Did Anyone Else Try Out "A Song of Ice and Fire?"

[Grazzt]

Ah, well, if you need grit, try Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay. It has LOTS of grit. Sometimes the grit level is so high, it gets between your teeth!

I agree. WFRPG is definitely gritty. (Lot's o' fun too...)

But- I too am looking fwd to Song of Fire and Ice. Very interested to see what GR does with it.

 

[Agamon]

Didn't participate in FRPGD, but ASOIAF looks pretty cool. I like the options for defeating someone in a challenge (though "Take the Black" is pretty extreme for a defeated PC ).

 

[Agamon]

Ah, well, if you need grit, try Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay. It has LOTS of grit. Sometimes the grit level is so high, it gets between your teeth!

...and your toes and ears and in your underwear. One needs to be careful not to drown in grit...

 

[Ruin Explorer]

The way you describe it makes it seem terribly simple. In some ways I'm not sure there's much point in bothering if it's just a bunch of opposed rolls without any tactics whatsoever.

There's something extremely hilarious about this. I guess it's that that's pretty darn close to what early versions of D&D were.

Anyway, that aside, I like the idea of the system that's being hinted at. I think skill challenges are a pretty crappy idea, to be honest, and unquestionably poorly implemented/explained in the DMG. This sort of system could make a nice addition to 4E, if handled well.

 

[apoptosis]

Shadow of Yesterdays social conflicts work like that.

Though there are feats and skills involved and you can do many things to influence the conflict so it can be somewhat narratively tactical.

 

[CleverNickName]

Shadow of Yesterdays social conflicts work like that.

Though there are feats and skills involved and you can do many things to influence the conflict so it can be somewhat narratively tactical.

There were modifiers to the rolls, and the modifiers were decided by things like ability level and story dialogue. I am sure that these things are covered in the quickstart rules, but like I said before...the store ran out of them before I could snag one.

Thanks for the tip, though. I'll see if I can track down more info on Shadow of Yesterdays, and see if bits and pieces of it can also be cherry-picked for my homebrew.

 

[EATherrian]

Ah, well, if you need grit, try Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay. It has LOTS of grit. Sometimes the grit level is so high, it gets between your teeth!

I think there's a distinction between a gritty setting and a depressing one. Warhammer falls far, far into the latter. I like it, but I'd hate to play more than a short game in it. ASOIAF on the other hand I could spend much, much time in that setting.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Sounds interesting. Or should I say intriguing?

I still wonder if such social combat rules are a good idea or not. After all,you can still essentially boil everything down to dice rolls and a minimum of role-playing, just like combat. Wouldn't it just be pretending to be role-playing?

But maybe that's the wrong thing to think about. Maybe the question should be if they are fun to use? If someone doesn't want to role-play using the system, well, fine, than he won't. At least he won't stop others from getting some "role-playing" action. Only question is if the deep immersive roleplayer/storytellers are still interested in using a social combat system or feel hindered by it. If not, go for it.

 

[GreatLemur]

Like a lot of folks, I thought of Burning Wheel immediately. And Spirit of the Century also has a social conflict system that sounds a whole lot like this. And, with 4e working social interaction into its whole skill challenge system, detailed social conflict mechanics really do seem to be making their way into traditional RPGs in a big way.

...Which is cool, in my opinion. Much more satisfying than having everything hinge on a single Diplomacy check or on player eloquence and GM judgement calls.

I still wonder if such social combat rules are a good idea or not. After all,you can still essentially boil everything down to dice rolls and a minimum of role-playing, just like combat.

Hell, I say if you're doing only a minimum of role-playing during combat, you're doing it wrong. I'm of the opinion that game mechanics and roleplay can coexist happily. (Disclaimer: Blah blah blah, just my personal taste, etc. etc.)

 

[The Little Raven]

Hell, I say if you're doing only a minimum of role-playing during combat, you're doing it wrong. I'm of the opinion that game mechanics and roleplay can coexist happily. (Disclaimer: Blah blah blah, just my personal taste, etc. etc.)

I agree. It's strange to me that people think that only a character's physical capabilities should be represented by traits, while a character's social/mental capabilities should be represented by the player's social/mental capabilities. That actually strikes me as not roleplaying in social/mental situations, since you're now relying on your social/mental capabilities and not your character's (aka the role that you are playing). That's why I use social/mental mechanics just as much as any other kind, as I don't care how silver-tongued Jeff is when he's playing Krunk the Socially Inept.