Recent content by Desdichado

I was out of the country from 1991-1993, so I'm not sure, but when I came back, got back into gaming and stuff, World of Darkness was obviously pretty big. I was a bit more interested at the time in Werewolf than Vampire, but you couldn't miss it. I don't remember thinking that it brought more...

J. R. R. Tolkien, Edgar Rice Burroughs, H. P. Lovecraft and Robert E. Howard.

To the original point of the thread; most uses of Lovecraftian details in Lovecraftian gaming makes them feel like theme park attractions. If you notice what Lovecraft and his circle did in their writing; they didn't really re-use a lot of elements; each story focused on a new one which was the...

Naturally. Given that the age of everyone is frozen, they have to be about late thirties to early 40s given the age of their kids. If Marge had a baby recently, she can't be much older than that, and if she mas middle school aged kids, she can't be much younger either. And given that the...

The test drive analogy is exactly what reading basic, expert, and the modules that they originally came with is.

Everyone's saying start with Gaz1; I presume this is under the understanding that you've already got the Known World hexmap from the Cook Expert set? (I presume the Mentzer expert set had the same map, but I don't remember anymore.) I'd certainly suggest starting with the B/X sets, and the two...

A little more grounded, but similar. Naming conventions; I mean, it's not like Greyhawk had great ones either. Verbobonc? Blibdoolpoolp? The Duchy of Geoff?

If they're both fantasy games with similar basic setting assumptions, you probably don't need to adapt very much anyway. Just take the equivalent from one system in place of what you have in another. I never bother adapting stuff mechanically; I just substitute it for the most part.

Always a worthy endeavor. In fact, that's a specific example I could have given too.

Yes, of course. I've done it many times. If they're very mechanical in nature, I'm much less likely to be interested, but modules, campaigns, setting stuff, "fluff" generally; sure. I have no problem adapting anything mechanically into my framework with little effort, so unless the mechanics...

While I don't necessarily disagree with you, what you are proposing is much more than a unique approach to psionics; that's a ground-up redesign of all supernatural f/x in D&D altogether. That'll never happen except maybe in some alternative approach to the game that isn't specifically D&D.

See, again, I liked how they did it in 3e, where psionics was very explicitly different than magic. It used focus and powerpoints, and felt more like psychic powers as they're usually defined, and even when they had psionic powers that mimicked magic spells, they at least had a different...

I'm not sure what you mean by a spellcaster psion. Was the 3e psion and wilder a spellcasting class? Because I liked psionics quite a bit in 3e. So much so that I even ran a game where magic was replaced by psionics. But not because I thought psions were spellcasters.

I doubt my experience is representative, but I don't really care what mechanics a module or setting or campaign has. I don't run 5e, although I do play in a game of it. I readily read modules in 5e, 3e, OSR, Pathfinder 1e or 2e, DCC or even WFRP and if I like it enough to run, adapt or loot it...

Limited prep. A one-page bullet point outline will easily get me 10-15 hours of play.