Voted the 4th most anticipated roleplaying game of 2016, Modiphius' Robert E Howard’s CONAN Roleplaying game - Adventures In An Age Undreamed Of is based on the company's own 2d20 system. Brom is a name you may recognise from Dark Sun and other D&D settings, as well as the covers of novels from the likes of Moorcock. He's a pretty big deal in the world of fantasy art. Apparently, Modiphius had trouble getting Brom for this cover - he was unavailable when they first approached him, but circumstances have brought his schedule in line with the game's 2016 release date, and so we now have a cover to ogle at!
Brom's Cover Art For Modiphius' Upcoming CONAN RPG
Voted the 4th most anticipated roleplaying game of 2016, Modiphius' Robert E Howard’s CONAN Roleplaying game - Adventures In An Age Undreamed Of is based on the company's own 2d20 system. Brom is a name you may recognise from Dark Sun and other D&D settings, as well as the covers of novels from the likes of Moorcock. He's a pretty big deal in the world of fantasy art. Apparently, Modiphius had trouble getting Brom for this cover - he was unavailable when they first approached him, but circumstances have brought his schedule in line with the game's 2016 release date, and so we now have a cover to ogle at!
That's how the game is mean to be played. I show you, in example, how the system doesn't make sense for the Conan universe.
The GM doesn't track where the points come from. He just looks at the Threat Jar and uses the points when he wants--when he thinks he can squeeze the most drama out of it.
The examples I've shown are examples of how the underlying mechanic just doesn't work for a Conan game.
I totally disagree. The mechanic doesn't drive RP at all. It drives focus on mechanics and Threat Points and game rules.
A character isn't being role played better if he throws 5 dice at a task rather than his normal 2 dice. He's just throwing more dice and doing things, mechanically, that he normally wouldn't be able to do. That's not role playing. That's rolling high.
At some point, the GM uses Threat Points, yes? When the GM uses Threat Points, do things get easier for the players or harder? Are obstacles easier to overcome when Threat Points are used or harder?
The relationship is clear. Players buy extra dice to roll higher than normal. This results in Threat Points that are used against the party sometime later in the scenario, either that same game session or later. Therefore, being heroic is punished, and the person who was heroic is not always the one punished.
This is going to sound crappy, but I don't mean it that way. I'm sincere in asking, how long have you been gaming?
Because what you say here is not roleplaying at all. It's rolling dice.
I quote the above because that clearly describes some of my problems with the game's system. If you don't agree. That's OK. If you like the new 2d20 system, then that's way OK, too. People have different tastes.
I was asked what I didn't like about the game, and I responded, in detail.
I'm not really looking to get into a long discussion about it. I think my points are clear.
If you like the system used with the new Conan RPG, then support it on kickstarter and go with God.
It's definitely not something for me.
This contradicts what you said before, as you gave me an example of a player in followup session being punished 'Because I have a lot of points' by the DM from the actions of a different player who he knew generated the threat in the previous session. Again, not having read the rules, and given you keep implying a jar full of buttons (i.e. lots of threat generated) the only way a DM wouldn't know who generated it if it came from a single source was if it is generated in secret. And it's not.
Now you're suggesting that the DM doesn't know who generated the threat because he "doesn't track where the points come from" which implies it came from more than one source, which of course means it was party generated threat and the DM should feel free to spend it on the party just like the party felt free to buy dice to gain an advantage against him. It's even. And the common sense solution is if you don't want the DM to be able to leverage large amounts of threat against you, then don't generate the threat to begin with.
The player drives the RP, not the dice. The mechanic gives the player a tool and an opportunity to add flavor to the RP much the same as a ability stat or skill bonus does, only the dice are not static, are tangible, and are implemented at player/DM discretion. I gave you examples of this which can unquestionably be tied to RP (again, keeping in mind that the player drives the RP, it's up to them to facilitate it). If I want to RP a fighter good at fighting I give him a high stat in Strength and the dice-buy mechanic gives me the option to RP a bonus in a situation using additional dice. It's as much role play as anything else. In fact, it finally adds the potential for a RP mechanic to the dice roll given it only happens at the whim of player agency. In other words, I always roll a dice for combat - nothing special about that - but now I can choose when I want to roll extra dice, and why that is. That's an RP moment.
It drives RP for the very reason you have pointed out. That is, if players just run around and buy dice willy-nilly (as you have suggested at least 1 player will), the DM has a large pool of threat to use against them. So they don't do this, because it would be stupid. Rather, they pick-and-choose when to use this mechanic so as not to face too much in retaliation, saving this mechanic and these resources for times in which they really need to pick that lock, or really need to land that hit, or really need to convince that NPC to do something. You know, RP moments that drive the story and have you talking about that game - and that moment in the game - for years to come.
But that doesn't have anything to do with the scenario as you presented it, or as I responded to it. In your scenario the DM punishes the thief because of an asshat in the previous session, for no good reason. Why would a DM do that? The DM isn't responding in an RP method, he's just responding to be a dick. That's what you said here:
And the 'punishment' is not in excess of the reward received for buying the dice in the first place. So once again, everything is equal. Heroism is no more punished than it is rewarded and no player was ever punished in excess of the reward received for being in the group which gained the bonus from the dice buy. Just because the fighter buys dice to kill the troll and thereby generates threat, doesn't mean that the wizard in the group didn't also benefit from him doing so.
Wait.. wait... wait. You have players in your game not acting like reasonable players - certainly not roleplaying, or acting in the best interests of the group... you have a DM (or are the DM) not behaving like a good DM - certainly not roleplaying, and in fact going out of your way to repeatedly and punitively punish other players who, by your own admission are not culpable for the asshattery of another individual... and you're suggesting that I'm the one that doesn't RP?
Even the responses you're giving in your own scenarios are not driven by RP. Why not try to solve your problem with the mechanic in an RP friendly method? Every example you've given does nothing to support your suggested interest in being a "role player".
This was a good discussion, and we can do that and still disagree.
Like I said when I read your first post I agreed with just about everything you said until I actually thought about it and realized that all you've done is identify how someone might go about abusing the system if they wanted to abuse it, and were allowed to do so.
In much the same way, as a DM I could have a handful of players roll up some 1st level characters and then throw the Tarrasque at them to fight. I could do that... because it's in the monster manual and I'm the DM and if I wanted to abuse the system, I could... but why would I? No one would want to play with me. Likewise a player would never do the things you're suggesting they would do with threat and be allowed back at the table or not expect the DM to respond by also spending threat on them. Players would never tolerate a militant DM who was hell-bent on using mechanics to repeatedly, unnecessarily, and unjustly punish their character for the misdeeds of another, or at least they certainly wouldn't get mad at him for doing so AFTER they had already reaped the benefits from the bonuses.
To me, the scenarios as you have presented them are simply fabrications and gross exaggerations of people intentionally trying to abuse a mechanic, and that can be done with any mechanic.
A much more realistic scenario than the ones you have presented is that sometimes players will use the mechanic to generate a bonus when they feel they need it, and sometimes the DM will spend threat to create a disadvantage when he feels it's needed. Some players will just roll added dice, and some players will tie the event in with RP.
Personally I think it sounds like a really dynamic mechanic, and an excellent opportunity for the player or DM to choose when to enable and add some really interesting story to a given situation. Somewhat akin to a Matt Mercer moment, where, when someone rolls a critical hit, he asks them, 'Ok, how do you want to do this?'
Last edited by a moderator:
[MENTION=6775182]moldyderp[/MENTION]
It looks to me that all you are doing is attacking my examples and saying that the game works if only I play it correctly.
Let's look at this from a different angle. Instead of de-railing the conversation with me defending my examples and you telling me that I'm full of it, give me an example, using this game system, that you think expresses how it is a good set of rules for use with a game set during Robert E. Howard's Hyborian Age.
It looks to me that all you are doing is attacking my examples and saying that the game works if only I play it correctly.
Let's look at this from a different angle. Instead of de-railing the conversation with me defending my examples and you telling me that I'm full of it, give me an example, using this game system, that you think expresses how it is a good set of rules for use with a game set during Robert E. Howard's Hyborian Age.
Given that there's another thread here where you've done similar to my attempts to explain how the system works (and another on RPG.net where you got threadbanned for it), I don't see this as particularly unfair. Every example I've brought up of the system working in play has seen you present worst-case-scenario corner cases as your only rebuttal, and throw around terms like meta-gaming and "roleplay not rollplay" as if we'd committed some sort of gaming sin for daring to employ mechanics that you happened not to like.
To anyone interested in seeing for themselves what the game is like rather than taking Water Bob's word for it, a quickstart adventure has been written which will be released alongside the Kickstarter campaign.
Water Bob said:
You said you wanted to go to PMs so I already answered you there. I haven't suggested anything of the sort as to 'playing correctly', only that you play as intended for reasons I've already outlined. The "problems" you've identified simply don't exist unless you're playing with idiots:
- Players don't play the way you are suggesting they do (a single player repeatedly acting unilaterally to the detriment of the group)
- DMs don't react the way you are suggesting they do (repeatedly applying punitive measures unjustly)
- A chalice of overflowing buttons doesn't exist because the DM is spending threat alongside the players as they generate it. And if he's not, why as players would you continue to generate more and more threat? This makes no sense! Players never get to this massive pile of buttons you keep insisting is there if they did not first reap the benefit from buying dice. It's entirely equal!
That's not to say the DM doesn't keep some around for him to use when he wants. But you keep asserting that there are so many buttons generated that the players begin to modify their approach to the game as a result, but you fail to realize this only happens if:
- The players continually buy bonuses and generate threat knowing full well the DM can use this against them, but not caring
- The DM doesn't bother spending it, knowing full well that they players may in turn begin to react cautiously (something you say you're trying to avoid)
Why would that ever happen? That makes no sense! As a DM, just spend the threat at a reasonable rate and every problem you have listed completely vanishes! Or save it, because why should players not have to consider their previous decisions (buying dice) in their future decisions? Of course they should.
As I pointed out, other mechanics already exist that do the same thing. If a player starts with 30 HP, and later finds themselves at 2 HP, they're going to make different decisions than if they had their full HP. Likewise if a player spent the first 3 hours of a 4 hour session buying a bunch of dice to succeed in his encounters it's absolutely reasonable to give the DM a recourse. Why the DM would allow the threat to pile up, I don't know, but apparently you do.
Water Bob said:
I already did provide examples. They're in every story. Conan does heroic things in excess of what the common (or even seasoned) adventurer can do all the time.
I know first hand that Conan bought dice on all the following
: He rips the head off of Baal-Pteor (The Man-Eaters of Zamboula)
He defeats two frost giants (The Frost Giant's Daughter... originally was only supposed to fight 1 but the DM upped it to two since Conan bought a bunch of dice in the previous fight)
He snaps the neck of a bull (it was originally supposed to be a piglet, but the DM spent some threat)
He scales the Tower of the Elephant (not to mention the Kothian he slays in The Maul, and his escape from the den of thieves - just before that)
He escapes Yezdigerd
He survives a crucifixion (the DM blew his threat wad to crucify Conan, but Conan buys some dice and pulls the nails out of his feet himself, if I recall correctly)
... the stories are full of examples of these mechanics in action!
Last edited by a moderator:
I guess if I had a financial stake in the game which made me biased, I might try to stamp out criticism too.
Let me remind you that I was asked about my opinion of this game on this thread. And, I responded.
I welcome people looking hard at the game, too. Sure, there will be some that like it. But, you know as well as I do that the gimmicky mechanics have been a hard sell from the get-go, and there are several gamers who, like me, who have told you, on several forums (including your own), that the 2d20 system is not liked. There are blogs about it.
I suspect people see "Conan" and that nifty cover (it is a nice cover) and don't realize what they are getting. I'm going to be interested to see how long this game lives. Will it live past the core rule book and a few initial offerings? I doubt it. Not with the current game system in place.
But, we'll see. Nobody can predict the future. Maybe I am wrong. Time will tell.
Conan does heroic things in excess of what the common (or even seasoned) adventurer can do all the time.
I know first hand that Conan bought dice on all the following
He rips the head off of Baal-Pteor (The Man-Eaters of Zamboula)
He defeats two frost giants (The Frost Giant's Daughter... originally was only supposed to fight 1 but the DM upped it to two since Conan bought a bunch of dice in the previous fight)
He snaps the neck of a bull (it was originally supposed to be a piglet, but the DM spent some threat)
He scales the Tower of the Elephant (not to mention the Kothian he slays in The Maul, and his escape from the den of thieves - just before that)
He escapes Yezdigerd
He survives a crucifixion (the DM blew his threat wad to crucify Conan, but Conan buys some dice and pulls the nails out of his feet himself, if I recall correctly)
... the stories are full of examples of these mechanics in action!
Yes, but what you are neglecting to say is that with this game, when Conan does these heroic things, he'll have to face greater obstacles later on during the adventure because he generated Threat Points being heroic in all these examples that you have.
That's one of the primary problems with the 2d20 game system. If a character is heroic, then that very act gives the GM power to make things more difficult than they would have been without the character being heroic.
In the Conan stories, Conan doesn't "pay" for his heroics later.
Water Bob said:
No, I didn't neglect it. I built it in. It's in the very text you're responding to. I gave you a few off the cuff examples of the DM spending threat:
moldyderp said:
You could say each and every encounter Conan ever faced was first modified by a DM using threat. Conan kills a dinosaur in Red Nails for crying out loud. Thats a prime example of an encounter buffed by threat. Conan is in fact the poster child for a character buying dice to gain success and the DM upping the difficulty of his encounters using his available threat.
The Modiphius guy that posted above refers to your scenarios as "worst case". They're not that. They're well-beyond that. They're essentially what happens when the perfect storm of idiots gets together with explicit intention of abusing the mechanics and each other.
And I was unaware you were going around and posting the same nonsense in multiple other locations, too, even to the result of getting banned from threads and/or forums. You have nothing but an agenda of hate and vitriol here that is completely unsubstantiated by your own examples.
Last edited by a moderator:
No, the examples are fine and could easily happen in anybody's game. Saying that gimmicky, silly mechanics aren't silly and gimmicky if you ignore that and play the game a certain way doesn't make the mechanics any less silly and gimmicky and inappropriate for the Hyborian Age.
I don't hate the game. I just give my real opinion. I'm not biased either way or the other (unlike the Modiphius dude). If something is good (the cover, Tim Truman's art), then I say it. If something is bad (the Threat Mechanic), then I say that too.
Not many people are aware of the funky mechanics used in the 2d20 system. I suspect that many expect typical roleplaying rules. The 2d20 System is not that.
It's a system designed for another universe entirely that has been shoehorned into Conan's universe, and it's a bad fit. The 2d20 system isn't flexible like the d20 system. And, it all boils down to the Threat Mechanic.
--> When players buy extra dice to make throws that their characters could not normally make, this generates Threat. Threat is used against the party later in the game.
Heroism in this game (spending a Fate or Luck point in other games) is rewarded with greater and harder obstacles later.
In other words: In the Conan 2d20 system, Heroism is punished.
- Status
Similar Threads
Related Articles
-
Discworld: Adventures in Ankh-Morpork from Modiphius Coming to Kickstarter This Year
- Started by Abstruse
- Replies: 21
-
-
-
Here They Are! Your 10 Most Anticipated TTRPGs For 2024!
- Started by Morrus
- Replies: 48
-