|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
 Recent Posts
I gravitate to 4e because I love cinematic/anime/comic book/video game pace and action.Wow! You've sold me on NOT buying the 4e books... I personally can't stand any of that kind of stuff. Looks like Pathfinder it will be, for me! I owe you one, CWM; you've saved me a small fortune with one small post. Cool. Glad I could help.
All RPGs attempt to simulate some kind of genre. By your definition BESM is an anime simulator. It is not meaningful because it is far too subjective and make the term "gamist" meaningless, or worse a simple pejorative. Any game that simulates its genre well will never be called gamist using your criteria. We would be left with simulations and games that try to be simulations but end up too gamist to be considered as such.
Or Phoenix Command/Living Steel ;) Talk about slow but fun. A friend and I ran a little skirmish using Phoenix Command way way back. I ran half a squad of Israeli Paratroopers and he ran a small group of Palestinian gunman. It took us 3 hours to get through like 30 seconds of combat. In the end we abandoned the game after I had 2 KIA and 3 wounded but operative and he had 1 KIA, 2 out of action, and 4 wounded but operative. Our games did get faster but man oh man that is a truly simulationist game and can slow to a crawl when things get hairy.
Then on what basis do you distinguish the changes between 4th and 3rd. Is one more "gamist"? I don't imply that that's bad. I think DMcCoy hit the nail on the head - 3e seems to be about fantasy literature and 4e is about fantasy cinema. They both have gamist abstractions that emulate heroic fantasy but they look towards different media for inspiration. Geyhawk is a great 3e setting. Eberron, though released for 3e is a far better setting for 4e. I gravitate to 4e because I love cinematic/anime/comic book/video game pace and action. Among my favorite games are 7th Sea, d6 Star Wars, and Paranoia. They all stress fast paced, rules lite role playing. I also enjoy Traveller, RuneQuest, and Twilight 2000 because there are times when I want gritty gaming where the rules try to simulate reality but add elements of the fantastic in a consistent manner. Life long D&D players have told me that it is a simulationist game. I see it as a gamist system that tries be a simulation, but it never lives up to that goal. I think 4e is the first edition to say - D&D is a gamist rules system and darn proud of it!
As I understand it, Simulationist puts simulating the target genre above everything else. The target genre is not always reality. Then the term is relative which makes the categorization subjective and somewhat arbitrary. All RPGs attempt to simulate some kind of genre. By your definition BESM is an anime simulator. $e could be called simulationist because it seek to simulate the free form cinematic high fantasy found in many pop-culture fantasy outlets like Harry Potter films, anime, and comic books. If this distinction is to be meaningful then objective criteria are required for "simulationist" and "gamist". BTW - I think every RPG can be narrative, in fact every RPG must be narrative, so I don't really see that as a category. IMO "simulationist" games try to emulate the real world with the addition of fantastic elements. They take a "if magic was real then how would it work" kind of approach. RunQuest is a prime example of a simulationist fantasy game. To me "gamist" rules bend reality to allow for heroic and supernatural exploits. D&D has always been pure gamist to me because armor makes you harder to hit and hit points spiral to ginormous proportions. D&D is all about unreality. Granted - some games reflect certain unrealities better that others, and some games simulate better than others but I think this duality has some fairly objective criteria for categorization.
The play style of groups does have an influence on how "gamist" or "simulationist" a game appears to be. However, some game systems seem to encourage or even almost demand a gamist approach to the game. I believe 4th edition has pushed D&D farther to the gamist end of the spectrum than it has ever been. It's a deal breaker for some people. It seems a lot of people are becoming disinterested in 4E after just a few sessions because it doesn't "feel" like D&D to them. Could it be that the system is so gamist that it hinders becoming immersed in your character? In my experience, if you see your character just as miniature on a grid with a cetain combat "role" to play instead of a real individual with goals and motivations, it's really difficult to care about what happens to your character and eventually the game itself. It is only gamist if you play it that way. Try this - the next time a rogue uses a positioning strike have the player describe what actually happens - rinse, repeat. Every RPG has mechanics of some form or another. All it takes is a little imaginative role playing and the gamist aspects will fade away. If you do not like the game and/or you are unwilling to try to role play and narrate then any game will feel like an elaborate board game.
Yeah 3.5 does have some overly gamist elements that I think it can do without (evasion, I'm looking at you), but these can be pushed to the side quite easily if PC's get immersed in their characters and the story. 4th edition throws the metagame thinking and gamist elements in your face like a glowing neon sign. No matter how hard you try, you can't overlook it. Everyone is shifting squares on a battlegrid, and the paladin has laser beams shooting from the sky to punish enemies who don't attack him for no other reason than he is a "defender" and has to be a more attractive target than the wizard. I disagree. All games use terms and actions in their mechanics unless you play a purely narrative game with no mechanics at all. Any game's mechanics and rule melt into the background with increasing familiarity and use.
Nice. I think I'll buy some of the RuneQuest stuff, then. I really like 5th edition Call of Cthulhu a lot (by contrast I did not like d20 Call of Cthulhu). Just remember that Mongoose RuneQuest is very similar to Chaosium's BRP but not exactly the same. Mongoose does some funky stuff with magic (mostly the incorporation of runes thing) and legendary abilities (a bit too power gamey for me). All in all its a solid system. For me Chaosium's BRP is closer to the original RQ.
I just picked up Chaosium's new Basic Role Playing and it rocks.That sounds interesting. If I were not leaning towards rules light systems, I would take a closer look. Funny that - BRP looks like a huge book but it presents a very modular rules set. The core of BRP is actually very light. In fact there is a form in the back that you can copy and hand out where the GM can check off all of the optional rules he or she will be using.
If CWM is canning 4th edition, that does not bode well for 4E's longevity. Not to pick on CWM, but he has defended 4E for quite a while. If even he can't stay interested in it enough for an extended campaign, who can? It seems that a lot of people that play 4E become disinterested in it quickly. Well, we still have Pathfinder. Like I said - it is not about 4e v 3e. Its about me v D&D. I am not thrilled by Pathfinder either at the moment. I may steal ideas from Pathfinder mods but I am done GMing class based RPGs for a while.
You're not alone. I canned my 4e game because classes are bugging me too. My group is going to alternate between Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay and a RuneQuest/BRP. I think I am going to limit D&D to organized play only for a while.I am impressed with your sincerity and honesty. Don't get me wrong Pax. In my opinion 4e is still far superior to 3e and if I ever GM D&D again I will use 4e. I guess I am just getting tired of D&D in general.
So what you posted above kind of reminds me of Chaosium's Call of Cthulhu, which I have the 5th edition of, and which I really enjoy. Is it similar to that in ways? Some of what you posted doesn't sound familiar, but some does. I'll have to check it out. There's definitely a large selection of RuneQuest material at my local store. Call of Cthulhu uses a streamlined version of RunQuest rules (both based on the Chaosium BRP) so having played Call of Cthulhu you have already played BRP.
Warhammer I like. Never tried RuneQuest but I noticed they have a bunch of Elric stuff, Lankhmar, etc. What's the system like? Excellent question! I just picked up Chaosium's new Basic Role Playing and it rocks. It distills all the changes that the system has gone through over the past 30 years into one solid volume. BRP is skill driven. PCs have stats but the core of their abilities lie in their skills. All skills are percentile and they increase with use. PCs start with a background skill set but you can take a PC in whatever direction you want based on the situation in-game. BRP also has "powers" but not in the D&D sense. Powers are the extraordinary abilities a character can posses like magic in a fantasy setting, mutations in a post apocalyptic game, or superpowers for comic book gaming. There are varying layers of rules complexity. You can use a simple DEX based initiative order or you can use a timing system called strike ranks that was a part of the original RQ rules. Strike rank take the base speed of an action and modifies it depending on your DEX (more missle fire) or DEX and SIZ for melee (yes - an attribute for physical size). Another example of complexity is in the use of hit points. You can use the generic HP pool which is always relatively small since it is based on your stats. Or you can use the pool plus a system of hit points by hit location. Yes, you can get your head lopped off well before your overall HP drop to zero. Combat is very simulationist with rolls to attack, parry, and dodge. Armor blocks damage. Oh, and parry too much with a weapon and it can break. Can you tell I love this game? Back in 1982 I played RQ for the first time and never looked back at D&D again until 3e came along. One final thought - Mongoose RuneQuest is OK but the Chaosium Basic Role Play is better IMHO even though both systems seem to be cut from the same cloth.
I gave 4e a chance but classes still frustrate me. There is no hope for me. You're not alone. I canned my 4e game because classes are bugging me too. My group is going to alternate between Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay and a RuneQuest/BRP. I think I am going to limit D&D to organized play only for a while.
respectfully I disagree. There are also examples of game publishers that have produced fine quality products that had the sales volume (in fact I assume higher) of the bigger OGL publishers with totally different (meaning non d20- or OGL-based) systems. So while I in general agree that the OGL was a great opportunity even for such talented people as those working for Green Ronin I wouldn't go so far as to declare their talent insufficient to go the hard (meaning their own) way and still be successful in the end. That is pure speculation. We will never know if Green Ronin would be where it is today without the OGL but we do know that it has been very successful by using the OGL. To deny that fact is to deny the obvious.
In the context of this thread (and especially as an answer to something CWM said before), that means that the 3PPs didn't get my money because of the OGL but because of their overall product quality (which WotC products quite often failed to achieve). At least as this customer is concerned Paizo earned my subscription on the base of their own efforts. And they don't owe WotC anything for it. Every OGL publisher owes WotC something - recognition that the OGL provided them an unprecedented opportunity to ride the coat tails of the dominant player in the RPG market. There are plenty of game publishers that have produced fine quality products that have never had the sales volume of some of the bigger OGL publishers. Sure - the OGL was beneficial to WotC as well. No doubt. But for any OGL publisher to say they could have been as successful as they have been without WotC is pure bunk.
This is exactly what I'm afraid of: that the setting will be tainted by the Living campaign---as the RPGA stamps its imprimatur on the setting, the Realms may become less and less desirable for a home game. Not sure I understand this particular sentiment. Living Greyhawk was fantastic! I wish someone at WotC would capture all of the development work done at the regional level. The Living Campaign gave Greyhawk incredible depth and rich detail. If LFR is half as good as LG then the Forgotten Realms is in for a big boost.
The accusation that WotC is just "out to make money" by doing X, Y, or Z is getting really old really fast. Of course they are. No company starts up thinking "we should just break even" or "let's take a loss". Companies that do not plan carefully and maximize their profits GO OUT OF BUSINESS! Companies that try to turn a profit - and as large a profit as possible - are not evil unless they are actually doing harm and profiting from it, or they are unethical in their business dealings. WotC is not causing harm and they are not in violation of any business code of ethics. I cannot believe that gamers are actually complaining that they have to buy more books. My God people - just look at your shelves! I bet they are stacked with game books. I bet there at least 5 to 10 books that you know are coming out soon and you know that you MUST have them. If you do not want to buy PHB2 or Martial Powers splat book then don't buy them, but don't blame WotC for trying to run a successful business - no one tries to run an unsuccessful one.
Most corporations realize that those two are one and the same. Frankly maximizing profits is what every company strives to do when the company is public the pressure is even greater.
Races and classes are like plaque buildup - you can only take so much before you are forced to floss. D&D has always suffered from bloat. The bigger the bloat the more need their will be to split the core into many many books.
I then organize the remaining tiles into a blue print of the right pattern so the craftsman can come in and build it.So basically he's the guy who knows how to hide the "Cancel my membership" link on porn sites. ;) Never worked on porn sites but that sounds like a case of a business goal getting in the way of a user need.
Yeah kind of. The medium I work in is semantics and language. The goal is to make systems that people will understand and find useful. So to use your analogy I first sift through the tiles and understand how they relate to each other, how they relate to the domain (communications, entertainment, etc.), and to the task the user is seeking to accomplish. Its a whole lot of categorization. Once the tiles have been sorted I figure out which specific tiles should be a part of the final design and which should not. I then organize the remaining tiles into a blue print of the right pattern so the craftsman can come in and build it.
True but roleplaying XP has not been explicit in the rule IIRC until very recently.Well then, you either don’t recall very well, you define “recently” as 19 years ago… or you chose to ignore what’s been around for a long time. Well, I had successfully ignored 2e - skipped it completely. But you are correct it does include RP XP. I stand corrected.
What is with hoards too? O.k. Dragons were given some reason or other, although it was pretty flimsy. Why does nearly every monster in D&D feel the need to acquire a hoard? I mean, could you paint a bigger target on your head? My players in Warhammer are getting used to the "What!?! No treasure?" moments. Besides - would you really want to touch anything that a Skaven has stuffed in their nest?
Nope - full time wage slave. My current gig is with Comcast Interactive Media. Past gigs included Vanguard, IKON Office Solutions, and several interactive agencies.And you own and operate a toy company? Yep. I work on that almost every night and a few hours each weekend. That is another very long story.
And if you can specify what in your mind an IA does, that would be helpful as well. In all my years I've noticed that IT lingo often has many different words for the same thing ;> Well - I'll tie this back to the OP if possible. I work on all kinds of digital media - web, mobile, tv, and traditional software. I focus on product strategy and shaping both the structure and function of the entire system. The three core parts of the whole that I shape are the organizational system, navigation, and the way all of the parts form a whole. The focus is on understanding the business goals and the needs of the user base and making sure that the two are in harmony. I do not focus on what can be done but what should be done. I help to shape what should be built and how it should work. Finally I help to set priorities for what the system should do now, six months from now, and beyond. Gleemax wanted to be everything - all at once. It was hard to use. It was hard to find what you were looking for. It tried to meet needs that the users did not have and failed to meet the needs they did have. To use a food metaphor - their eyes were bigger than their stomach. They seem to be focusing on what can be done and less on what should be done - and what steps will get us there.
IAs with 10+ years of experience in that discipline are rare since it really began in 1996-1997. So yes - there are not a whole lot of us that have been practitioners from the start. Nope - full time wage slave. My current gig is with Comcast Interactive Media. Past gigs included Vanguard, IKON Office Solutions, and several interactive agencies.
...Character advancement requires it.I'd say that statement is false on the grounds as that obtaining role-playing xp is (while difficult in the extreme) possible. this means that in theory characters that never lift a single sword can advance. like politicians. how do you get a politician over level one (assuming they have never faught)? It does make it easeir though, and the game was designed with combat integral to advancement. True but roleplaying XP has not been explicit in the rule IIRC until very recently. The DNA of the game is kill monsters and take their stuff.
You are not really saying that there are only a few hundred people in the world that have ten years of IT experience, are you? No. Designing large scale online projects like the DDI and Gleemax is not about IT at all. I am talking about online strategy and user experience design. Those disciplines have only been around since the mid-1990s. More likely you mean that you've been an Information Architect for 10 years and even then I seriously doubt there are but a handful of you guys out there. IAs with 10+ years of experience in that discipline are rare since it really began in 1996-1997. So yes - there are not a whole lot of us that have been practitioners from the start. Whenever a company I work for looks to hire folks with Senior level experience it can take months to find the right resume. If I had to put it into numbers I would say, world wide, IA and UX professionals with 10+ years of experience number in the mid to low thousands at the most. Now when you get to 5+ years of experience that number shoots up dramatically.
I would not say that "kill monsters and take their stuff" is the only way to play but D&D is designed for that to be the heart of the game. Character advancement requires it.
And what kind of person frequents Cute Overload, exactly? Me too. My wife and I check it every day. That and http://icanhascheezburger.com/ and http://ihasahotdog.com/.
I'm not trying to foment any discord, but the roles are very different between editors and web developers and one cannot succeed without the other. The salary differential in not just about role. I am a Senior Information Architect with over 10 years of experience. There are only a handful of folks in the world with that kind of experience. The same with interaction designers, visual designers, and web developers. Scarcity causes a big jump in demand, which in turn cause salaries to rise. I would love to work for a game company but at this point they could not afford to hire me.
Fair enough. It bothers me more than you, I guess. I don't always like the conceptual baggage that comes along with a "borrowed idea". Its sometimes hard to get people to "unlearn" what they think they know in those situations and becomes an open invitation to problems with metagame knowledge. Whereas I see that as a positive rather than a negative. It is easy to understand for someone new to the game. Back in the day there was no explanation required to play an elf, dwarf, or hobbit. Compare that to a game like Talaslanta where all of the races are "non-standard". I love the originality but it takes time and effort to get ramped up to play.
And during a re-enactment of the Battle of... MAKE IT STOP ... MAKE IT STOP I went into a laughing fit. Riled up the dog. Laughed so hard I was crying. Wiped my eyes and forgot I had Goldbond anti itch cream on them. Now my eyes sting. That made me forget about the mosquito bite, so that's good. You and your friends need to spin this into a movie deal. Way too f&*&ing funny.
haha! I just knew you were going to go there. You are correct sir. Because everyone knows two wrongs make a right in internet examples! Nope - I am in the "it may be a knock off but i just don't care" camp. It simply does not bother me that Gygax lifted hobbits straight from JRRT and it does not bother me that WotC may have lifted something from WoW. Happens all the time.
Endearing is in the eye of the beholder. Ask a cattleman and it would not be so endearing. Ask anyone else and i think they would get it. In all seriousness, I never would have imagined you that way CWM. It's funny how we create images based on information that has nothing to do with physical appearance in anyway. Funny how that works. I once met an NPR reporter and when I said that he was not what I thought he would look like he asked me what I had envisioned. I forget the exact description I gave but he said that I was not the only one that painted that particular mental image. It is strange to meet folks you only know from the written word and you realize they are nothing like you had imagined.
Right. Just like the white box hobbits.
Not if you're already curious. (grin) Nope. Not that kind of curious. Though funny tangent - a very good friend of mine is more comfortable telling people that he is gay than he is admitting that he plays D&D. Second tangent - he just loved playing this ranger whose tag line was - "The only thing I like straight are my arrows". That got people at the table squirming in their seats.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
