Sorry kaorti, even having spent most of the last 3 years behind the GM screen, I just don't see you view as being valid. Even as a player in the 4 years before I took over majority DM duties, more often then not, I saw that it was the players who ended or destroyed the campaign, and not the GM.
A gaming group HAS to be a democracy, otherwise their will be bitter feelings and resentment. Especially resentment against the GM who forced a system the players did not want on them. I've been witness to 3 entire gaming groups completely destruct because the GM tried to force his system or his modifications to a system on the players.
If we don't play games that everyone is interested in playing, then there won't be any gaming, period.
No one is claiming that a GM should be able to run whatever system he wants and fuck the players cause they're garbage and dont matter.
Everyone needs to be at least partially invested in a system or it will fail at the table, but it will fail faster if the GM is not the most invested. The difference between the amount of preparation required by both sides should make this point obvious.
Sorry kaorti, even having spent most of the last 3 years behind the GM screen, I just don't see you view as being valid. Even as a player in the 4 years before I took over majority DM duties, more often then not, I saw that it was the players who ended or destroyed the campaign, and not the GM.
A gaming group HAS to be a democracy, otherwise their will be bitter feelings and resentment. Especially resentment against the GM who forced a system the players did not want on them. I've been witness to 3 entire gaming groups completely destruct because the GM tried to force his system or his modifications to a system on the players.
If we don't play games that everyone is interested in playing, then there won't be any gaming, period.
But pushing that the entire group must have it's first choice system is entirely unreasonable. Very few groups have identical preferences, and insisting that they do in order to play is silly.
The GM has a responsibility to create a game which the players can have fun in. He or she is in the best position to do this even when some or all of the players aren't using their first choice system. Conversely, the players need to be willing to play in a game which the GM enjoys, because the GM is entitled to have fun too. Choice of system has a larger impact on GM fun in D&D style GM and players games because the GM has to spend the most time working with the system, creating interesting encounters, building storylines which work with game mechanics and setting tone, and making rules calls during the game. It follows that the system has a greater impact on GM satisfaction than on player satisfaction. Especially since GMs are expected to wade through additional rulebooks and understand the system on a deeper level in order to make the proper rulings and keep the game running smoothly. This is a significant commitment of time and energy outside the regular game session.
Since GM satisfaction is more related to system, and since player satisfaction can be created by an invested GM in a broader array of systems, it follows that the GM's preference of system should be given more weight. I'm not saying that it isn't better if everyone loves the chosen system, or that players should be "forced" to play a system they dislike. I am saying that players need to have a broader list of games which they are willing to play, compared to a GMs list of games they want to run.
Players, even good ones, are more easily replaced than GMs, especially good GMs. That means that even if the players want a GM to run a system that the GM dislikes, it is irresponsible to get them to do so - GM burnout is a real problem, and it isn't fun for anyone.
Players aren't forced to play a game they don't like - they're free to leave, or to run their own games. You're presenting a false dichotomy between browbeating players into an un-fun game and caving to a group's popular demand for a system the GM finds un-fun.
In short, in a reasonable group, Vanguard's advice at the top of this page is good. Players need to keep an open mind about games, and GM's shouldn't be expected to run systems they dislike. If the differences can't be resolved by the group here, then that group probably shouldn't be gaming anyway. They're looking for different things and would probably have more fun playing with different groups.
edit: as a personal anecdote, I've had awesome, years long campaigns in a system I detest precisely because the GM was excited and invested. The worst games I've participated in have all been because the GM is uninvested in the game or fighting a system they dislike. In the latter case, everyone would have been better if if the group had moved on to a different game or dissolved.
kaorti on
0
Options
VanguardBut now the dream is over. And the insect is awake.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
AspectVoid, no one is arguing that GMs should jam games down their players' throats. The argument, as kaorti said, is that the GMs run more exciting games when the system inspires them.
More importantly, players who dislike a system can usually get over their issues with it easier than a GM can. Running a game is a lot of work. How much prep work does a player have to do in between gaming sessions? In most cases, none. This is why a player can put aside their differences with a system easier. Whatever those issues are, they only exist during the game. GMs have to figure out how to negotiate their problems with the system in between sessions.
If there is conflict about which system to play, it really is best to not even bother.
Really? THat's actually pretty awesome. Diagotsu was a far better villian than Fu Leng ever was. I think I need to pick up the newest version of the rules and give them a read, if that's the direction the setting took.
The link to the story in which it happened is here.
NOOOO IT BURNNSSSSS
Oops, that's probably not a great intro!
Hi! I'm a long-time DM of L5R 4th ed., and I'm also heavily involved in the L5R CCG. I've run kotei tournaments, won name a card tournaments, and placed in the top 24 of the second chance event at GenCon last year. I've also, more pertinent to the discussion, been running L5R campaigns since the 4th ed. core hit stands. I started playing at the end of L5R 3.5, and when possible I usually play Togashi monks because they're sweet. My reaction earlier was because I damn near quit L5R after reading that linked fiction. The end of Celestial Edition was, charitably speaking, a goddamned train wreck. Characters died for no real reason, without any sense of tragedy or drama, and the whole arc was one huge wasted opportunity. It's rare that I get actually angry over PnP materials, but holy crap did the whole Goddesses series just suck ass.
Luckily for the game, the setting's largely moved into the Imperial Colonies with a mostly new story team and those, at least, have been pretty great end to end. If you're really interested in the game's lore, I'd recommend reading the death fiction of Isawa Mizuhiko, the first part of which is here: http://www.l5r.com/2012/01/06/judgment-part-1/ It's really truly the best fiction of Celestial Edition and, in my opinion, the real end cap to the arc and much of old L5R. The last heroes of the Clan War died in Celestial Edition, with Ginawa in that fiction being the last to go, and it sets up a ton of amazing implications.
While I like certain elements of the timeline neutrality 4th ed. has, I feel like it's lost a lot of the fun insanity of previous editions. I have most of the Way of books (missing, as far as a I know, Bearers of Jade, Way of the Shadow and Way of the Ninja) as well as the 2nd ed. core books and the contrast in ideas is stark. 4th Edition L5R is safer, and more balanced, but it's also not sure what it wants to be. The Matsu, for example, want a map-based combat system which the game doesn't really allow for or handle well. The schools as presented are mostly crap, and what they did to the Yoritomo bushi school should be considered a war crime. Whomever okay'd that shit should be tried in the Hague, is what I'm saying. A lot, and I mean a LOT, of flavor was excised in the name of balance but my problem is that their version of balance isn't really fun. I'm also of the opinion that L5R needs a social combat mechanic because 25% of a given's Clan schools are based around it and there's nothing there for it besides the usual PnP mind control results.
I'd say it's 70% of the GM's job to be enthusiastic about the campaign. After all this is the guy deciding on the setting, system and judgment calls (where the game system isn't clear). If the GM is miserable than the campaign isn't going to fair well.
The other 30% is up to the players. They have to at least like setting. Usually, they can get over the system not being what they want and can more or less deal with the judgment calls (provided the GM isn't being a dick). Even here you don't need all players picking up their fair share of that 30%. I've been in games where one well played character get get things rolling if the GM is invested in the game, while having one or two players being super quiet and doing the bare minimum.
Just had a crazy thought: My (so-far) only spellcaster in the campaign is an expert on the Mutants & Masterminds system, DC Adventures, all that stuff. I was thinking I might let him craft spells using the power-construction rules from DC Adventures, with the following rules:
1) X power points per spell level
2) Subject to the DM's whim if he concocts anything especially game-breaking
3) In-game costs of the research to be determined based on the nature of the spell -- he might need to seek out specific materials, spend weeks working on it, etc.
Anybody tried this before?
0
Options
VanguardBut now the dream is over. And the insect is awake.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
I think I may pick up the first edition books. Not the reprints, but the old ones with the orange spine. I can snag them for about $60, some in excellent condition.
So I'm almost sold on the new Marvel Heroic RPG. The Doom Pool mechanic alone sounds worth the price of admission.
But I'm mostly interested in running campaigns with custom characters. Does it work as well for that, or are you expected to be playing established heroes?
You... You could run a trial campaign here on the boards to find out. You know. For science.
So I'm almost sold on the new Marvel Heroic RPG. The Doom Pool mechanic alone sounds worth the price of admission.
But I'm mostly interested in running campaigns with custom characters. Does it work as well for that, or are you expected to be playing established heroes?
The MHR game I'm running with my group is all custom characters, with one of my players playing the part of resident NPC and jumping in when necessary as Iron Man, SHIELD Agent #3, etc. Using custom characters works fine and there are no problems mixing them with established heroes if you're interested in doing that.
These are the point-buy rules I used for my game. They're a modified version of some rules posted online somewhere. Using these rules should get you a character roughly equal in power to any of the heroes in the book (tending towards somewhat less powerful), with the exception of Wolverine (who is way over-budget, but that's Wolverine for you).
The great thing about MHR's single resolution mechanic (roll your dice, pick two for the total, one for the effect) is that you can create literally anything you can think of and the system won't even blink. Writing up a character with reality-manipulating powers controlled by alien technology that activates his latent mutant abilities is no harder than writing up a guy with super-strength and rocket boots.
So I'm almost sold on the new Marvel Heroic RPG. The Doom Pool mechanic alone sounds worth the price of admission.
But I'm mostly interested in running campaigns with custom characters. Does it work as well for that, or are you expected to be playing established heroes?
You... You could run a trial campaign here on the boards to find out. You know. For science.
I two campaigns cooking. The first is a series of one shots that will probably be Call of Cthulhu. The second is MHR, and may be... unnatural.
Choose, but choose wisely.
I... I think I have to hear all about this unnatural MHR campaign please sir.
0
Options
tzeentchlingDoctor of RocksOaklandRegistered Userregular
So I'm almost sold on the new Marvel Heroic RPG. The Doom Pool mechanic alone sounds worth the price of admission.
But I'm mostly interested in running campaigns with custom characters. Does it work as well for that, or are you expected to be playing established heroes?
You... You could run a trial campaign here on the boards to find out. You know. For science.
I two campaigns cooking. The first is a series of one shots that will probably be Call of Cthulhu. The second is MHR, and may be... unnatural.
Choose, but choose wisely.
Likewise in support of the MHR campaign! I may even attempt to port the character I made in Denada's "Let's Read" of the older version, since I really do like how she turned out.
So I'm almost sold on the new Marvel Heroic RPG. The Doom Pool mechanic alone sounds worth the price of admission.
But I'm mostly interested in running campaigns with custom characters. Does it work as well for that, or are you expected to be playing established heroes?
You... You could run a trial campaign here on the boards to find out. You know. For science.
I two campaigns cooking. The first is a series of one shots that will probably be Call of Cthulhu. The second is MHR, and may be... unnatural.
Choose, but choose wisely.
Likewise in support of the MHR campaign! I may even attempt to port the character I made in Denada's "Let's Read" of the older version, since I really do like how she turned out.
Is this a vote? I've been dying to see how MHR actually plays. Hearing people talk about it has me very interested about it and reading the rulebook only made me more intrigued.
I have a hard-on for random tables right now. Currently filling up an Evernote account with tables for every conceivable situation. My favorite so far is labeled, "What the hell is that?" It's a series of d12 lists (from the blog I linked earlier) containing weird shit that could potentially be seen in different environments.
So thread, what is your favorite table?
Dark Heresy critical damage tables, easily. Key moments:
The rifle guy headshotting two enemies at once.
Smearing the batleground with so much gore it becomes hard to move without slipping.
At the climax of the last mission, the Psyker set the rifle guy on fire due to a long-held grudge.* It was such a powerful attack it cooked all his grenades and blew a hole in the side of the spacecraft.
* (Explanatory anecdote)
He held it right until the end of the campaign, when Rifle Guy decided to kill me because of a grudge borne from the same prior event (involving mind-switching, unlicenced Psykic powers and me running away to return disguised as my own father), and the Guardsman who had managed to stay uncorrupted all the way through simultaneously decided that we were all heretics and needed to be executed. Guardsman gets sucked out of the first hull breach, and rifle guy and I tumble into the cockpit.
Rifle guy: "Psyker, help me, Rhesus is a heretic!"
Psyker: "Just a minute... *rolls* Yeah, you're on fire, Rifle Guy."
Rifle Guy: "You bastar *KABOOM*"
Psyker: "Revenge! Oh shi- *Sucked into space*"
Basically, the type of shit you can only get away with right at the end of the campaign when you know that the other guys will take it with good grace.
So I'm almost sold on the new Marvel Heroic RPG. The Doom Pool mechanic alone sounds worth the price of admission.
But I'm mostly interested in running campaigns with custom characters. Does it work as well for that, or are you expected to be playing established heroes?
You... You could run a trial campaign here on the boards to find out. You know. For science.
I two campaigns cooking. The first is a series of one shots that will probably be Call of Cthulhu. The second is MHR, and may be... unnatural.
Choose, but choose wisely.
I... I think I have to hear all about this unnatural MHR campaign please sir.
I was thinking about kicking off a (potentially horror/dark) one shot of MHR using the optional random data file generation rules (tzeentchling's generated character from Denada's game would qualify). If it goes really well, it (or an offshoot) could be expanded to a full campaign.
There's something really appealing about random rolls, isn't there? If you decide to do this on the boards (and no pressure, mind you, 'cause DMing is obviously not something to do if you're not enthusiastic about it) I'd definitely be up for playing.
I'm intending to use the resolution mechanics from MHR as a base for a custom PbP Death Note game I'll be running here, I really like em. Will be simplified and totally handled behind the scenes though.
It is why it is taking longer than I planned now though.
Alright, sorted out my issues with the DM regarding my future Literal Bear Style Kung Fu guy. He had been thinking that I was asking to get ALL the monk powers up to my druid+monk level the moment I change classes. I was a little dumbfounded. He's actually okay with me using my Druid+Monk BAB for Flurry of Blows. I think he thought it was obvious... and I'd think so, too, if there weren't a Vocal Group On The Internet that insists your Flurry BAB is only what the chart in the book says, based on ONLY your monk level.
Sigh.
Anyway, we had our first session, and my greatest contribution so far has been my badass dog, Gronnigan. He can take a hit as well as the Lithorian Barbarian, and does as much damage as any of the fighters. Nerf dogs!
and I'd think so, too, if there weren't a Vocal Group On The Internet that insists your Flurry BAB is only what the chart in the book says, based on ONLY your monk level.
wat
Jesus some people are bad at rules, this isn't ambiguous at all in the actual rules.
D&D is trying to be helpful with "here are the number of attacks and the mods baked in for your monk of level X" in the table and people think that is now some kind of rule. :rotate:
Howdy CF dudes: I don't really post here--mainly lurk from time-to-time--but I've been real excited about Burning Wheel and don't have anyone to play it with in-person. I thought I might inquire how one does so using the internet.
Ideally I'd want to do something real crazy, and by that I mean attempting Burning Planescape, but I know that is probably biting off more than I can chew. I'd still run the shit out of it or do a character: play-by-post, Google+, I don't give a shit.
Would any of all y'all be into that? Is Burning Planescape too crazy? I realize that figuring out lifepaths might become insane, but damn it, it just sounds like a bitching idea.
So I'm almost sold on the new Marvel Heroic RPG. The Doom Pool mechanic alone sounds worth the price of admission.
But I'm mostly interested in running campaigns with custom characters. Does it work as well for that, or are you expected to be playing established heroes?
You... You could run a trial campaign here on the boards to find out. You know. For science.
I two campaigns cooking. The first is a series of one shots that will probably be Call of Cthulhu. The second is MHR, and may be... unnatural.
Choose, but choose wisely.
I... I think I have to hear all about this unnatural MHR campaign please sir.
I was thinking about kicking off a (potentially horror/dark) one shot of MHR using the optional random data file generation rules (tzeentchling's generated character from Denada's game would qualify). If it goes really well, it (or an offshoot) could be expanded to a full campaign.
So just for giggles I bought MHR this afternoon and rolled up a character. Ended up with a mutant master spy with a mental blast that can melt a car and the ability to control minds to the point that my hero can permanently reconfigure someone's personality. This system is awesome fun.
Also, @Dracula : Planescape anything is wonderful and insane and should be encouraged whenever possible.
Cheers for the heads up! It may have only been $1.50 saved but I was going to pick Sailor's on the Starless Sea up at some point soon so it might as well be now.
I'm also casting my eyes over DCC and one of the GUMSHOE Core books (Esoterrorists or Fear Itself).
Can somebody tell me, the Traveller Book Zero...is it actually a useful introduction to the system? I remember hearing that you could actually die during character creations, and that sounds like a system I'd be interested in studying.
(Now, before you laugh about the Veggie Patch and such, I'm supposed to run a lot of one-shots for my local gaming club this school year, and I want some light-hearted, off-the-wall stuff I can surprise people with. Things to get people thinking outside the box about RPGs again, since our club has been mired down in "nothing but D&D" for some time now.)
If you're going to intersperse random one-offs into your game time, Everyone is John is always fun, especially when the players haven't played it before.
"The psychedelic mind is a higher dimensional mind, it is not fit for three dimensional space time."
- Terence McKenna
0
Options
tzeentchlingDoctor of RocksOaklandRegistered Userregular
Orpheus is an interesting choice! It reminds me a bit of Geist, another of WW's roleplaying games that's actually quite fun and a good concept.
So, WW just dropped its release schedule for the next year- and it's way more extensive than I anticipated. New Demon next year, three Mummy supplements, a book on Left-Handed legacies for Mage, Exalted 3rd edition, all kinds of interesting stuff.
I'm really excited for a new Demon. Demon: The Fallen was my favorite oWoD game.
Professor Phobos on
0
Options
VanguardBut now the dream is over. And the insect is awake.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
I am a huge proponent of DCC RPG. My blog pretty much revolves around it at the moment. That being said, if you're burned out on Swords and Sorcery at the moment, it may not be the game for you. When you're ready to come back, however, definitely snag it.
Alright, so, after having picked up the MHR book, I've got a couple questions, because their in-book examples leave a little to be desired..
My first question is in regards to Limits. Every single example in the book involves a Limit that involves getting a PP. However, there are a few Limits that do not.
So..if I'm dealing with Storm, whose Limit is:
Limit: Emotional Tempest. Change any Goddess of the Storm power into a complication and recover emotional stress equal to that power’s die size. Activate an opportunity or remove the complication to recover the power.
Storm herself can activate it by turning it into a complication and recovering emotional stress. No PP. So, as Watcher, can I still activate this Limit against her? Is the choice then "Either you recover the emotional stress or I spend a doom die?" rather than "Either you gain a PP or I spend a doom die?"?
And a clarification on Mutant,
Limit: Mutant. Earn 1 PP when affected by mutant-specific Milestones and tech.
So, let's say Storm gets a complication that is an collar that negates Mutant abilities. Her simply having that Limit makes her vulnerable to the complication in the first place, and then she simply claims the plot point, right? There's no innate power shut-down or anything, its more just to mark that particular trait of her potential weakness, correct?
Second questions have to do with complications/assets.
So, the book is kind of vague. It says you can spend a PP to allow the Complication/Asset to last until the end of the next Action Scene. However, it says without that, that a Complication/Asset lasts until the end of the "current roll or conflict"...so, is it just based on the discretion of the Watcher and the situation?
So, in the book there's an example of Colossus wrapping a Hellfire guard in an iron bar. Does that just last until the next hero utilizes it, or does it last until the Hellfire guard (at which point he just wriggles free?) or someone else rolls against it to step it down/remove it?
And then there's a an example of Emma Frost smashing the ground and unbalancing a Sentinel. In that case, her asset only lasts a single roll.
So, pretty much, the only balance there is the creativity of the heroes? If Emma could have figured out something more long-lasting, like Colossus's situation, it could have lasted until the end of the scene or until rolled against?
And apparently Complications/Assets are just to be fancy, right? Because, it seems like a D10 asset wouldn't be any more effective than inflicting D10 physical stress. And "stressing out" someone via Complications is pretty much the same as any other way of doing it?
It seems like a cool system, I just want to make sure I'm grasping it.
Origin for Dragon Age: Inquisition Shenanigans: Inksplat776
So, WW just dropped its release schedule for the next year- and it's way more extensive than I anticipated. New Demon next year, three Mummy supplements, a book on Left-Handed legacies for Mage, Exalted 3rd edition, all kinds of interesting stuff.
I hate to resort to memetics, but...
At least the flame-wars will keep me entertained until it comes out.
PMAvers on
COME FORTH, AMATERASU! - Switch Friend Code SW-5465-2458-5696 - Twitch
Not an Exalted fan personally, but the designers are saying the right things, given the problems even Exalted fans acknowledge is present in the system as it stands.
(Now, before you laugh about the Veggie Patch and such, I'm supposed to run a lot of one-shots for my local gaming club this school year, and I want some light-hearted, off-the-wall stuff I can surprise people with. Things to get people thinking outside the box about RPGs again, since our club has been mired down in "nothing but D&D" for some time now.)
Have you played Traveler before?
If you haven't, I'd recommend looking at it and playing a one shot before buying. It serves a pretty niche audience, and very few people I know (myself included) have enjoyed it. Those who do like it, though, swear by it.
Hey, guys, I'd like some feedback on some ideas of a Rogue Trader game I'm running. Details and setup in the Help and Advice forum here. Figured people here would be positioned to give good advice.
Invictus on
Generalísimo de Fuerzas Armadas de la República Argentina
0
Options
ElldrenIs a woman dammitceterum censeoRegistered Userregular
Not an Exalted fan personally, but the designers are saying the right things, given the problems even Exalted fans acknowledge is present in the system as it stands.
Hm. MHR seems like it'd be fun for a whole lot of settings. I think a Lovecraftian Horror game would work super well, given you've got Physical/Mental/Emotional stresses and traumas, plus the Doom Pool.
Edit: Oh, or Avatar. Would work really well to represent Benders.
InkSplat on
Origin for Dragon Age: Inquisition Shenanigans: Inksplat776
Going to throw this request out here again, I think it got buried last time.
What game systems to you recommend for one shots? I'm looking for systems that are easy to set up, can be run in a session, and will introduce new concepts and ways of playing to my group. We have about 3 months worth of sessions without a full crew, and we are not running the main campaign while we are missing people. Instead I'd like to give as many different systems as possible a one shot.
Going to throw this request out here again, I think it got buried last time.
What game systems to you recommend for one shots? I'm looking for systems that are easy to set up, can be run in a session, and will introduce new concepts and ways of playing to my group. We have about 3 months worth of sessions without a full crew, and we are not running the main campaign while we are missing people. Instead I'd like to give as many different systems as possible a one shot.
I find Dread to be a lot of fun for one-shots. All you need is a Jenga set!
Origin for Dragon Age: Inquisition Shenanigans: Inksplat776
Posts
A gaming group HAS to be a democracy, otherwise their will be bitter feelings and resentment. Especially resentment against the GM who forced a system the players did not want on them. I've been witness to 3 entire gaming groups completely destruct because the GM tried to force his system or his modifications to a system on the players.
If we don't play games that everyone is interested in playing, then there won't be any gaming, period.
Everyone needs to be at least partially invested in a system or it will fail at the table, but it will fail faster if the GM is not the most invested. The difference between the amount of preparation required by both sides should make this point obvious.
But pushing that the entire group must have it's first choice system is entirely unreasonable. Very few groups have identical preferences, and insisting that they do in order to play is silly.
The GM has a responsibility to create a game which the players can have fun in. He or she is in the best position to do this even when some or all of the players aren't using their first choice system. Conversely, the players need to be willing to play in a game which the GM enjoys, because the GM is entitled to have fun too. Choice of system has a larger impact on GM fun in D&D style GM and players games because the GM has to spend the most time working with the system, creating interesting encounters, building storylines which work with game mechanics and setting tone, and making rules calls during the game. It follows that the system has a greater impact on GM satisfaction than on player satisfaction. Especially since GMs are expected to wade through additional rulebooks and understand the system on a deeper level in order to make the proper rulings and keep the game running smoothly. This is a significant commitment of time and energy outside the regular game session.
Since GM satisfaction is more related to system, and since player satisfaction can be created by an invested GM in a broader array of systems, it follows that the GM's preference of system should be given more weight. I'm not saying that it isn't better if everyone loves the chosen system, or that players should be "forced" to play a system they dislike. I am saying that players need to have a broader list of games which they are willing to play, compared to a GMs list of games they want to run.
Players, even good ones, are more easily replaced than GMs, especially good GMs. That means that even if the players want a GM to run a system that the GM dislikes, it is irresponsible to get them to do so - GM burnout is a real problem, and it isn't fun for anyone.
Players aren't forced to play a game they don't like - they're free to leave, or to run their own games. You're presenting a false dichotomy between browbeating players into an un-fun game and caving to a group's popular demand for a system the GM finds un-fun.
In short, in a reasonable group, Vanguard's advice at the top of this page is good. Players need to keep an open mind about games, and GM's shouldn't be expected to run systems they dislike. If the differences can't be resolved by the group here, then that group probably shouldn't be gaming anyway. They're looking for different things and would probably have more fun playing with different groups.
edit: as a personal anecdote, I've had awesome, years long campaigns in a system I detest precisely because the GM was excited and invested. The worst games I've participated in have all been because the GM is uninvested in the game or fighting a system they dislike. In the latter case, everyone would have been better if if the group had moved on to a different game or dissolved.
More importantly, players who dislike a system can usually get over their issues with it easier than a GM can. Running a game is a lot of work. How much prep work does a player have to do in between gaming sessions? In most cases, none. This is why a player can put aside their differences with a system easier. Whatever those issues are, they only exist during the game. GMs have to figure out how to negotiate their problems with the system in between sessions.
If there is conflict about which system to play, it really is best to not even bother.
NOOOO IT BURNNSSSSS
Oops, that's probably not a great intro!
Hi! I'm a long-time DM of L5R 4th ed., and I'm also heavily involved in the L5R CCG. I've run kotei tournaments, won name a card tournaments, and placed in the top 24 of the second chance event at GenCon last year. I've also, more pertinent to the discussion, been running L5R campaigns since the 4th ed. core hit stands. I started playing at the end of L5R 3.5, and when possible I usually play Togashi monks because they're sweet. My reaction earlier was because I damn near quit L5R after reading that linked fiction. The end of Celestial Edition was, charitably speaking, a goddamned train wreck. Characters died for no real reason, without any sense of tragedy or drama, and the whole arc was one huge wasted opportunity. It's rare that I get actually angry over PnP materials, but holy crap did the whole Goddesses series just suck ass.
Luckily for the game, the setting's largely moved into the Imperial Colonies with a mostly new story team and those, at least, have been pretty great end to end. If you're really interested in the game's lore, I'd recommend reading the death fiction of Isawa Mizuhiko, the first part of which is here: http://www.l5r.com/2012/01/06/judgment-part-1/ It's really truly the best fiction of Celestial Edition and, in my opinion, the real end cap to the arc and much of old L5R. The last heroes of the Clan War died in Celestial Edition, with Ginawa in that fiction being the last to go, and it sets up a ton of amazing implications.
While I like certain elements of the timeline neutrality 4th ed. has, I feel like it's lost a lot of the fun insanity of previous editions. I have most of the Way of books (missing, as far as a I know, Bearers of Jade, Way of the Shadow and Way of the Ninja) as well as the 2nd ed. core books and the contrast in ideas is stark. 4th Edition L5R is safer, and more balanced, but it's also not sure what it wants to be. The Matsu, for example, want a map-based combat system which the game doesn't really allow for or handle well. The schools as presented are mostly crap, and what they did to the Yoritomo bushi school should be considered a war crime. Whomever okay'd that shit should be tried in the Hague, is what I'm saying. A lot, and I mean a LOT, of flavor was excised in the name of balance but my problem is that their version of balance isn't really fun. I'm also of the opinion that L5R needs a social combat mechanic because 25% of a given's Clan schools are based around it and there's nothing there for it besides the usual PnP mind control results.
The other 30% is up to the players. They have to at least like setting. Usually, they can get over the system not being what they want and can more or less deal with the judgment calls (provided the GM isn't being a dick). Even here you don't need all players picking up their fair share of that 30%. I've been in games where one well played character get get things rolling if the GM is invested in the game, while having one or two players being super quiet and doing the bare minimum.
battletag: Millin#1360
Nice chart to figure out how honest a news source is.
1) X power points per spell level
2) Subject to the DM's whim if he concocts anything especially game-breaking
3) In-game costs of the research to be determined based on the nature of the spell -- he might need to seek out specific materials, spend weeks working on it, etc.
Anybody tried this before?
You... You could run a trial campaign here on the boards to find out. You know. For science.
The MHR game I'm running with my group is all custom characters, with one of my players playing the part of resident NPC and jumping in when necessary as Iron Man, SHIELD Agent #3, etc. Using custom characters works fine and there are no problems mixing them with established heroes if you're interested in doing that.
These are the point-buy rules I used for my game. They're a modified version of some rules posted online somewhere. Using these rules should get you a character roughly equal in power to any of the heroes in the book (tending towards somewhat less powerful), with the exception of Wolverine (who is way over-budget, but that's Wolverine for you).
The great thing about MHR's single resolution mechanic (roll your dice, pick two for the total, one for the effect) is that you can create literally anything you can think of and the system won't even blink. Writing up a character with reality-manipulating powers controlled by alien technology that activates his latent mutant abilities is no harder than writing up a guy with super-strength and rocket boots.
I... I think I have to hear all about this unnatural MHR campaign please sir.
Likewise in support of the MHR campaign! I may even attempt to port the character I made in Denada's "Let's Read" of the older version, since I really do like how she turned out.
Is this a vote? I've been dying to see how MHR actually plays. Hearing people talk about it has me very interested about it and reading the rulebook only made me more intrigued.
Dark Heresy critical damage tables, easily. Key moments:
The rifle guy headshotting two enemies at once.
Smearing the batleground with so much gore it becomes hard to move without slipping.
At the climax of the last mission, the Psyker set the rifle guy on fire due to a long-held grudge.* It was such a powerful attack it cooked all his grenades and blew a hole in the side of the spacecraft.
* (Explanatory anecdote)
Rifle guy: "Psyker, help me, Rhesus is a heretic!"
Psyker: "Just a minute... *rolls* Yeah, you're on fire, Rifle Guy."
Rifle Guy: "You bastar *KABOOM*"
Psyker: "Revenge! Oh shi- *Sucked into space*"
Basically, the type of shit you can only get away with right at the end of the campaign when you know that the other guys will take it with good grace.
There's something really appealing about random rolls, isn't there? If you decide to do this on the boards (and no pressure, mind you, 'cause DMing is obviously not something to do if you're not enthusiastic about it) I'd definitely be up for playing.
It is why it is taking longer than I planned now though.
Sigh.
Anyway, we had our first session, and my greatest contribution so far has been my badass dog, Gronnigan. He can take a hit as well as the Lithorian Barbarian, and does as much damage as any of the fighters. Nerf dogs!
wat
Jesus some people are bad at rules, this isn't ambiguous at all in the actual rules.
D&D is trying to be helpful with "here are the number of attacks and the mods baked in for your monk of level X" in the table and people think that is now some kind of rule. :rotate:
Ideally I'd want to do something real crazy, and by that I mean attempting Burning Planescape, but I know that is probably biting off more than I can chew. I'd still run the shit out of it or do a character: play-by-post, Google+, I don't give a shit.
Would any of all y'all be into that? Is Burning Planescape too crazy? I realize that figuring out lifepaths might become insane, but damn it, it just sounds like a bitching idea.
So just for giggles I bought MHR this afternoon and rolled up a character. Ended up with a mutant master spy with a mental blast that can melt a car and the ability to control minds to the point that my hero can permanently reconfigure someone's personality. This system is awesome fun.
Also, @Dracula : Planescape anything is wonderful and insane and should be encouraged whenever possible.
Can somebody tell me, the Traveller Book Zero...is it actually a useful introduction to the system? I remember hearing that you could actually die during character creations, and that sounds like a system I'd be interested in studying.
DCC
Traveler: Book Zero
Marvel Heroic
Mythic
Orpheus
The Veggie Patch
Cthulhu For President
Historia Rodentia
Part-Time Gods
STALKER
(Now, before you laugh about the Veggie Patch and such, I'm supposed to run a lot of one-shots for my local gaming club this school year, and I want some light-hearted, off-the-wall stuff I can surprise people with. Things to get people thinking outside the box about RPGs again, since our club has been mired down in "nothing but D&D" for some time now.)
- Terence McKenna
I'm really excited for a new Demon. Demon: The Fallen was my favorite oWoD game.
My first question is in regards to Limits. Every single example in the book involves a Limit that involves getting a PP. However, there are a few Limits that do not.
Limit: Emotional Tempest. Change any Goddess of the Storm power into a complication and recover emotional stress equal to that power’s die size. Activate an opportunity or remove the complication to recover the power.
Storm herself can activate it by turning it into a complication and recovering emotional stress. No PP. So, as Watcher, can I still activate this Limit against her? Is the choice then "Either you recover the emotional stress or I spend a doom die?" rather than "Either you gain a PP or I spend a doom die?"?
And a clarification on Mutant,
Limit: Mutant. Earn 1 PP when affected by mutant-specific Milestones and tech.
So, let's say Storm gets a complication that is an collar that negates Mutant abilities. Her simply having that Limit makes her vulnerable to the complication in the first place, and then she simply claims the plot point, right? There's no innate power shut-down or anything, its more just to mark that particular trait of her potential weakness, correct?
Second questions have to do with complications/assets.
So, in the book there's an example of Colossus wrapping a Hellfire guard in an iron bar. Does that just last until the next hero utilizes it, or does it last until the Hellfire guard (at which point he just wriggles free?) or someone else rolls against it to step it down/remove it?
And then there's a an example of Emma Frost smashing the ground and unbalancing a Sentinel. In that case, her asset only lasts a single roll.
So, pretty much, the only balance there is the creativity of the heroes? If Emma could have figured out something more long-lasting, like Colossus's situation, it could have lasted until the end of the scene or until rolled against?
And apparently Complications/Assets are just to be fancy, right? Because, it seems like a D10 asset wouldn't be any more effective than inflicting D10 physical stress. And "stressing out" someone via Complications is pretty much the same as any other way of doing it?
It seems like a cool system, I just want to make sure I'm grasping it.
I hate to resort to memetics, but...
At least the flame-wars will keep me entertained until it comes out.
COME FORTH, AMATERASU! - Switch Friend Code SW-5465-2458-5696 - Twitch
Have you played Traveler before?
If you haven't, I'd recommend looking at it and playing a one shot before buying. It serves a pretty niche audience, and very few people I know (myself included) have enjoyed it. Those who do like it, though, swear by it.
Could you elaborate on what they are saying?
Edit: Oh, or Avatar. Would work really well to represent Benders.
One of my players (a bard) has elected to make his One Unique Thing, "Pacifist".
This shit's gonna get real.
What game systems to you recommend for one shots? I'm looking for systems that are easy to set up, can be run in a session, and will introduce new concepts and ways of playing to my group. We have about 3 months worth of sessions without a full crew, and we are not running the main campaign while we are missing people. Instead I'd like to give as many different systems as possible a one shot.
I find Dread to be a lot of fun for one-shots. All you need is a Jenga set!