log in or register to remove this ad

 

Products That Overwhelmed You

Sithlord

Adventurer
I think that one of the more difficult things about Tekumel, IMHO, is not so much the alien science fantasy aspects of the setting, but, rather, understanding the cultures of the game from a more day-to-day sort of perspective, such as its values and how family-clan kinship relations work.
I love settings like tekumel. But one thing I learned is most players really don’t want to do the homework to play in such a system.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Aldarc

Legend
I love settings like tekumel. But one thing I learned is most players really don’t want to do the homework to play in such a system.
Same. It's an impressive setting, but I needed a graph to understand how inner-clan relations in Tekumel were conceptualized regarding who is or isn't a mother, father, aunt, uncle, cousin, sibling, etc. It was a real headache as someone coming from an incredibly simplistic Euro-American "nuclear family" frame of reference.
 

Lwaxy

Cute but dangerous
This got me thinking about other products I've purchased, including the original edition of Ptolus
Ptolus is super easy to run for me - currently running a group with PF 1e through several campaigns at once. All the info makes it easy - if you have the time to read it all AND a memory for those facts. If not, better ignore the published stuff altogether.

Hint - read it while on the John, you can't give up so easily then :)

I tend to give up on non-d20 rule books with more than a few pages of rules nowadays, especially when the print size and/or color/font is unreadable.
 

Lwaxy

Cute but dangerous
I'm finding that I am getting overwhelmed more frequently these days. I wonder what the difference is now?
I don't have the free time I had in my youth to pour over rulebooks?
I have less patience for convoluted mechanics after seeing numerous systems over the years?
COVID/Pandemic exhaustion making me hesitant to learn new stuff?
I have a lot of games to read and study (and play) and I get things mixed up easily?
I place higher importance on using all of the rules/setting material and playing a game "correctly" than I did when I was younger?
I think it is because we've seen almost everything in the way of rules, and we know what we like. and too many "new" systems with minor variations come out, and who wants to bother to keep them all straight? So we prefer to stick with what works for us, and then it is just work to work through new rules.
 

Fenris-77

Small God of the Dozens
Also, old gamers are often lazy gamers, no criticism intended (I'm including myself there). There's a point where you know what you like, and your tolerance for a whole bunch of reading goes way down unless its in service of something really exciting.
 



The One Ring. Love Tolkien and Middle-Earth, and the system is good once you get it figured out, but while I could play it, I never got comfortable enough to try and run it.

D&D 3.x and Pathfinder. They were fine at first, but the more stuff came out and the more you needed to know, the complexity got to be overwhelming to the point I gave up on both of them.
 

Ace

Adventurer
I think that one of the more difficult things about Tekumel, IMHO, is not so much the alien science fantasy aspects of the setting, but, rather, understanding the cultures of the game from a more day-to-day sort of perspective, such as its values and how family-clan kinship relations work.

It also makes it hard to get players into the adventuring . Most player groups like to play what are essentially vagabonds. Tekumel is well set for adventuring but the ties you noted don't sit well with players who prefer an anti authoritarian play style.
 

Sithlord

Adventurer
The One Ring. Love Tolkien and Middle-Earth, and the system is good once you get it figured out, but while I could play it, I never got comfortable enough to try and run it.

D&D 3.x and Pathfinder. They were fine at first, but the more stuff came out and the more you needed to know, the complexity got to be overwhelming to the point I gave up on both of them.
I loved pathfinder and I think they came up with many good idea. But when they game got so complex that we were using hero lab to create characters we quit. They keep adding layers of complexity like archetype (different than 5E) and traits and I can’t remember what else.
 

amethal

Adventurer
I loved pathfinder and I think they came up with many good idea. But when they game got so complex that we were using hero lab to create characters we quit. They keep adding layers of complexity like archetype (different than 5E) and traits and I can’t remember what else.
Traits are a great idea in theory - a couple of "half-feats" that you pick at character creation to add a minor bit of customisation to your character and also give a few role-playing hooks.

Of course, this being Pathfinder it was implemented in as complicated a way as possible.

Lots of categories of traits, including the Basic category which was split into 4 sub-categories, and you couldn't have two traits from the same category, except that for Basic ones you could have more than one so long as they were from different sub-categories (I have absolutely no idea why the sub-categories weren't just made into categories and the Basic part just ditched).

A category called race traits, which is something completely different to "racial traits" (which are what you get as your racial abilities per the races chapter). Then you get the "adopted" trait which allowed you to get the race trait from another race, making the distinction moot but also making people think they could get racial traits with it, such as stonecunning or darkvision. But you could in theory get things like a halfling brought up by orcs being able to get a bite attack or a very ugly (and therefore intimidating, since this is D&D) face.

And of course the rush to create as many traits as possible, so there are literally hundreds to choose from, some of which are objectively better than others (e.g. granting a +2 instead of +1), some of which are exactly the same as others but in a different category, and some of which are exactly the same as others and in the same category. And many of which are either useless in themselves or useless except in very specific circumstances that almost never happen.

And campaign traits, which are flat out better than other types of trait to reward you for picking something campaign-appropriate. But which are lumped in with all the other traits if you do a search on Archives of Nethys, so you then have to explain to your players that they can't pick those unless you are playing a specific campaign.

But technically one of your traits has to be a campaign trait, so are you going to design some for your homebrew?

And, of course, there is a feat to get extra traits. Which you can take more than once.

And "exemplar" traits which count as two traits (so how does that fit in with the requirement that one of your traits is a campaign trait?) which allow you to ignore the rule about no more than one trait from each and actually gives you benefits the more traits you have in a specific category.

And absolutely no guidance as to whether NPCs get the free traits or not (I just give them to NPCs as needed, but usually only one rather than two.)

And traits give trait bonuses, so they don't stack with each other but do stack with everything else. Everybody involved in Pathfinder was crying out for a new type of bonus to go with the hundred it already has.
 

Sithlord

Adventurer
Traits are a great idea in theory - a couple of "half-feats" that you pick at character creation to add a minor bit of customisation to your character and also give a few role-playing hooks.

Of course, this being Pathfinder it was implemented in as complicated a way as possible.

Lots of categories of traits, including the Basic category which was split into 4 sub-categories, and you couldn't have two traits from the same category, except that for Basic ones you could have more than one so long as they were from different sub-categories (I have absolutely no idea why the sub-categories weren't just made into categories and the Basic part just ditched).

A category called race traits, which is something completely different to "racial traits" (which are what you get as your racial abilities per the races chapter). Then you get the "adopted" trait which allowed you to get the race trait from another race, making the distinction moot but also making people think they could get racial traits with it, such as stonecunning or darkvision. But you could in theory get things like a halfling brought up by orcs being able to get a bite attack or a very ugly (and therefore intimidating, since this is D&D) face.

And of course the rush to create as many traits as possible, so there are literally hundreds to choose from, some of which are objectively better than others (e.g. granting a +2 instead of +1), some of which are exactly the same as others but in a different category, and some of which are exactly the same as others and in the same category. And many of which are either useless in themselves or useless except in very specific circumstances that almost never happen.

And campaign traits, which are flat out better than other types of trait to reward you for picking something campaign-appropriate. But which are lumped in with all the other traits if you do a search on Archives of Nethys, so you then have to explain to your players that they can't pick those unless you are playing a specific campaign.

But technically one of your traits has to be a campaign trait, so are you going to design some for your homebrew?

And, of course, there is a feat to get extra traits. Which you can take more than once.

And "exemplar" traits which count as two traits (so how does that fit in with the requirement that one of your traits is a campaign trait?) which allow you to ignore the rule about no more than one trait from each and actually gives you benefits the more traits you have in a specific category.

And absolutely no guidance as to whether NPCs get the free traits or not (I just give them to NPCs as needed, but usually only one rather than two.)

And traits give trait bonuses, so they don't stack with each other but do stack with everything else. Everybody involved in Pathfinder was crying out for a new type of bonus to go with the hundred it already has.
I so loved many of the classes of pathfinder that I wish they would have had a pathfinder basic where everyone played one class with no multiclassing and a simpler list of feats. But paizo does not understand simple.
 

Voadam

Legend
I so loved many of the classes of pathfinder that I wish they would have had a pathfinder basic where everyone played one class with no multiclassing and a simpler list of feats. But paizo does not understand simple.
Well they did have their beginner box rule sets. I didn't delve into it in PF 1e but it was supposed to be a fairly stripped down more straightforward Pathfinder rules set. I see they have one for PF2e now too.
 

Sithlord

Adventurer
Well they did have their beginner box rule sets. I didn't delve into it in PF 1e but it was supposed to be a fairly stripped down more straightforward Pathfinder rules set. I see they have one for PF2e now too.
No. No. People say that over and over again. It was just level 1-3 or something like that for beginners. It was not a full 1-20 game. It was just an introductory low level adventure for new players.
 

Retreater

Legend
I so loved many of the classes of pathfinder that I wish they would have had a pathfinder basic where everyone played one class with no multiclassing and a simpler list of feats. But paizo does not understand simple.
Couldn't a GM just curate such a list, remove the options to streamline the experience?
 

Voadam

Legend
No. No. People say that over and over again. It was just level 1-3 or something like that for beginners. It was not a full 1-20 game. It was just an introductory low level adventure for new players.
Yeah the 1e beginner box covered 1-5. So very close to the E6 d20 variant. And more than the 1-3 Moldvay, and Mentzer Basic D&D sets. Moldvay did have the follow up Cook Expert set and Mentzer had the whole BECMI follow up sets though.

Also it had a transition book on how to go from beginner box rules to full Pathfinder which also included how to convert stuff from normal pathfinder into Beginner Box.

It looks like it did not use AoOs or combat maneuvers, so a lot like OSR D&D.

I would imagine extrapolating past level 5 the big issue would be iterative attacks and how to progress with some class features.
 

Ace

Adventurer
I love settings like tekumel. But one thing I learned is most players really don’t want to do the homework to play in such a system.
I can't get my players to read lore period and its not just "The Internet attention span" some people think it is Players who are into the lore in any game, video or TTRPG are a small subset of all players. This includes history. In one group I was in decades ago , i was the only player with the slightest notion of how to play Wooden Ships and Iron Men. I don't think the group who were decently educated had the slightest idea what was going on and nor did they care. That buy-in cost tends to reinforce D&D Standard play styles with the exception being Vampire back in the day.

In all honestly I care only about enough to play well which means if the setting is complex or strange, I can be a good player but it won't do anything for me. I've read Forgotten Realms books have a grasp of the basics but eh. its just D&D. Same as everyone else.

Same withe being a DM which is why I use homebrew, I made it, I can care about it.
 

I would like to run Rappan Athuk. Especially after getting the 5E physical copy for basically free from Frog God Games after purchasing it alongside 5E City of Brass and using a 50% off code promotion they were offering customers at the time.

Keyword being I would like to run Rappan Athuk

But after reading a portion of it................it's a mother of a beast.
 

Zaukrie

New Publisher
I would like to run Rappan Athuk. Especially after getting the 5E physical copy for basically free from Frog God Games after purchasing it alongside 5E City of Brass and using a 50% off code promotion they were offering customers at the time.

Keyword being I would like to run Rappan Athuk

But after reading a portion of it................it's a mother of a beast.
True! I can't imagine anyone running the whole of it.
 

Retreater

Legend
I've run a few levels of Rappan Athuk, but I'm honestly getting more mileage out of Barrowmaze currently.
For Rappan Athuk, I have stuck with the classic, original 3rd edition levels. There are many added from Rappan Athuk Reloaded ("RARE" for 3.5), and then more for the Pathfinder & 5e releases. As it is, 15 levels (and sublevels) is more than enough, and it's more consistent in tone than trying to run everything.
 

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top