|
Swagger Dagger posted:I've only got one game in but, I dunno, it's still a D20 game. The numbers work a little better and are less dependent on the normal D20 poo poo but at some point it's still lipstick on a pig. Well, it's going to depend on if you like D&D or not. I'm also filtering it through a charitable lens since it's so early.
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2012 19:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 05:34 |
|
|
Swagger Dagger posted:I don't think we can really talk about that, sorry. I fear this thread may be really premature.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2012 19:45
|
|
|
Gort posted:I fear this thread may be really premature. Well, it wasn't, at first, but then Pelgrane told everyone to stop talking about it  .
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2012 19:46
|
|
|
I am not enjoying (waiting for the second round of) this playtest.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2012 20:20
|
|
|
So why does Pelgraine maintain a forums presence on RPGnet instead of, say, here?
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2012 20:38
|
|
|
Every single RPG thing ever has an RPGnet presence. Despite how frustrating the site can be, it's still the basically the #1 RPG forum. If you can get RPGnet talking up your product that's definitely going to result in sales. I'm pretty sure TGD has less than a hundred active posters.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2012 20:41
|
|
|
moths posted:So why does Pelgraine maintain a forums presence on RPGnet instead of, say, here? I hate to break it to you but basically nobody reads this forum, comparatively. edit: what Mikan said
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2012 20:47
|
|
|
Also 
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2012 20:51
|
|
|
I guess that makes sense, even if it's somewhat discouraging. This loving hobby.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2012 20:54
|
|
|
We just have to console ourselves by being better than other people, and sneering at them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2012 20:58
|
|
|
moths posted:I guess that makes sense, even if it's somewhat discouraging. This loving hobby. RPGnet is not a good place but it's also not terrible; the awful stuff on RPGnet is nowhere near as bad as like theRPGsite, and there's actually some cool stuff that comes out of RPGnet. It's just, RPGnet is aggressively mediocre.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2012 21:03
|
|
|
Mikan posted:RPGnet is not a good place but it's also not terrible; the awful stuff on RPGnet is nowhere near as bad as like theRPGsite, and there's actually some cool stuff that comes out of RPGnet. Honestly I think RPGNet is mostly fine as long as you're not reading the D&D forum. But why would you read the D&D forum? edit: grognards.txt is pretty bad most of the time too, ya'll, I don't want to turn this into a forum bashing derail, and I like this forum the best of all forums, but nobody should really be acting like they're superior to anyone long-ass nips Diane fucked around with this message at 21:09 on Mar 27, 2012 |
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2012 21:06
|
|
|
The 13th Age rpg.net thread has 7,000 views. This thread has 12,000. You know, if we want to start measuring things. Updated the OP by the way. Not really new information, but the lack of logo and all around formatting was really bugging me.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2012 21:21
|
|
|
I hope this game can somehow do away with the adventuring day entirely. If there's an official X fights before each rest standard that the game strongly herds you towards using that's better than nothing, but ideally powers, hit points, and healing are rationed out such that a day with one fight in it (or ten fights in it) doesn't particularly privilege or punish a given character. I want a D&D where there's no such thing as "per day" but I can only use one Greater Power per two encounters or something.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2012 23:56
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:If there's an official X fights before each rest standard that the game strongly herds you towards using that's better than nothing, but ideally powers, hit points, and healing are rationed out such that a day with one fight in it (or ten fights in it) doesn't particularly privilege or punish a given character. You should not be disappointed!
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2012 00:14
|
|
|
There are conceptual artifacts from previous D&Ds here. A fair number are walled off in the Optional Rules Garden, where they can frolic and play with one another, but a few tunneled under the fence in the manner of a stoat to nibble at the ripe berries of good design.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2012 01:32
|
|
|
I am enjoying this apt analogy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2012 01:38
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:I hope this game can somehow do away with the adventuring day entirely. If there's an official X fights before each rest standard that the game strongly herds you towards using that's better than nothing, but ideally powers, hit points, and healing are rationed out such that a day with one fight in it (or ten fights in it) doesn't particularly privilege or punish a given character. I agree with this. Trying to visualize a group of adventurers/explorers/heroes/looters and their rest patterns outside of the context of DnD, I can't imagine a reason other than "it's getting dark and we are tired" or "someone was gravely wounded, we must tend to his injuries and let him rest" for breaking pace and camping. At what point did we even get into the habit of "we need to make it part of the game design to force players to rest after X encounters"? Even 4E did it with the dailies/healing surges. Is it so terrible to imagine a group of characters storming a tomb and emerging only after they have found what they were after? What if after each encounter you get back ALL your HP and abilities, but with the trade-off that if someone drops below 0 HP, you MUST find a safe place to rest for him to recover. That way rest can tie more nicely to the narrative, as it is a response to an important event that happened, not part of a routine that the rules force you into. Of course, I understand that it's not good design to have someone wait it out for the rest of the battle if he drops below 0 without any way to recover in the same encounter, but I think there can be ways to make it more interesting than just "you lie in the ground, unconscious."
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2012 10:25
|
|
|
Rexides posted:I agree with this. Trying to visualize a group of adventurers/explorers/heroes/looters and their rest patterns outside of the context of DnD, I can't imagine a reason other than "it's getting dark and we are tired" or "someone was gravely wounded, we must tend to his injuries and let him rest" for breaking pace and camping. Yes. It's called 'healing'. Healing is a very toxic element if used immoderately, but you have to either live with it, or give players some sort of luck manipulation mechanic so that they can make sure they'll emerge triumphant when it matters to them. I'm not opposed to giving characters all of their abilities back after a fight (in fact, that's a pretty cool thing IMO), but not if it means that some bad die rolls can chuck you out of it outright.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2012 10:34
|
|
|
Transient People posted:I'm not opposed to giving characters all of their abilities back after a fight (in fact, that's a pretty cool thing IMO), but not if it means that some bad die rolls can chuck you out of it outright. Haha, no gently caress that, I HATE that (death to SoD). But you are still seeing this from the DnD context where HP/Damage/Healing is balanced in a way that assumes that there is a good chance that a character will drop below 0, but there will always be a healing ability available to bring him up, and if you take that out of the equation it will come crumbling down. So you rebalance the math to make that event a more rare occurrence (more HP or bigger heals). In fact, why does "0 HP" have to mean "unconscious"? Maybe you are still up, but can't use your cool abilities and have slower movement rate. So you can still participate, but not as effectively (btw, gently caress penalties to rolls due to injuries).
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2012 10:56
|
|
|
Rexides posted:Haha, no gently caress that, I HATE that (death to SoD). But you are still seeing this from the DnD context where HP/Damage/Healing is balanced in a way that assumes that there is a good chance that a character will drop below 0, but there will always be a healing ability available to bring him up, and if you take that out of the equation it will come crumbling down. So you rebalance the math to make that event a more rare occurrence (more HP or bigger heals). Well, I'm actually just imagining it as 'Spirit of the Century, except with no Fate Points'. And...it's kind of terrible. It might be possible to take something like FP-less SotC and salvage a decent fight mechanic out of it, though. It's late where I am and I'm not thinking too hard about it, but i think it could be done.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2012 11:01
|
|
|
Rexides posted:What if after each encounter you get back ALL your HP and abilities, but with the trade-off that if someone drops below 0 HP, you MUST find a safe place to rest for him to recover. That way rest can tie more nicely to the narrative, as it is a response to an important event that happened, not part of a routine that the rules force you into. Yeah, that's the kind of thing I'd like to see. Maybe falling to 0hp just means that you can only ever recover to your Bloodied value until you get a proper rest somewhere, or means that next encounter you start with one or two of your abilities pre-spent, or something like that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2012 16:18
|
|
|
The problem with that is that it has 'unstable equilibrium' written all over it. You lose one fight, so next fight you lose harder, and next fight harder than that, and...it's a very tricky issue.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2012 16:49
|
|
|
Transient People posted:The problem with that is that it has 'unstable equilibrium' written all over it. You lose one fight, so next fight you lose harder, and next fight harder than that, and...it's a very tricky issue.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2012 17:04
|
|
|
More JRPGs - a genre as plagued by stasis as tabletop RPGs - just have everyone heal to full after every fight, so each fight you have all your resources available and they don't have to balance through attrition. It's a lot more interesting.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2012 17:06
|
|
|
ImpactVector posted:Right. If there's no pacing mechanism in the game then you either end up with a death spiral waiting to happen or you need to keep all characters at full effectiveness all the time (like Gamma World). I don't see the problem if the only requirement for getting back to full effectiveness is making it out of the fight alive, and someone dropping bellow 0 HP is a kinda rare event.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2012 17:13
|
|
|
Mikan posted:More JRPGs - a genre as plagued by stasis as tabletop RPGs - just have everyone heal to full after every fight, so each fight you have all your resources available and they don't have to balance through attrition. It's a lot more interesting. Rexides posted:I don't see the problem if the only requirement for getting back to full effectiveness is making it out of the fight alive, and someone dropping bellow 0 HP is a kinda rare event. I think losing stuff until the end of the fight is a fine idea (and was basically what I meant when I pointed out Gamma World), but you still have to realize that you've just shifted the bounds on your pacing mechanic, so that instead of every five fights your reset is every fight and your release valve is running away. Then again I'm probably pointing out the obvious.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2012 17:27
|
|
|
Mikan posted:More JRPGs - a genre as plagued by stasis as tabletop RPGs - just have everyone heal to full after every fight, so each fight you have all your resources available and they don't have to balance through attrition. It's a lot more interesting. I'm a huuuuuuuuge fan of this system. Lots of people balk at it (just check out how many people yell about regenerating health when it comes to FPS games), but properly done, it makes every battle tense except the ones that are deliberately easy. Death to Dailies!
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2012 17:29
|
|
|
Transient People posted:I'm a huuuuuuuuge fan of this system. Lots of people balk at it (just check out how many people yell about regenerating health when it comes to FPS games), but properly done, it makes every battle tense except the ones that are deliberately easy. Death to Dailies! But if you were playing a sandbox dungeon delve game where your risk/reward cycle was a question of "how far should I push this trip?" things might work better the other way.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2012 17:39
|
|
|
ImpactVector posted:Yeah, I'm definitely not arguing against this concept. Doing things this way eliminates a lot of tedium and allows the writing to dictate the pace (especially when you also eliminate save points and allow saving anywhere). It worked great for a story driven game like Xenoblade. I think the two concepts aren't exclusive, actually - it's just that it might be better to make the 'fatigue' or 'penalty' narrative dependent. What I mean by this is, imagine you have the following resources: -HP. -Powers. -Tilt. HP and Powers are easy to understand, and always refresh/recharge to full after a fight. Tilt, meanwhile, is something that accumulates as you beat more and more monsters down - each encounter you complete gets you further into 'the zone', but you're also more and more tired. Some fights are easy and don't build up Tilt, but others do because they tax you. The more Tilt you accumulate, the stronger the powers you can use are (for example, there's a power you can only sub in in place of one of your normal powers if you are already at Tilt 2, and it's a really badass comeback maneuver that you can use as your poo poo gets kicked in), and maybe you also gain more XP and loot too, if the system is prepared for numbers fuckery on that end. However, as you go deeper into Tilt, you take more and more damage, and Fumbles and negative effects bite deeper and deeper into you - a save for ongoing damage that worsens if you botch it might turn into 'each square you move, take the ongoing damage, still save only at the end of the turn'. This way, PCs are always ready for a fight - they just have to weigh the risks of pressing forward vs. calling it a day carefully as they kick more and more rear end. Transient People fucked around with this message at 18:27 on Mar 28, 2012 |
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2012 17:53
|
|
|
Good call. That sounds like a sweet setup. Maybe just toss in a way for players to influence Tilt as well (they're pushing hard between fights so increase by one, or they're taking it slow and cautious so decrease)? I really like the power unlocks at certain Tilt levels.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2012 18:02
|
|
|
ImpactVector posted:I think the bolded part is arguable. The gradual reduction in resources is a mechanic intended to increase tension. It's just tough to find a balance point so that the climax of the arc coincides with when you're on the brink of collapse unless you're really strict about pacing. Which most RPGs are not. Except that rarely happens, and when it does you are more likely to fail because you ran out of resources. But that Tilt mechanic sounds sweet. Sort of like the Escalation Die, but on a larger scale.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2012 18:16
|
|
|
Yeah "Tilt" is exactly the sort of thing I'd like to see. I want a setup where as the day drags on, each adventurer becomes more vulnerable but at the same time more inclined to pull off incredible desperation moves. Depending on how it was balanced, you might even end up with a game in which everyone doesn't have to have the same amount of Tilt for encounters to work. Maybe you gain extra Tilt for dropping to 0 hitpoints, for instance, so you could have a situation in which some characters are feelin' fine while others are on their last legs and they're both equally capable of participating in gameplay.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2012 18:19
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:Yeah "Tilt" is exactly the sort of thing I'd like to see. I want a setup where as the day drags on, each adventurer becomes more vulnerable but at the same time more inclined to pull off incredible desperation moves. Yeah, Impact's comment really got me thinking about the possibility of controlling Tilt - and I think that's a good way to go about it. Let every character have his own tilt, and adjust to taste - if you don't want to take risks, there's no reason why you should be the one to let your party down because you're afraid - you can just keep your tilt at 0 and roll with your baseline effects. Meanwhile, another character might want to rack his Tilt up to an insane degree, so he'll do stuff that boosts Tilt (like getting KO'd and maybe spending some sort of resource to inflate it further) and deal with the swingy combat. PS: The best part of this is that it helps solve an issue with a system like 4e's, which is that 'Daily' effects are really really powerful and tend to trivialize fights. If you have to expose yourself to some really major risks to be able to do amazing attacks and cast mighty spells, they're far more palatable - because if anything survives that super strong effect (maybe that Solo you're fighting decided to open the fight at very high Tilt, and thus has access to a No Sell power), you will pay for it. This sort of risky gameplay seems really appealing to me.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2012 18:32
|
|
|
Transient People posted:Yeah, Impact's comment really got me thinking about the possibility of controlling Tilt - and I think that's a good way to go about it. Let every character have his own tilt, and adjust to taste - if you don't want to take risks, there's no reason why you should be the one to let your party down because you're afraid - you can just keep your tilt at 0 and roll with your baseline effects. Meanwhile, another character might want to rack his Tilt up to an insane degree, so he'll do stuff that boosts Tilt (like getting KO'd and maybe spending some sort of resource to inflate it further) and deal with the swingy combat. I could be wrong though. The devil is in the details.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2012 18:43
|
|
|
It tends to come down to two playstyle ideals that are somewhat at odds with each other. The first is one where you have potentially lots and lots and loving lots of fights throughout the "day," but very few to none of them are all that special. This is mostly characterized in Basic, OD&D, and AD&D, with the random encounter tables, the "puzzle enemies," the remarkably few "solo" style enemies, and the idea that the "day" is what makes up the entire adventure (rather then you just resting in the middle of the dungeon). The other is one in which you have far fewer fights but they tend to be far more special or interesting. I think 4e characterized this one best, with 3e desperately trying to reach it and ultimately failing. The problem with "daily" and "encounter" powers is that the first two match up, as do the second two. Daily powers "work best" in a given situation where you have an unknown number of fights, and none of them are really "boss battles." Encounter powers "work best" in a situation where you only have a few set pieces but they tend to be important and dramatic. Or to put it another way, daily powers work when the game is based/balanced around a full "day" of adventuring with no resting breaks or severe penalties to attempting such as you go throughout, whereas encounter powers work when the game is based/balanced around set pieces set to work together with more narrative ability given to players. The big problem with 3e and to an admittingly smaller extent (but still there) 4e is that it tries to do both. 3e balanced itself around a full "day" of adventuring, but then tried to peg that to "four combat encounters each day," which is dumb as gently caress because it lashes both the game and narrative to a really bizarre and pretty abstract number of fights. This was the source of one of CR's big flaws - that fights were very abstractedly meant to bring down 1/4th of a party's resources. So it tried to balance a "day" but then did it through a set number of "encounters." And it failed loving miserably. Then you add in all the ways 3e let you rip apart the "day" and rest on command and it's no wonder the system was hosed. 4e made it better with outright encounter powers and the two types of resting and healing surges (btw healing surges are loving brilliant on a few levels but that's a whole different topic), but the daily powers still sorta stuck out like a sore thumb. Normally it wouldn't be that big of an issue...if it weren't for how many you get, not just from your class but also your paragon, your epic, and your items, good loving christ the items. I have a level 11 psion and more then half my goddamn items have daily powers connected to them, all of them of different potency. It's a loving mess. Keep in mind, I'm not saying you can't have both types of "balance" in the game. It just has to be very well thought out. "Fighters can go all day long while wizards only have a few big spells" only sorta worked when wizards got like 19 spells max and they couldn't re-memorize them in the dungeon, and high AC and high HP actually equated to lasting a long enough time. The answer then to a "daily" balance existing alongside encounter balance is to very brutally cut down on how many "daily" abilities a person has to make them special and to utilize a form of resource management that isn't directly connected to how "powerful" a person is. You know, like healing surges. ( Healing surges are so loving brilliant, I can't even begin )
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2012 18:57
|
|
|
13th Age already has the escalation die which is a brilliant mechanic how about Tilt as something similar going for the Monsters. Each enounter after the second during the adventuring day Monsters get a static +1/+1 or an HP boost.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2012 19:38
|
|
|
Or just how about an overarching escalation die? Plop a D20 in the center, starts at 1. Every time somebody uses a Daily (for lack of a better term) the die increases by 1, and every time you win a battle it also increases by 1. Monsters can tag the die, reducing it by a set number, but adding it's number to their attack or damage roll. Bada-bing, bada-boom, no more need for 15-minute adventuring days or healing surges.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2012 20:55
|
|
|
Alright, how about fatigue? Each fight you participate in gives you one fatigue, a few extraordinarily flashy powers give you one as well. Whenever you take damage, you take bonus damage equal to the fatigue value... so in the sixth fight of the day, you take +5 damage per attack. Scale up slightly with level.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2012 21:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 05:34 |
|
|
Captain Bravo posted:Or just how about an overarching escalation die? Plop a D20 in the center, starts at 1. Every time somebody uses a Daily (for lack of a better term) the die increases by 1, and every time you win a battle it also increases by 1. Monsters can tag the die, reducing it by a set number, but adding it's number to their attack or damage roll. Bada-bing, bada-boom, no more need for 15-minute adventuring days or healing surges. I'm not exactly sure I follow, but it sounds like you've got it kind of backwards. Daily resources (or the equivalent) push the players to rest as often as possible. What you need to balance that is a corresponding pull mechanic to encourage the players to keep adventuring as long as possible, so that the advantage of resources is put on a scale against some other equally awesome and interesting advantage. So the players should be the ones that can tag the die in your example. Then you get to keep the idea of rest as your resource replenisher (which is cool, because people understand the whole resources = fatigue thing) while killing the urge to take a nap every time you slay an orc. Keep going, get bigger bonuses, be simultaneously badass and on your last legs. Tension!
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2012 21:31
|
|
