Feeling Lost?

[Col_Pladoh]

Hey, Gary!

I still own the '99 edition, one of Gary's limited signed and numbered ones (#17 of 1000!) from Gencon that year. The game system is VERY easy, and characters are a breeze. The main thing that keeps me away from playing it, however, is the terminology. I could substitute the more generic terms back in place, but I'd practically have to rewrite the rulebook with the more common terms in place and give a copy to my players in order to even play it. Those guys will NOT keep a straight face if I start using "Extraordinary Activations" and "Activity Block Counts."

I am hopeful it's been a success for Gary, though. If anyone deserves it, it's him.

The terminology change is absoilutely necessary to force the participants from thinking in the D&D game mold and into the mindset necessary for adaptation to the rules light, skill-bundle-based LA game system.

Invariably those gamers that approach the LA system thinking in terms of the D&D game can not properly grasp how it works.

As a matter of facy once the new patois is accepted and employed, the LA game becomes easy to understand and play, usually with considerable verve and enjoyment. At that point the use of the old terminology is not a problem. I often mix in D&D vernacular when mastering an LA game session.

If you are in doubt, give it a try and see if the changes in patois do not force all participants to think outside of the old D&D box. That is indeed necessary for immersion in the new, LA game system.

Cheerio,
Gary

 

[Col_Pladoh]

So, Gary, since I have the Premiere Edition, if I get the Tome of Knowledge, I'm good? I'm not missing any rules material, correct?

The Premier Edition does not contain the various corrections made in later editions of the Lejendary Rules for All Players. It is a collector's work these days.

What I would suggest is that you skip the Tome of Knowledge and wait for the Revised Edition of the LA game's core rules books to be published. Otherwise, if you want to have the current updated version of the rules, pick up a copy of the Lejendary Rules for All Players from the Inner City Game Designs website. Chris Clark still has some of these OOP books available.

Cheerio,
Gary

 

[Col_Pladoh]

I look forward to seeing them. I'm also now thinking of using your "guild" ranks too. A nice alternative to "Prestige Classes", plus I just like how it adds to the atmosphere of a campaign. Plus the advantages aren't necessarily a power, skill, or attribute bonus, even though these LA tables do have some of that.

I'm thinking in terms of C&C to have guild ranks make things easier to find or make. Such as cheaper spell books, access to certain spells of each level that are "common", maybe even uncommon/rare, a lab that will decrease the costs of making stuff by up to 30%. Maybe even cut down on enchanting item times by having a fellow ghuild member help.

For fighters it will allow them to get "expert" grade weapons and Armor, give them "contacts" with mages and churches to get magic items at a 10% discount, or have custom made stuff done for them. Things like that.

Yeah, I'm definitely going to have to adapt this stuff to C&C.

Well, as a matter of fact I did design the LA game to be adaptable. As I have adapted portions of it to the C&C game system, who am I to say nay if others do the same.

If you are seeking sociatal details in your campaign, may I be so bold as to suggest you have a look at the Living Fantasy reference book from Troll Lord Games?

Ciao,
Gary

 

[Col_Pladoh]

I can guess how introducing a new char .. avatar would go in my group:

"I'm Jay .. Jay Lord"

Perhaps your gaming group take themselves and gfames too seriously...

Cheers,
Gary

 

[Col_Pladoh]

As a FWIW:

A fellow of mine just sent me the following:

"I was compiling a quick little list of the things 4e is supposed to change that you "already did" with LA. Here's a couple of quick bits. ...

" 4e damage is rumored to be a shorter range, instead of 6d6 you would have 18+d6 (19-24). Lejendary Adventures already has this feature.

"4e will be using "meta attributes"--roles for monsters are defined as "striker", "leader", "brute". LA was one of the pioneers of meta attributes, with ability scored labeled "health", "precision", and "speed" instead of definite attributes like "strength" or "wisdom"

"4e is supposed to be rules-light, well, LA's been that way for about 10 years now."

The above is not meant to cause a heated dispute, but mearly to highlight some features that the LA game system possesses that are being touted for the new 4E D&D game.

Cheerio,
Gary

 

[Rakin]

Ha, thanks Gary, for the answers that dwarves the answers that I would of probably suggested.

I'd like to add that I heard a rumor that in 4E, game play starts with stronger avat...I mean characters. ( ), around the equivalent of a level 3 or 4 character in the old system, which is something else LA does as well.

 

[Col_Pladoh]

Ha, thanks Gary, for the answers that dwarves the answers that I would of probably suggested.

I'd like to add that I heard a rumor that in 4E, game play starts with stronger avat...I mean characters. ( ), around the equivalent of a level 3 or 4 character in the old system, which is something else LA does as well.

OA/D&D are great systems to use for progressive adventures, mainly of the dungeon crawl sort. There is something eminently satisfying about beginning with a weak 1st level PC and by successive expeditions into ever-deeper levels of a dungeon building that character into a potent force.

I have yet to devise a comparative device for the LA game system. OTOH, the scope of possible adventure scenarios available for play with the LA game system is sweeping, as I demonstrated in the Hall of Many Panes demi-campaign module.

Ciao,
Gary

 

[Rakin]

Although I have to agree with you on the O/AD&D, comment, for most, and even myself at times it is fun to "raise" a character from a baby to almost immortalhood.

But I'm a anxious to trade all that off to be able to ignore game mechanics (well not really ignore but put them on the back burner versus having them in the forefront) and worry more about whats going on in the game on the level of imagining the situation and roleplaying.

LA does a good job in making the mechanics needed but on the back burner, and after playing some and realizing how much fun you can have with solid roleplaying as well as overcoming situations you (at least I did) start to realize how much leveling-up is not really something that was as exciting as you thought it was.

I mean in the end leveling is just math, it's the actions of the avatars that makes the game fun.

 

[Col_Pladoh]

...

...

I mean in the end leveling is just math, it's the actions of the avatars that makes the game fun.

That is indeed the true charm of the RPG.

Well said,
Gary

 

[Treebore]

Well, as a matter of fact I did design the LA game to be adaptable. As I have adapted portions of it to the C&C game system, who am I to say nay if others do the same.

If you are seeking sociatal details in your campaign, may I be so bold as to suggest you have a look at the Living Fantasy reference book from Troll Lord Games?

Ciao,
Gary

Oh, I will. I have the "Builder" books, and the Book of Names, and will eventually get Living Fantasy and the book for thieves. I believe I'll have all the books at that point.

I am also looking forward to the newest version of LA. I finally got around to creating a "Noble Human" and I am laughing at finding the equipment being the most difficult part of the rules to understand.

I love how you have "Weapons" build with each other, as is illustrated by taking Weapons at 100% of Health and then Archery at 10%. Very solid idea. I also like how Chivalry and even physical can add even more to those skills. A definite feel of "building" your character from the ground up.

About the only thing I don't like is having to have Chivalry ranked as your first skill to be part of the Noble order. I can see it for non humans and their required racial picks interfering with it, but humans pick their 4 at the same time, so I don't see why having Chivalry ranked second to weapons would preclude joining the order. I would think all that should matter is what rank you have IN Chivalry for purposes of determining placement within the order. Like my Nobles Chivalry maybe second ranked as a skill, but his Chivalry score places him in the 8th rank of the order, and only 4 points short of 7th rank.

Fortunately Wulfgarn and I see eye to eye on that particular issue and a house rule addresses it. However, do you still think Chivalry should be ranked first, even for humans? Or have you changed your mind on this particular point after 10 or so years? If you still think it should be ranked first please share you rationale for it. I have changed my mind about many a rule over the years when I finally understood the rationale behind it.


I also like how you have the amount of equipment a character has determined. You, or whomever posted it, weren't kidding when it was said a Knight could have so much equipment they could spare enough to equip half a party with no detriment to themselves.

An excellent way of having nobility mean something but in a way that doesn't ruin the game.

Definitely a lot to like about LA, and the more I read and reread the more I find to like.