that one kill you only by the luck. It is impersonal, cold, lifeless.
The other is a drama device. We know it can enhance or activate opposition skills, but nothing like "kill a pc right now", thought.

It basically comes down to the difference between: "Tough luck, that's the way the dice fall sometimes, but I'll be rooting for you next time," and "You died because I decided that it would be dramatic for you to die. Isn't this a great story?"

It's the difference between the GM as a neutral arbiter, and the GM as an unpredictable force of nature which can switch between benign or malevolent on a whim. It doesn't make for a terribly satisfying experience as a player, not even getting into the causality chains between innocuous actions in one region having a physical impact on the events that take place in another region.

 

[Water Bob]

Sure I'll post the links here as soon as we can.

Good idea on the commentary - it might be a bit busy audio wise for that, I think a video version (mine was audio only) would allow that better as I can add subtitles and will bear that in mind.

I just think hearing how the rules are used from the GM's point of view--why you made that choice, what you were thinking there that motivated you to do that--would be good for the game all around. Those that already like the game get to see it in action. Those on the fence get a better understanding of how the rules can be used. And, those, like me, who hate the Threat Mechanic get a close up view of it in action, with commentary--which may change some opinions (even mine--I'll give it a fair look).

It can't hurt you. I can only help the game.