But regardless of the roll outcome, that door is now unlocked. So on some level, the character succeeded at the thing. Their ability to pick the lock was never in question, only whether it would work out the way they hoped.
But regardless of the roll outcome, that door is now unlocked. So on some level, the character succeeded at the thing. Their ability to pick the lock was never in question, only whether it would work out the way they hoped.
Well no, in that "Before the guards arrive scenario" the door may or may not be unlocked as the guards discovered them. You can certainly set the scene up either way but the door doesn't have to be unlocked for it to be failing forward. If the door is still locked the scene is no longer about the door, it is about the lock picker escaping some guards now. That can just be a solid failure in the break in attempt, though you need to have the next higher level situation change and not just have the thief return the next night to keep failing forward.
Hmm. That is the case, though it comes down to the GM's feelings about what best pushes the game state forward at that point. Is it unlocking the door just as the guards show up and see, or is it being chased off without unlocking the door?
Either way, the roll isn't a direct measure of the skill of the character so much as an abstraction of the scenario surrounding it. Which is why a lot of people get hung up on the concept of failing forward and see it as a squishy resolution methodology.
Hmm. That is the case, though it comes down to the GM's feelings about what best pushes the game state forward at that point. Is it unlocking the door just as the guards show up and see, or is it being chased off without unlocking the door?
Either way, the roll isn't a direct measure of the skill of the character so much as an abstraction of the scenario surrounding it. Which is why a lot of people get hung up on the concept of failing forward and see it as a squishy resolution methodology.
Yea, no matter how the resolution plays out, I think the end goal is not to just let the Rogue sit there and make 20 lockpick checks until he succeeds or the DM decides that the lock breaks and now what.
Hmm. That is the case, though it comes down to the GM's feelings about what best pushes the game state forward at that point. Is it unlocking the door just as the guards show up and see, or is it being chased off without unlocking the door?
Either way, the roll isn't a direct measure of the skill of the character so much as an abstraction of the scenario surrounding it. Which is why a lot of people get hung up on the concept of failing forward and see it as a squishy resolution methodology.
Yea, no matter how the resolution plays out, I think the end goal is not to just let the Rogue sit there and make 20 lockpick checks until he succeeds or the DM decides that the lock breaks and now what.
I think "the lock breaks" is fine if the roll is a 1 or some sort of critical failure. I like to do a spectrum of success/fails with my games, just because it gives more options/feels more real. If you never come across a dead end, you don't get to know true failure or truly feel the weight of your choices.
Hmm. That is the case, though it comes down to the GM's feelings about what best pushes the game state forward at that point. Is it unlocking the door just as the guards show up and see, or is it being chased off without unlocking the door?
Either way, the roll isn't a direct measure of the skill of the character so much as an abstraction of the scenario surrounding it. Which is why a lot of people get hung up on the concept of failing forward and see it as a squishy resolution methodology.
Yea, no matter how the resolution plays out, I think the end goal is not to just let the Rogue sit there and make 20 lockpick checks until he succeeds or the DM decides that the lock breaks and now what.
I think "the lock breaks" is fine if the roll is a 1 or some sort of critical failure. I like to do a spectrum of success/fails with my games, just because it gives more options/feels more real. If you never come across a dead end, you don't get to know true failure or truly feel the weight of your choices.
Very true, just as DM you gotta be able to make sure at that point that there is something for that rogue to do at that point, no matter how ill advised it is for the player. Just gotta make sure the setting is fleshed out enough to lead the player down other avenues. Just like information wants to be free, treasure wants to be looted. I like looking towards Deus Ex for inspiration for level design, because in that game there is rarely just one avenue to gain entrance to somewhere. You have keycards, lockpicks, air vents etc...
On a side note, I've broken out Campaign cartographer to make the map for my Gamma World campaign and fuck I've completely forgotten how to use this damn thing.
admanbunionize your workplaceSeattle, WARegistered Userregular
What's interesting is that OSR designers and narrative designers both got to the idea that a roll should never happen without a consequence, but OSR got to it with "well it was obvious if you ever played with [insert old-school GM that they played with]" whereas narrative got to it with "what if we wrote it in the rules?" OSR games end up being really well-designed if you already know how to play them, while narrative games teach you how to play them.
Then you have D&D in the middle which, instead of just teaching DMs how to run D&D, invented the fucking Take 10 and Take 20 rules which just make people more confused and create more problems.
I like the lock picking example because I've found the idea that failure should mean you alert the enemies in side, or attract nearby guards is an easy revelation for new GMs that will push them to the next level of GMing. But sometimes not getting that door open is the interesting consequence of failure, and avoiding that at all cost because of the fail forward lesson can itself be bad GMing.
Normally in that example though, 'unlocking the lock' is synonymous with 'doing the one thing that moves the story along'.
So 'breaking the lock' becomes 'I guess you guys can't progress and have another adventure elsewhere?'.
It's fine to break the lock if alternate solutions present themselves (break down the door) or if there are alternate ways around the scenario (climb through a window).
But if opening the lock is the one thing that progresses the story, then having the player fail at doing it just kills the story.
And that's a mistake that's probably as common as having the player pick the lock several times (especially with critical fails).
So I think saying that breaking the lock is interesting is rather too reductive.
It's only interesting if there's something else that can be done instead.
Normally in that example though, 'unlocking the lock' is synonymous with 'doing the one thing that moves the story along'.
So 'breaking the lock' becomes 'I guess you guys can't progress and have another adventure elsewhere?'.
It's fine to break the lock if alternate solutions present themselves (break down the door) or if there are alternate ways around the scenario (climb through a window).
But if opening the lock is the one thing that progresses the story, then having the player fail at doing it just kills the story.
And that's a mistake that's probably as common as having the player pick the lock several times (especially with critical fails).
So I think saying that breaking the lock is interesting is rather too reductive.
It's only interesting if there's something else that can be done instead.
Although, if my DM told me the lock breaks, and I know I have to get through the door, the next option becomes the less stealthy way of opening the door.
"I will write your name in the ruin of them. I will paint you across history in the color of their blood."
admanbunionize your workplaceSeattle, WARegistered Userregular
Exactly. Imagine a scenario where there's one door into the room where the evil vizier is performing his horrible ritual on your handsome prince. The door is still your only way through, but failing to pick the lock doesn't stop the action, it changes the situation (which is really what we want out of all rolls) -- it escalates the tension, you have less time, and when the barbarian slams their body against the door the vizier now knows you're coming. When that fails too and you switch to going at it with axes, and finally a fireball (geez guys how badly do your dice suck?) All of those "you fail, what now?" responses have known, dangerous consequences.
I tend not to roll things related to barrier obstacles like doors/climbing/whatever provided the PC's have a passable skill level and sensible equipment.
Unless there's another obstacle in the scene (guards, a time limit, etc.) there's usually not much gained by asking heroic adventurers if they can climb that cliff with climbing gear.
'Failing Forward' has always been a concept at our table, we just never called it that. Meeting challenges that are just flat out too hard for you at the time are normal occurrences. Defaulting back to d20 rules - Natural 20s aren't automatic successes on skill checks.
But having a GM/DM who makes a hard-skill check a dead-end is just the sign of a bad GM. There are mechanics like taking 10 and taking 20, but they have their own liabilities attached to them, and given the previous example, even taking a 20 on a lock might not be enough to overcome it.
Now, you do get the stubborn players who will not take failure as an option, and absolutely not accept anything other than going through that door. Even if you have a giant neon sign across the hall saying 'SECRET SEWER ACCESS!' with an arrow pointing towards it.
But I've been a fan of the GM's best friend (aka the +2 modifer) If for example the thief is within 2 of hitting the lock DC I may go ahead and give it to them -- but they've left the lock obviously busted or they break their lock pick.
Last night, we finished our 11-sessions long Burning Wheel campaign. It was pretty fun and I was happy that we achieved a satisfying end regardless of the short turn around after we learned a player was moving and we had to conclude asap. I had a lot of fun GMing Burning Wheel. The BITs -> Artha feedback loop might be the best mechanic I've ever seen at the table. It's just so good to motivate the player to escalate the situation and create drama and gives clear indication to the GM about what to focus the game on. However, the underlying system might be too complex for its own good and I had trouble using it to it's fullest to challenge the players. I think I preferred my short campaign of Apocalypse World 2e over that one. The GM/MC tools for AW are more suited to my style I think.
For my next campaign, we're taking a break from a player-driven sandbox. I want to try some old-school DnD for a time, so we'll play The Nightmare Underneath, Johnstone Mentzger's gorgeous OSR game set in a fantasy Middle East where dungeons are invading nightmares intent on the destruction of civilization. There's a free artless version if you're interested.
I've been considering a Burning Wheel campaign for a while since the BITs mechanics seem gorgeous. At this point I'm mostly waiting for inspiration to strike while I roll in to season 2 of a Blades in the Dark campaign and a one-shot of Tales from the Loop.
I've been considering a Burning Wheel campaign for a while since the BITs mechanics seem gorgeous. At this point I'm mostly waiting for inspiration to strike while I roll in to season 2 of a Blades in the Dark campaign and a one-shot of Tales from the Loop.
Did you see the Rollplay Tales from the Loop one-shot ? It was a great game and it showcased the game really well. I currently play in a Coriolis campaign, which shares its DNA with Tales from the Loop and between the two, I think Tales is a more focused game.
For Burning Wheel, you really don't need that much front-loaded inspiration. My initial pitch was "primitive clan resists conquest from much more sophisticated people". You then use your session 0 to "campaign burn" and tighten your Situation and to suit it to the PCs. The Codex is a great tool for this.
McKid on
0
Options
Mostlyjoe13Evil, Evil, Jump for joy!Registered Userregular
Should I even bother with the TORG kickstart? I mean the deal looks sound, but what are my chances of getting players?
PSN ID - Mostlyjoe Steam ID -TheNotoriusRNG
0
Options
VanguardBut now the dream is over. And the insect is awake.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
I've been considering a Burning Wheel campaign for a while since the BITs mechanics seem gorgeous. At this point I'm mostly waiting for inspiration to strike while I roll in to season 2 of a Blades in the Dark campaign and a one-shot of Tales from the Loop.
Burning Wheel needs player buy in to work and the game uses a collaborative approach to creating the setting and situation. I'd recommend pitching the game to your group and have a few ideas back pocket to start that process, but the game explicitly tells you to not world build or go in with too much set in stone.
+1
Options
VanguardBut now the dream is over. And the insect is awake.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
Also, thank you @McKid for mentioning Tales from the Loop. I've been a little out of the RPG loop for the last year or so, and this game sounds rad as fuck.
+2
Options
AuralynxDarkness is a perspectiveWatching the ego workRegistered Userregular
Last night, we finished our 11-sessions long Burning Wheel campaign. It was pretty fun and I was happy that we achieved a satisfying end regardless of the short turn around after we learned a player was moving and we had to conclude asap. I had a lot of fun GMing Burning Wheel. The BITs -> Artha feedback loop might be the best mechanic I've ever seen at the table. It's just so good to motivate the player to escalate the situation and create drama and gives clear indication to the GM about what to focus the game on. However, the underlying system might be too complex for its own good and I had trouble using it to it's fullest to challenge the players. I think I preferred my short campaign of Apocalypse World 2e over that one. The GM/MC tools for AW are more suited to my style I think.
For my next campaign, we're taking a break from a player-driven sandbox. I want to try some old-school DnD for a time, so we'll play The Nightmare Underneath, Johnstone Mentzger's gorgeous OSR game set in a fantasy Middle East where dungeons are invading nightmares intent on the destruction of civilization. There's a free artless version if you're interested.
The Nightmare Underneath sounds cool. Do I just run the googles to find the artless version?
0
Options
VanguardBut now the dream is over. And the insect is awake.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
Last night, we finished our 11-sessions long Burning Wheel campaign. It was pretty fun and I was happy that we achieved a satisfying end regardless of the short turn around after we learned a player was moving and we had to conclude asap. I had a lot of fun GMing Burning Wheel. The BITs -> Artha feedback loop might be the best mechanic I've ever seen at the table. It's just so good to motivate the player to escalate the situation and create drama and gives clear indication to the GM about what to focus the game on. However, the underlying system might be too complex for its own good and I had trouble using it to it's fullest to challenge the players. I think I preferred my short campaign of Apocalypse World 2e over that one. The GM/MC tools for AW are more suited to my style I think.
For my next campaign, we're taking a break from a player-driven sandbox. I want to try some old-school DnD for a time, so we'll play The Nightmare Underneath, Johnstone Mentzger's gorgeous OSR game set in a fantasy Middle East where dungeons are invading nightmares intent on the destruction of civilization. There's a free artless version if you're interested.
Some of the more complex subsystems (Fight, in particular) of Burning Wheel can grind a game to a halt, especially if no one is a veteran. I find simple resolution is preferable for everything but "boss conflicts" most of the time.
The feedback loop is, indeed, great, but I actually think Torchbearer has a tighter risk/reward system.
Last night, we finished our 11-sessions long Burning Wheel campaign. It was pretty fun and I was happy that we achieved a satisfying end regardless of the short turn around after we learned a player was moving and we had to conclude asap. I had a lot of fun GMing Burning Wheel. The BITs -> Artha feedback loop might be the best mechanic I've ever seen at the table. It's just so good to motivate the player to escalate the situation and create drama and gives clear indication to the GM about what to focus the game on. However, the underlying system might be too complex for its own good and I had trouble using it to it's fullest to challenge the players. I think I preferred my short campaign of Apocalypse World 2e over that one. The GM/MC tools for AW are more suited to my style I think.
For my next campaign, we're taking a break from a player-driven sandbox. I want to try some old-school DnD for a time, so we'll play The Nightmare Underneath, Johnstone Mentzger's gorgeous OSR game set in a fantasy Middle East where dungeons are invading nightmares intent on the destruction of civilization. There's a free artless version if you're interested.
The Nightmare Underneath sounds cool. Do I just run the googles to find the artless version?
Last night, we finished our 11-sessions long Burning Wheel campaign. It was pretty fun and I was happy that we achieved a satisfying end regardless of the short turn around after we learned a player was moving and we had to conclude asap. I had a lot of fun GMing Burning Wheel. The BITs -> Artha feedback loop might be the best mechanic I've ever seen at the table. It's just so good to motivate the player to escalate the situation and create drama and gives clear indication to the GM about what to focus the game on. However, the underlying system might be too complex for its own good and I had trouble using it to it's fullest to challenge the players. I think I preferred my short campaign of Apocalypse World 2e over that one. The GM/MC tools for AW are more suited to my style I think.
For my next campaign, we're taking a break from a player-driven sandbox. I want to try some old-school DnD for a time, so we'll play The Nightmare Underneath, Johnstone Mentzger's gorgeous OSR game set in a fantasy Middle East where dungeons are invading nightmares intent on the destruction of civilization. There's a free artless version if you're interested.
Some of the more complex subsystems (Fight, in particular) of Burning Wheel can grind a game to a halt, especially if no one is a veteran. I find simple resolution is preferable for everything but "boss conflicts" most of the time.
The feedback loop is, indeed, great, but I actually think Torchbearer has a tighter risk/reward system.
It's not even the complicated subsystems. We did two Duel of Wits and two Fights during our short campaign and it went pretty quickly, relatively speaking. It's just all the moving parts. I don't think any of my players ever used their call-on traits. Or the fumbling about which skill to use. Remembering to do Steel tests. The Burning Wheel HQ later works are much more tightly designed, I agree, but I don't think I'd use any other system than Burning Wheel for character-driven fantasy, even with all my misgivings about the game. Like, I've been pretty critical in this thread, but in kinda the same way a teacher would have the harshest critics for their best students.
Has anyone played that Tales from the Loop? I have one of his art books (the second one, set in the 1990s) and it definitely creates an evocative mood -- not one that seems as Stranger Things-esque as the RPG blurbs suggest but definitely weird and uncanny. I wonder about the mechanics and everything when the inspiration for the setting is inherently vague and mysterious.
Has anyone played that Tales from the Loop? I have one of his art books (the second one, set in the 1990s) and it definitely creates an evocative mood -- not one that seems as Stranger Things-esque as the RPG blurbs suggest but definitely weird and uncanny. I wonder about the mechanics and everything when the inspiration for the setting is inherently vague and mysterious.
It's the same mechanics as Mutant Year Zero. You roll a pool of D6s, 6 is success, no success means you fail forward. There will be some specific bits to their system based on the setting, but that's the core foundation. Fairly traditional with a few light storygame elements.
I'm thinking about getting back in the GM saddle. However, there is already an excellent VtM game going and I don't want to step on anyone's toes. I don't believe I see any 13th Age games going right now, so I was thinking I might run a one-shot. Maybe the recently released The Strangling Sea adventure.
How much interest would there be in this if I got an OP up?
Enworld has some more info on Star Finder "Totally not an Edition Change" for Pathfinder out.
Some interesting stuff but the "No iterative attacks, everybody can attack twice for a -4 to hit" thing is....well absent context. Thugs and extra attacks are kinda the only thing they get going for them so I guess it'll depend on what else they're given to make up for it. Still, a fairly big change that I'm impressed they're willing to make.
Enworld has some more info on Star Finder "Totally not an Edition Change" for Pathfinder out.
Some interesting stuff but the "No iterative attacks, everybody can attack twice for a -4 to hit" thing is....well absent context. Thugs and extra attacks are kinda the only thing they get going for them so I guess it'll depend on what else they're given to make up for it. Still, a fairly big change that I'm impressed they're willing to make.
That sounds an awful lot like how Saga Star Wars did it, actually.
So I have been in the market for campaign management software and came across this guy's kickstarter. It looks pretty cool from the demo. I already own Herolab, and I know that Lonewolf does a program similar to this, but it's a LOT more expensive.
@MagicPrime Kickstarter links are no bueno on the boards. Linking to the guys site saying "He's having a kickstarter" is kosher as I understand but no direct links to kickstarter.com.
@MagicPrime Kickstarter links are no bueno on the boards. Linking to the guys site saying "He's having a kickstarter" is kosher as I understand but no direct links to kickstarter.com.
Enworld has some more info on Star Finder "Totally not an Edition Change" for Pathfinder out.
Some interesting stuff but the "No iterative attacks, everybody can attack twice for a -4 to hit" thing is....well absent context. Thugs and extra attacks are kinda the only thing they get going for them so I guess it'll depend on what else they're given to make up for it. Still, a fairly big change that I'm impressed they're willing to make.
I am sort of waiting to see the full rules. In the bits and pieces I have seen I have seen some features for classes that let them do an attack in a move action so I don't know if doing that prevents you from using your standard action to attack or if you can get both in a turn.
That said it does seem like they intend for you to have less attacks per round especially at higher levels and everybody be a lot closer for actions per turn. The soldiers though are getting a shitload more feats so they start really good with weapons and armor and pretty rapidly improve. Also using heavier soldier oriented weapons you get your full expertise bonus and small arms give like half bonus so a lot of a soldiers bonus is not attacking faster but in hitting harder.
The weapons have some level ranges so the weapons non spell casters use stay a lot more competitive with pure spell caster damages at higher levels. Also a lot of the tech weapons have special effects on crit in addition to extra damage.
WACriminalDying Is Easy, Young ManLiving Is HarderRegistered Userregular
edited June 2017
Sometimes I scroll through the Pathfinder SRD and wish I had the energy/scheduling to get involved with a local group so I could just experiment with weird builds and non-standard classes. Like the Savant or maybe some kind of Deductionist+(Cleric or Paladin) build. EDIT: Not with the intent of min-maxing or power-gaming, but just for the fun of building interesting characters whose various facets are actually mechanically represented, rather than simply flavor-texted into the game.
So I got my daughter Savage Worlds to kind of entry into paper and pen type stuff.
My history with this type of thing isn't very deep, so is there anything we could watch on youtube together to get her to understand how things work? She seems like she's sort of interested in running a campaign for her friends, but I think isn't sure how to start and I'm not really sure how to guide her either.
She's 11/going into middle school for reference.
Posts
But regardless of the roll outcome, that door is now unlocked. So on some level, the character succeeded at the thing. Their ability to pick the lock was never in question, only whether it would work out the way they hoped.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
Well no, in that "Before the guards arrive scenario" the door may or may not be unlocked as the guards discovered them. You can certainly set the scene up either way but the door doesn't have to be unlocked for it to be failing forward. If the door is still locked the scene is no longer about the door, it is about the lock picker escaping some guards now. That can just be a solid failure in the break in attempt, though you need to have the next higher level situation change and not just have the thief return the next night to keep failing forward.
Either way, the roll isn't a direct measure of the skill of the character so much as an abstraction of the scenario surrounding it. Which is why a lot of people get hung up on the concept of failing forward and see it as a squishy resolution methodology.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
Yea, no matter how the resolution plays out, I think the end goal is not to just let the Rogue sit there and make 20 lockpick checks until he succeeds or the DM decides that the lock breaks and now what.
Origin ID: Discgolfer27
Untappd ID: Discgolfer1981
I think "the lock breaks" is fine if the roll is a 1 or some sort of critical failure. I like to do a spectrum of success/fails with my games, just because it gives more options/feels more real. If you never come across a dead end, you don't get to know true failure or truly feel the weight of your choices.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
Very true, just as DM you gotta be able to make sure at that point that there is something for that rogue to do at that point, no matter how ill advised it is for the player.
On a side note, I've broken out Campaign cartographer to make the map for my Gamma World campaign and fuck I've completely forgotten how to use this damn thing.
Origin ID: Discgolfer27
Untappd ID: Discgolfer1981
Then you have D&D in the middle which, instead of just teaching DMs how to run D&D, invented the fucking Take 10 and Take 20 rules which just make people more confused and create more problems.
I like the lock picking example because I've found the idea that failure should mean you alert the enemies in side, or attract nearby guards is an easy revelation for new GMs that will push them to the next level of GMing. But sometimes not getting that door open is the interesting consequence of failure, and avoiding that at all cost because of the fail forward lesson can itself be bad GMing.
So 'breaking the lock' becomes 'I guess you guys can't progress and have another adventure elsewhere?'.
It's fine to break the lock if alternate solutions present themselves (break down the door) or if there are alternate ways around the scenario (climb through a window).
But if opening the lock is the one thing that progresses the story, then having the player fail at doing it just kills the story.
And that's a mistake that's probably as common as having the player pick the lock several times (especially with critical fails).
So I think saying that breaking the lock is interesting is rather too reductive.
It's only interesting if there's something else that can be done instead.
Although, if my DM told me the lock breaks, and I know I have to get through the door, the next option becomes the less stealthy way of opening the door.
The Monster Baru Cormorant - Seth Dickinson
Steam: Korvalain
Origin ID: Discgolfer27
Untappd ID: Discgolfer1981
Unless there's another obstacle in the scene (guards, a time limit, etc.) there's usually not much gained by asking heroic adventurers if they can climb that cliff with climbing gear.
But having a GM/DM who makes a hard-skill check a dead-end is just the sign of a bad GM. There are mechanics like taking 10 and taking 20, but they have their own liabilities attached to them, and given the previous example, even taking a 20 on a lock might not be enough to overcome it.
Now, you do get the stubborn players who will not take failure as an option, and absolutely not accept anything other than going through that door. Even if you have a giant neon sign across the hall saying 'SECRET SEWER ACCESS!' with an arrow pointing towards it.
But I've been a fan of the GM's best friend (aka the +2 modifer) If for example the thief is within 2 of hitting the lock DC I may go ahead and give it to them -- but they've left the lock obviously busted or they break their lock pick.
Critical Failures - Havenhold Campaign • August St. Cloud (Human Ranger)
For my next campaign, we're taking a break from a player-driven sandbox. I want to try some old-school DnD for a time, so we'll play The Nightmare Underneath, Johnstone Mentzger's gorgeous OSR game set in a fantasy Middle East where dungeons are invading nightmares intent on the destruction of civilization. There's a free artless version if you're interested.
Did you see the Rollplay Tales from the Loop one-shot ? It was a great game and it showcased the game really well. I currently play in a Coriolis campaign, which shares its DNA with Tales from the Loop and between the two, I think Tales is a more focused game.
For Burning Wheel, you really don't need that much front-loaded inspiration. My initial pitch was "primitive clan resists conquest from much more sophisticated people". You then use your session 0 to "campaign burn" and tighten your Situation and to suit it to the PCs. The Codex is a great tool for this.
Burning Wheel needs player buy in to work and the game uses a collaborative approach to creating the setting and situation. I'd recommend pitching the game to your group and have a few ideas back pocket to start that process, but the game explicitly tells you to not world build or go in with too much set in stone.
The Nightmare Underneath sounds cool. Do I just run the googles to find the artless version?
Some of the more complex subsystems (Fight, in particular) of Burning Wheel can grind a game to a halt, especially if no one is a veteran. I find simple resolution is preferable for everything but "boss conflicts" most of the time.
The feedback loop is, indeed, great, but I actually think Torchbearer has a tighter risk/reward system.
Right here.
It's not even the complicated subsystems. We did two Duel of Wits and two Fights during our short campaign and it went pretty quickly, relatively speaking. It's just all the moving parts. I don't think any of my players ever used their call-on traits. Or the fumbling about which skill to use. Remembering to do Steel tests. The Burning Wheel HQ later works are much more tightly designed, I agree, but I don't think I'd use any other system than Burning Wheel for character-driven fantasy, even with all my misgivings about the game. Like, I've been pretty critical in this thread, but in kinda the same way a teacher would have the harshest critics for their best students.
If you've got five-ish hours to kill, Adam Koebel put his prep up for a one shot up on youtube here:
and the actual play here (just linking the first video, but there's four total of these):
It's the same mechanics as Mutant Year Zero. You roll a pool of D6s, 6 is success, no success means you fail forward. There will be some specific bits to their system based on the setting, but that's the core foundation. Fairly traditional with a few light storygame elements.
How much interest would there be in this if I got an OP up?
Steam: Elvenshae // PSN: Elvenshae // WotC: Elvenshae
Wilds of Aladrion: [https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/comment/43159014/#Comment_43159014]Ellandryn[/url]
Some interesting stuff but the "No iterative attacks, everybody can attack twice for a -4 to hit" thing is....well absent context. Thugs and extra attacks are kinda the only thing they get going for them so I guess it'll depend on what else they're given to make up for it. Still, a fairly big change that I'm impressed they're willing to make.
That sounds an awful lot like how Saga Star Wars did it, actually.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
Site Link - He's also doing a kick starter.
Critical Failures - Havenhold Campaign • August St. Cloud (Human Ranger)
Fixed!
Critical Failures - Havenhold Campaign • August St. Cloud (Human Ranger)
I am sort of waiting to see the full rules. In the bits and pieces I have seen I have seen some features for classes that let them do an attack in a move action so I don't know if doing that prevents you from using your standard action to attack or if you can get both in a turn.
That said it does seem like they intend for you to have less attacks per round especially at higher levels and everybody be a lot closer for actions per turn. The soldiers though are getting a shitload more feats so they start really good with weapons and armor and pretty rapidly improve. Also using heavier soldier oriented weapons you get your full expertise bonus and small arms give like half bonus so a lot of a soldiers bonus is not attacking faster but in hitting harder.
The weapons have some level ranges so the weapons non spell casters use stay a lot more competitive with pure spell caster damages at higher levels. Also a lot of the tech weapons have special effects on crit in addition to extra damage.
The Disappearance of Inigo Sharpe - a 13th Age play-by-post adventure!
My history with this type of thing isn't very deep, so is there anything we could watch on youtube together to get her to understand how things work? She seems like she's sort of interested in running a campaign for her friends, but I think isn't sure how to start and I'm not really sure how to guide her either.
She's 11/going into middle school for reference.