Lejendary Adventures - Anyone played it?
- Thread starter reveal
- Start date
- Status
LA is a good game. Players enjoy getting access to powerful spells at low levels. Yet there is no problem with game balance. The LA magic system is mana-based. Players enjoy the flexability that their characters can recast any spell they know numerous times before resting.
DM's enjoy LA because the monster and NPC stat blocks are smaller. The monster stat blocks in other systems can take up several paragraphs of precious space in published adventures. Yet the monsters in LA are unique, diverse and challenging.
There are fewer game mechanics in LA than other systems. Yet there are rarely arguments about how a game situation is resolved. There is rarely confusion about how a given rule works in LA. There is very little rules reference time in LA. Though combat can take a long time, it is never because a player or DM needs to look something up.
Armor provides damage reduction to hit points. It works kind of like stoneskin. So you have to buy new armor when it wears out. A normal dagger can do as much damage as a normal sword in LA. So players are less likely to always pick a sword as their primary weapon because it always does more damage.
DM's enjoy LA because the monster and NPC stat blocks are smaller. The monster stat blocks in other systems can take up several paragraphs of precious space in published adventures. Yet the monsters in LA are unique, diverse and challenging.
There are fewer game mechanics in LA than other systems. Yet there are rarely arguments about how a game situation is resolved. There is rarely confusion about how a given rule works in LA. There is very little rules reference time in LA. Though combat can take a long time, it is never because a player or DM needs to look something up.
Armor provides damage reduction to hit points. It works kind of like stoneskin. So you have to buy new armor when it wears out. A normal dagger can do as much damage as a normal sword in LA. So players are less likely to always pick a sword as their primary weapon because it always does more damage.
Golem Joe
First Post
Re: Re: Re: LA
Well it isn't implicitly stated, but one could infer that an Avatar without the correct Ability would have a 00% or 01% chance of success, modified upwards on the basis of the ease of the action.
OTOH, by not explicitly defining each ability down to the barest nuance, players and LMs are encouraged to be creative in the use of Abilities, and the LM can always use difficulty modifers to moderate this.
And that is what the a lot of your argument hinges on -- preference. By your argument, Mythus and Rolemaster are superior game systems to 3e because they cover a wider skill base. OTOH, Over the Edge, hailed by many as a great RPG, is crap because it leaves so much to the GM to adjudicate. If 3e floats your boat, that's fine. It gets on my nerves. I like to have a bit more elbow room as a GM and that's something LA gives me.
I won't fault you for your opinion though. Just want to make sure they are kept in perspective.
Steverooo said:
Well it isn't implicitly stated, but one could infer that an Avatar without the correct Ability would have a 00% or 01% chance of success, modified upwards on the basis of the ease of the action.
OTOH, by not explicitly defining each ability down to the barest nuance, players and LMs are encouraged to be creative in the use of Abilities, and the LM can always use difficulty modifers to moderate this.
And that is what the a lot of your argument hinges on -- preference. By your argument, Mythus and Rolemaster are superior game systems to 3e because they cover a wider skill base. OTOH, Over the Edge, hailed by many as a great RPG, is crap because it leaves so much to the GM to adjudicate. If 3e floats your boat, that's fine. It gets on my nerves. I like to have a bit more elbow room as a GM and that's something LA gives me.
I won't fault you for your opinion though. Just want to make sure they are kept in perspective.
Last edited:
Golem Joe
First Post
Melan said:
I can arrange that. Here's a character from my campaign.
Cierva
Female Ilf (Unordered)
BASE RATINGS
Health (62)
Precision (51)
Speed (13.5)
ABILITIES
Geourgy (54)
Psychogenics (43)
Weapons (36)
Hunt (31)
Stealth (26)
Arcana (10)
EXTRAORDINARY POWERS
Geourgy
Conjure Marti
Ice Arrow
Ice Spear
Fog Elementary Service
Krisollan's Hard Water
Psychogenics
Premonition
Self Levitation
Thought Insinuation
Apport and Teleport
Cierva is an ilf, one of the lower elf races, and trained as a elementalist. She is a follower of the Khemetic Pantheon and worships Isis.
tieranwyl said:
Rarely arguments about how a game situation is resolved? HA! Rarely confusion about how a given rule works? BRO-ther!
Counter-example: Facing an Animal Evil Spirit with no magical weapons, an AC with Ranging hits upon the plan of using two lassos from opposite side to rope the critter, then hold it. What happens? Do the characters succeed?
(Sorry, don't have BoL handy - I am thinking of the one with the dog picture... I forget its name.)
We had this come up, in a game. I'll tell you what the LM ruled, later. Let's see what you come up with!
Re: LA
Careful about putting words in other peoples' mouths, or you'll lose that arm clean up to the elbow...
Actually, I wouldn't even say that about LA, let alone Over the Edge, which I've never even seen.
Which game is "better" is, indeed, a matter of preference, but as others, here, have pointed out, there is little (if any) reason to buy a game where one must make up the rules as they go along, anyway... Better to simply start from scratch, and write your own.
When I first saw LA, I felt like I had bought HALF a game. If I wrote a review, it would be titled LA: The Bad Taste Never Goes Away! It was interesting, to me, that the "Forlorn Corners" sceario in the Author's and Premier editions, had a well that PCs could fall into, in the dark of Pott's basement, and yet no swim rules... When the LML came out, we got swim rules, but are they intuitive?
Nope! Waterfaring is obvious; Ranging, Rustic, and Savagery I can see, but Hunt, Minstrelsy, and Unarmed Combat also grant swimming skill... Provided one isn't clad in heavy clothes, or armor! (Of course, if one drops into a well, in the dark...)
So the point is, rules for covering situations that will obviously come up in a game are not covered. Yes, this gives the GM total freedom in deciding what he wants to do. It also disallows the AC to have any control over his character's fate!
He cannot plan (very well, anyway) when choosing his skills, because (for instance) Hunt, Minstrelsy, and Unarmed Combat don't even mention granting the ability to swim! Neither does Ranging. It mentions exploring dangerous terrain, and I would ASSUME that allowed swimming... but that assumption could be WRONG, and easily get the AC killed. Savagery doesn't mention swimming either, IIRC, although it does mention boating. So, again, I would ASSUME...
Frankly, I don't understand the GM's fear of the players knowing what their own abilities are! Gary's response (Paraphrased) that "It's just like real life, you never know what you can do until you try!" certainly doesn't apply to swimming (I know whether I can swim or not, and I bet you do, too). This is info the player needs.
Is LA a better game for NOT providing it to the players?
Is it a worse one?
The same arguement applies to Climbing, Jumping, Riding, yadda, yadda, yadda.
"You don't know 'til you try!": The Mantra of LA!
At least with a magical ability, you know you have a 48% chance, or whatever.
So, ACs who pre-plan are basically put-off by LA. It is for the free-wheeling type who dash off without "worrying" about it. Guess I'm just the wrong kind of roleplayer for this kind of game.
Golem Joe said:
Careful about putting words in other peoples' mouths, or you'll lose that arm clean up to the elbow...
Actually, I wouldn't even say that about LA, let alone Over the Edge, which I've never even seen.
Which game is "better" is, indeed, a matter of preference, but as others, here, have pointed out, there is little (if any) reason to buy a game where one must make up the rules as they go along, anyway... Better to simply start from scratch, and write your own.
When I first saw LA, I felt like I had bought HALF a game. If I wrote a review, it would be titled LA: The Bad Taste Never Goes Away! It was interesting, to me, that the "Forlorn Corners" sceario in the Author's and Premier editions, had a well that PCs could fall into, in the dark of Pott's basement, and yet no swim rules... When the LML came out, we got swim rules, but are they intuitive?
Nope! Waterfaring is obvious; Ranging, Rustic, and Savagery I can see, but Hunt, Minstrelsy, and Unarmed Combat also grant swimming skill... Provided one isn't clad in heavy clothes, or armor! (Of course, if one drops into a well, in the dark...)
So the point is, rules for covering situations that will obviously come up in a game are not covered. Yes, this gives the GM total freedom in deciding what he wants to do. It also disallows the AC to have any control over his character's fate!
He cannot plan (very well, anyway) when choosing his skills, because (for instance) Hunt, Minstrelsy, and Unarmed Combat don't even mention granting the ability to swim! Neither does Ranging. It mentions exploring dangerous terrain, and I would ASSUME that allowed swimming... but that assumption could be WRONG, and easily get the AC killed. Savagery doesn't mention swimming either, IIRC, although it does mention boating. So, again, I would ASSUME...
Frankly, I don't understand the GM's fear of the players knowing what their own abilities are! Gary's response (Paraphrased) that "It's just like real life, you never know what you can do until you try!" certainly doesn't apply to swimming (I know whether I can swim or not, and I bet you do, too). This is info the player needs.
Is LA a better game for NOT providing it to the players?
Is it a worse one?
The same arguement applies to Climbing, Jumping, Riding, yadda, yadda, yadda.
"You don't know 'til you try!": The Mantra of LA!
At least with a magical ability, you know you have a 48% chance, or whatever.
So, ACs who pre-plan are basically put-off by LA. It is for the free-wheeling type who dash off without "worrying" about it. Guess I'm just the wrong kind of roleplayer for this kind of game.
Last edited:
Sample Characters
http://anch_stevec.crosswinds.net/chargen.htm
The Sorrow AC, by the way, is the Morchaint-Din character featured in http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=42158 "A Tale of Sorrow".
Melan said:
http://anch_stevec.crosswinds.net/chargen.htm
The Sorrow AC, by the way, is the Morchaint-Din character featured in http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=42158 "A Tale of Sorrow".
Last edited:
Col_Pladoh
Gary Gygax
Gez said:At least, rule-heavy means the mathematically minded can actually find some fun when the story sucks. With a rule-light system, we don't even have the game within the game, and are forced to pray the GM will have some great idea this time.
Hey, this thread is open to troll, ain't it ?
Heh!
Not a bad rejoinder, Gez
However, as I never troll, you shouldn't either
Gary
Col_Pladoh
Gary Gygax
Well Fellows...
As I posted a bit back, why quibble? someone has negative things to say about the LA game system, okay. That's a valid opinion, whether or not others disagree.
To avoid contentiousness, simply post without reference to another's opinion.
Cheers,
Gary
As I posted a bit back, why quibble? someone has negative things to say about the LA game system, okay. That's a valid opinion, whether or not others disagree.
To avoid contentiousness, simply post without reference to another's opinion.
Cheers,
Gary
- Status
