CONAN Is Finally Here!

After appearing three years running in the 10 Most Anticipated RPGs of the Year list, it seems that Conan's streak has come to and end - because Conan: Adventures in an Age Undreamed Of has been released! You can get it right now from Modiphius' web store, and will be able to get it elsewhere from tomorrow. PDF only, for the moment. You can also grab a book of six adventures, Jewelled Thrones of the Earth. Conan: Adventures in an Age Undreamed of is based on Modiphius' own 2d20 system (which also powers their upcoming Star Trek Adventures game). The book is now available for review in the reviews area.

5_conan.jpeg


JTotE-Cover-Mock-Up.jpeg

SaveSave
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Russ Morrissey

Russ Morrissey

It's been a while since I've seen a blantant example of badwrongfun. Blimey!
Have you not read the DMG for D&D 5E? Because condemnation of meta-gaming is right in there. Traditional RPGs have been warning against the ignoble practice of meta-gaming for decades, with varied degrees of eloquence.

More recently, an idea has been gaining traction through some games that meta-gaming is okay, as long as it's in service of a higher goal - such as furthering the story. Whether or not you buy into that argument is going to depend largely on why you play these kinds of games in the first place.

I have no idea why you're trying to equate a game mechanic you don't like with an actual problem like discrimination and sexism.
The short of it is that, just because something is common or widely-accepted, that doesn't mean we have to accept it. It's okay to take a stand for something you feel strongly about, and if the other side doesn't back down, that doesn't make you wrong for holding to your convictions.

It's true of important, real-world problems. It's true of silly game rules (e.g. how Quidditch can be improved significantly by getting rid of the Snitch and just using a clock, which some people feel very strongly about). And it's true of the intersection between real-world problems and silly games. The basic logical process for determining what does or does-not make sense is not altered by how serious the topic is.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
Have you not read the DMG for D&D 5E? Because condemnation of meta-gaming is right in there.

I have and it isn't.

Inspiration is a metagaming mechanic.

I and many others here were playing RPGs, including D&D, for 30 years before the current DMG was written. It's just a book. I wrote a book, too. And Conan is a book.

The only wrong is people telling others they are engaging in #badwrongfun.

Traditional RPGs have been warning against the ignoble practice of meta-gaming for decades, with varied degrees of eloquence

Many very successful, excellent RPGs use metagame mechanics. Including D&D 5E (not that that means anything).

The short of it is that, just because something is common or widely-accepted, that doesn't mean we have to accept it.

You can not accept it all you want. But you don't get to decide how other people have their fun.

It's okay to take a stand for something you feel strongly about, and if the other side doesn't back down, that doesn't make you wrong for holding to your convictions.

If you have convictions about how other people choose to enjoy harmless games, yeah, it kinda makes you wrong. You can play your games how you want to, of course, but nobody needs your permission to play games the way they want to. There's no stand, and nobody has to back down.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

2) No it isn't.
I don't know how you could have read the part about how to discourage meta-gaming, because meta-gaming is bad, and come away thinking that it isn't against meta-gaming.
3) Inspiration is a metagaming mechanic.
The degree to which this is true is going to vary from table to table. You could use it to model inspiration, which is a thing that exists within the game world and which the characters are aware of, and which is reflected in the ways inspiration is gained and spent. Or the DM could ignore the mechanic entirely, which is another option in the book. Or I guess you could treat it as a meta-game player resource, if you really wanted to.

If you have convictions about how other people choose to enjoy harmless games, yeah, it makes you wrong. Nobody needs your permission to play games the way they want to.
It sounds like there was a miscommunication somewhere. I'm not against other people meta-gaming, at their own tables, as far away from me as possible. If you can have fun playing FATE or Savage Worlds or this new Conan game, then that's great. I just don't want it anywhere near my table, because it directly conflicts with the core principle of role-playing, which is that you make decisions as your character and out-of-game factors are irrelevant.

When I say meta-gaming is bad, I mean it in the same way that pineapple on pizza is bad. I find it supremely distasteful, and I can't just ignore it because it ruins the taste of everything around it, but it's not a moral judgment against people who like it or anything.
 

thzero

First Post
I'm up to 10 house rules, and thats just in the character building section.

And RPGs are a game, not a story telling sitaround. GAME. So if you have to fudge things just to make the results tell the story you want, instead of finding the story that comes out of the good and bad.. um, yeah.
 


Prickly

First Post
I was sceptical at first but I tried out the quickstart during the kickstarter and I really became very fond of the 2d20 system.

I'm actually currently running a mutant chronicles game and I am excited to try out the update 2d20 for conan.

I recommend everyone to give it an honest try with the free quickstart, and then form your opinion.
 

Prickly

First Post
I don't know how you could have read the part about how to discourage meta-gaming, because meta-gaming is bad, and come away thinking that it isn't against meta-gaming./QUOTE]

There is a difference between a meta game mechanic and a player meta-gaming

doom point, fate point, savage world bennies and 5e inpiration all all metagame mechanics

A player looking up monster stats to gauge what spells to use or attacks to make is meta-gaming
 

There is a difference between a meta game mechanic and a player meta-gaming
One is a sub-set of the other. The major issue with something like a Doom pool is that it requires meta-gaming in order to use. A player looking at the stats for a monster, and making a decision based on that information, is meta-gaming to the same degree as a player looking at the GM's pile of Doom tokens and making a decision based on its size.

The only real difference is that D&D is written from a perspective that meta-gaming is bad, and you're not supposed to look up stats for the monster; where a game like this is written from the perspective that meta-gaming is good, and you are supposed to take the Doom pool into consideration.
 

aramis erak

Legend
I don't seem to be making any sense to you, so I'll allow someone else to answer.

(Maybe it's controversial because a lot of people really want to like this game. I know I do. But the mechanics are so bad that I won't play the game. So, massive disappointment has set in. Which angers people. They gripe about it. Discussion seen as controversy.)

You're stating a preference, being asked to analyze it and explain it, and just repeating the preference without explanation. You've given ZERO insight into why you hate it, while championing, even to the point of attempting to put the whole mechanics up on the BBS, a game which makes extensive use of metagame points... WEG d6.
 

Water Bob

Adventurer
If you're angry about the choice of rules in a tabletop roleplaying game, game forums are not your solution.

Game forums aren't the place to state a dissenting opinion about the mechanics of a game?

Hmm. :-S



I'd be interesting in hearing from people other than you, as you are known for stalking 2d20 threads across multiple websites and ranting about how awful it is. The fact that there's a person out there who obsessively hates a system to the extent of following it around the web and condemning everywhere they see it is not useful information to me.

Hey, I wasn't the first here. I just joined in today on this thread. There are plenty of others who stated opinions against the game.
 


Water Bob

Adventurer
You're stating a preference, being asked to analyze it and explain it, and just repeating the preference without explanation. You've given ZERO insight into why you hate it, while championing, even to the point of attempting to put the whole mechanics up on the BBS, a game which makes extensive use of metagame points... WEG d6.

There are no meta-game mechanics in WEG's D6 Star Wars. There's nothing in that game that influences players to make decisions outside of the game universe--not like the DOOM pool at all.

I'll agree that my responses above were more about my preference.

I just don't like the 2d20 mechanics. At all. So, when it comes up, I state my preference. My preference is negative, so when people who have read my preference on this game before don't want to hear it again. It's as if people are expected to state their negative opinions one time only, on one thread only, ever.

I don't like the game. I'd like them to change it. They probably won't, but I'd like Modoiphius to go with another system. So, when people are talking about it, I should be allowed to state my opinion on it.

I haven't dominated or drowned out this thread.
 

thzero

First Post
Because it is a trope that the source material embraces?

WHAT?! Of course an RPG is collective story telling! True, everyone has their role, but each of them fit within the same story or sequence of events that the game takes place in. In terms of the GM dice pools, whats the difference between those and the times a GM fudges a number to make a fight more challenging or to help a player along who's had cold dice at the table all night? This is just another way of adjudication, that's all.

Huh? There is some truth to the adjudication argument. I try to keep things as level as possible.

However, RPG is a collective story telling session. People keep saying it is, but its a GAME otherwise the name would be Role Playing Story Telling. I think people get way to caught up in you have to tell a story, and make the events fit a story, etc. than realizing that in the process of playing a game, doing hopefully cool stuff, sharing stories, having highlights and lowlights (yes because of randomness that is built into most of the RPGAME systems), that thats where the story comes from! Not trying to force certain storylines just to make it come out the way you want.

To me, maybe Morpheus has gone a bit too far, but I like the idea of mechanical events (which are meta anyways) allowing some interesting twists to the events, and given players alternate avenues of helping shape the in-game happens outside what their character may or may not be doing. I think it may lead to more interesting stories coming out of the game.

Too bad, for a mechanical game, they've butchered it and taking sloppy short-cuts and limited options... especially for how long its been in production, and having started with an already existing system. And then on top, in this day and age, to not OGL (or choose your own) for the rules (not fluff or canon mind you).... yeah.
 



Skywalker

Adventurer
So you don't use force points nor Dark Side points? Both are metagame.

That's not accurate. The Force and the Dark Side are concepts within the setting and the mechanics model those. You could argue the same for Doom (it models a sense of Doom that Conan once referred to) but I think the concept is clearly less embedded in the setting and, given how it operates, is more obviously of a metagame nature. I think the same is true with Inspiration, which though it could be argued as being actual inspiration, how the mechanics operate make it clear that it is designed as a metagame mechanic.

However, I think this all misses the point. There is nothing wrong with metagaming. It is a matter of taste only. Though the D&D5e DMG correctly warns against the players using OOC knowledge, expanding that statement to say any metagame mechanic is bad goes way beyond its intended meaning.

Its also important to note that we are talking about a GM tool here, not a player one. If you take some of the arguments here to their logical conclusion then a GM choosing to run a module based on its prescribed levels being a better challenge for the PCs would also be bad as the GM is referring to mechanics outside of the setting's conceits. The same is true of encounter building rules, which the GM uses to plan out there encounters. I am sure that there are RPGers who truly believe that these kinds of rules are bad too, and are happy to add a Adult Red Dragon to their 1st level PCs wandering monster table, but I would expect the majority of RPGers see that such mechanics add a lot of enjoyment to the game.

To reiterate, the Doom pool is intended to do a couple of things:
1. To provide the GM with a bennie pool equivalent to the PCs. It does this well and helps the GM with NPC resource management.
2. A gauge to help the GM evaluate when to push harder, as well as a visual countdown clock (which is genre appropriate) for the PCs. Again, it doesn't force the GM to play that way, such as in FATE, and there is a robust RPG system that sits alongside it operating as you would expect.

Again, if you hate any metagame mechanic, even action points and encounter building rules, then Conan 2d20 is not for you. There is really not much more to say that just isn't a repeat of your concern ad nauseum. However, I don't think that purist position of these mechanics reflects where today's hobby is as a whole.
 

thzero

First Post
However, I think this all misses the point. There is nothing wrong with metagaming. It is a matter of taste only. Though the D&D5e DMG correctly warns against the players using OOC knowledge, expanding that statement to say any metagame mechanic is bad goes way beyond its intended meaning.

Yes and yes. And I do believe all the versions of the DMG have said roughly the same thing.
 


AD&D 1E told the GM to change the rules to prevent player rules knowledge ... and for many, EGG's advice therein is the epitomé of bad advice.
Again, though, it's only bad when taken out of context. For the time period when EGG was involved with the game, role-playing wasn't really what the game was about. Although the advertisements may have included the idea of how fun it would be to pretend to be a character, and you certainly could do that while playing, the rules of the game were still just a modified war-game rule-set that set up a contest between the players and the DM.

Gygax expected the players to meta-game, and gave advice that was relevant for the context he was working in. That expectation wasn't something that survived the transition between AD&D 1E and AD&D 2E.
 

Water Bob

Adventurer
So you don't use force points nor Dark Side points? Both are metagame.

Neither are meta-game. I think Skywalker said something to the same effect above.

Dark Side Points and Force Points are both in-universe mechanics that represents the effect of the Force on the characters. Other players cannot see how many Force points a foe has and determine not to engage that foe if the number is high--as is done with the Doom Pool.

DSPs and Force Points are no different that a +1 attack a character may get in AD&D due to his superior STR rating. It's not meta-game at all.









AD&D 1E told the GM to change the rules to prevent player rules knowledge ... and for many, EGG's advice therein is the epitomé of bad advice.

I believe that Meta-Gaming is bad and poor form and against what I consider pure roleplaying.

Players in an AD&D game should operate on the knowledge that their characters have--not on the knowledge that the player may get outside of the game.

If a player sees a new monster and decides to have his character run from it, it is considered poor form indeed if the player then changes his mind after having a peek at the GM's notes to see that the HD on the creature is low and easily beaten--not at all what the character was thinking through the player's play before the meta-game information entered the situation.

The same goes for the DOOM pool. The number of DOOM points the GM has to use should be hidden from the players so that the players cannot make in-character decisions based on the DOOM Pool's total. But, it's impossible to hide the DOOM pool as the players generate the points via their actions. Any player paying attention will know the DOOM pool count.
 

Related Articles

Visit Our Sponsor

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top