|
PARTS OF THIS POST A. Overview of the project. B. The Scenario A. OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT The game you see before you is an outline of an educational simulation of industrial conflict in late nineteenth-century Australia. I have chosen "Melbourne 1890" as its working title. I intend to flesh out the details with data from a specific historical situation. This will be chosen from the local history of any community this simulation may eventually be taught in, and I would encourage other educators or gamers to study their own local history before implementing any "vanilla" dispute. I will, however, leave this title and any posts to this thread non-specific, partly to protect the anonymity of the students I may work with. I am creating this project as a classroom resource to satisfy one of the requirements for my teaching degree. It may or may not ever see "action." It is intended as a radical teaching tool, both in its structure and content. It is, first and foremost, a history lesson. While some may argue about Marx's relevance to modern economies, his analysis has generally been accepted as valid for classical industrial scenarios. Therefore, much of the maths behind the game were derived from his labour theory of value. I may be opening myself to accusations of indoctrination, but if properly implemented this simulation will grant students a degree of autonomy and creative freedom that is inconsistent with "indoctrination." No strategy is prescribed for either industrial leaders or their workers, though this simulation ought to be integrated into a wider curriculum that gives at least some historical knowledge on the period. Nor would I hope for "simple" truths from anyone. The post-game debate is meant to foster mutual sympathy and understanding, perhaps leading students to discuss modes of reconciliation that did not occur to them during the game. Furthermore, while the core dynamic is one of labour vs capital, I have tried to include some more post-modern critiques by noting the inclusion women and Indigenous Australians in the game. If the numbers of students are sufficient, the simulated town may include a rather broad middle class. If resources allow, I would much prefer to see a complex and multifaceted community represented than a simple economistic cliche. B. THE SCENARIO This outline taken from: Marsh, C. "Studies of Society and Environment: Exploring the Teaching Possibilities" 5th ed (Pearson Education Australia, Frenchs Forest NSW: 2008) 227. =Objectives= Through roleplay, the students will negotiate strategies and explore meaning in an industrial community in Melbourne going through an economic crisis in the 1890s. =Scenario= As Australian trade and communications flourished in the nineteenth century, a previously agrarian economy became a rapid industrialising one. The workers were in some sense left behind by this progress, leading to emergence of a strong Labour movement that, in Melbourne, won the eight-hour day in the 1850s, led a series of strikes during the financial crisis of the 1890s, and elected Labour representatives to the first Federal parliament in 1901. This simulation focusses on a small industrial community in the Melbourne area. As the financial crisis works its effects on the price of living, wages, and employment, students will attempt to maintain their livelihood. The town will be set up to include housing, a grocery store, a police station/jail/courthouse, houses for town officials and wealthy individuals, a factory, a union hall and a railroad. Possible additions (depending on time and resources) could include a restaurant, a school, a doctor's office, and a church. =Roles= Minimum roles: 1-3 factory managers 10-15 workers 2-3 policemen 1 shopowner Additional roles (in no particular order of preference): Mayor Judge Doctor Priest (or two: Catholic/Protestant sectarianism) Teacher Union leader Teacher-supplied roles: An accountant (helps managers with maths and prevents cheating on their part) Possibly want teachers to play police? =Role Profiles= Factory Managers One will play the owner of the factory, any others will be foremen hired and paid by the owner. The managers will be tasked with maintaining profits, procuring raw materials, selling their product on the market, overseeing production, and resolving disputes. Workers Workers may be male or female; employed, unemployed, or engaged in paid or unpaid domestic labour; Protestant or Catholic; European or Indigenous; etc. Some of these considerations will be affected by the size of the group, and composition will obviously affect the emphasis of the game. Each will have a detailed description of their upbringing, circumstances, and recent work history. They will perform factory labour; receive wages; spend it on food and housing; among other essentials, and sleep. If the setting is expanded, some may work as cooks/waiters in the restaurant; shop assistants in the grocery store; or other functions around the town. If there is a school, some will be young enough to go to school (though some of those will already be working). Police These students will draw and spend wages from the government; ensure order; and arrest legal violators. Shopowner This student will buy groceries from outside suppliers; stock their shop; set prices; and sell goods. Mayor This student, as a generic representation of the state, will oversee and advise or order the activities of the police, the judge, and the teacher. Judge This student will organise and oversee the trials and sentencing of those students under arrest. Doctor This student will offer medical treatment, though obviously at professional prices. Priest This student will be given a detailed description of their character's background and beliefs and will have to roleplay regular "sermons." They will be encouraged to fill the benches! Teacher This teacher will be given a list of "lessons" to teach in school. They have to stick to pre-chosen topics and maximise attendence. Remember, children who aren't at work may get harassed by the police unless they go to school, depending on Mayoral policy! Union Leader This student will be a worker, but with additional background elements and information concerning union activities. I have included this as optional as it changes the nature of the game significantly. Are students generating their own strategies, or are they learning about historical strategies? Obviously, with or without the inclusion of a union leader, they will to some extent do a mix of both. One thing to note is that the unions are employed, white, and craft-based. =Role Interaction= Interactions proceed in three rotating phases. 1. Work Employed workers enter the factory. They will come equipped with green "energy" tokens. In each of eight rounds, they will select either 1 (slack off), 2 (steady pace), or 3 (work hard) tokens. They line up and one by one drop their counters into a large bucket (with a lid that conceals its contents). In each of those rounds, each manager selects someone to oversee, by stopping them in line. The "overseen" must reveal their choice of counters. There is a second bucket in the factory with yellow "push" counters. Anyone may draw from the "push" counters if they run out of green tokens, but their withdrawals are noted down, and they may only take one per round. At the end each rounds, each worker makes an injury roll, a % chance which is increased if they took a "push" counter that round (perhaps from 2% to 10%?). Any failed rolls result in an injury that effectively terminates their employment (either temporarilly if they receive proper treatment, or permanently). The management then distributes the day's wages. 2. Eat As the workers leave the factory, the managers have a job to do. The day's bucket is then totalled up to determine the day's production. This process is performed by the managers with the aid of their Teacher "accountant". Yellow "push" counters accumulate to possibly reduce production, by shoddy or ruined work. I may also introduce in some part of the scenario a small number of red "sabotage" counters which workers may dump in the bucket for a drastic chance and severely reducing production. Meanwhile, the workers go and spend their money at the general store for food tickets. These are taken home where anyone may "cook" them by exchanging them for green energy tokens. Each cook must also expend two energy tokens to do this (Cooking rules are meant to introduce a feminist angle, by showing domestic work). These tokens are then divied up (the "meal"). If one were to drop the domestic setting, the shop would merely provide green energy tokens, rather than food, providing an eerie "soylent green" effect. This phase should be long, giving the workers time to socialise and discuss issues as well as simply consume their pay. 3. Sleep Any worker with a house must return to it and is delivered 4 green tokens. Any worker in a tenement is delivered 2 green tokens by their landlord. =Procedures and Win Criteria= There is no "victory" per se. This game will run for a set period of time during which pressures will mount that will almost certainly cause an industrial dispute. To begin with, wages will begin barely above the subsitence level. Inflation will set in (the prices of raw materials and bulk groceries will go up for managers and shop keepers respectively). When the banking crisis hits, the managers will find their capital become suddenly very thinly stretched. The managers will be in a situation that encourages them to either slash wages, demand a speed-up (any worker found slacking, one token, gets fired immediately), or lay off workers. The workers will be in a situation that encourages them to seek job security, a safe work environment (the manager will have the option of investing in safety equipment), a slower pace at work, and better wages. When the time alloted to the simulation ends, there will be an extensive debrief including group discussions across (and now outside) roles, followed up by a written assignment.
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2009 04:37
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 08:21 |
|
|
Oligopsony posted:that's actually pretty cool The LF'est RPG
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2009 04:45
|
|
|
The professional DM has an apprentice: OBSERVATION AND BEHAVIOR QUEUES Preparation and organization are but one of the many mask a GM must wear during an RPG session, sometimes things wont go as expected, for example: the encounter one was so excited to run just doesn't ring right to the players and they become bored, what would one do?. Improvising and keeping the game fun is as fundamental to GMing as bringing your props to the table, its important to train your observation skills to perceive how people respond to a particular stimuli, in a way you "calibrate" to your players behavior. For instance, lets say one player is really excited (he is blushed, speaking loudly, moving a lot, and having good emotional responses overall) during a fight against a group of orcs, he starts manifesting this behavior when he shoots a fireball and deal a massive amount of damage. If he´s bored during an encounter with say... a fire elemental (lets say that its invulnerable to fire), you could come up with a way to evoke that emotion from him, let him roll an easy perception check "just above the rambling living flame he hangs a huge chandelier by a tight rope... fire could probably burn the rope"... he blushes and shouts loudly when the chandelier falls on the elemental damaging it, bang, you have the player excited when otherwise he would be bored to tears. Be on the lookout for: - Behaviors common to the person when he/she is really excited - What actions trigger such behaviors - Behaviors that denote boredom - What moments trigger such behaviors Also, read the little details, if someone plumps all his point on an attack skill he is telling you he wants combat, if a person plays a priest of his favorite deity and spends point on diplomacy built a scene around him preaching in a church. Listen to what they say: "careful this NPC could betray us" is like telling you "hey I think your party is full on intrigue", "oh man, not this guys again" -while making an expression of disgust- that probably means the player doesnt like that NPC, allow him to defeat it at some point. Challenges: - training to spot this kind of behaviors while roleplaying is hard and requires lots of practice. - One could misjudge a behavior or link it to a different triggering stimuli. Benefits: - The person feels like you are paying attention to what they like, and they feel more in rapport with you and the game.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2009 12:08
|
|
|
Mikan posted:I think I genuinely hate Old Geezer. I know it's silly, but I do. No. Not since I was about 23. Look, kiddo, grab a couple beers, sit down, and let your old Uncle Geezer clue you in on something. If you want, grab yourself a beer too. Most of that stuff is just plain elementary. What isn't elementary is bollocks. Honestly, lad, you sound like somebody who's hung around and played D&D with the same 6 theater major friends since you were in high school. Well, fine. If you're having fun, Crom bless your pointy little hearts. But your "battle cries" were so hackneyed and turgid they made me wince. The idea of a puppet show is laughable. Going to a theater or opera house to watch you do amateur theatrics.... What. The. gently caress? And even your possible good ideas (like "Pictures") ... lad, lad, lad. This is the 21st loving CENTURY. If you DO use a set of pictures, load jpegs onto your laptop and show them that way. If you fumble with pieces of paper at a HOME game for FUN I'll throw Cheetos at you and mock you. It's also my PERSONAL OPINION that theatrics and funny voices have no place in a game, but I'm a bit of a curmudgeon on that. And players who spend more than three seconds in description in combat get told to "Shut the gently caress up and throw the drat dice". But that's just me. And I've never had trouble filling a table in 38 years, so I must be doing SOMETHING right. And there's the heart of it, my boy. GO. PLAY. Run some games, get some experience under your belt. You have enthusiasm, I'll give you that. But, and I say this with all tenderness, you're so wet behind the ears I could berth a 32 foot sloop there. You seem to be suffering from "Echo Chamber" effect. Go out and game with LOTS OF DIFFERENT PEOPLE and see what you think.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2009 12:11
|
|
|
I guess you can't build castles in Dungeons and Dragons anymore.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2009 16:08
|
|
|
I can't wait to read the tips on playing a mute PC in that book.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2009 00:40
|
|
|
Gentlemen- I spend a lot of time planning games. One of the things I count on is people being prompt. While I won't go so far (yet) as to require an RSVP, it is a little tiring for people to assure me of their attendance only to have them blearily answer their phones at game start-time, having just woken up. I don't want to fight for your attention, either you care about adventuring and exploring the ruined world of Athas or you don't. So, starting this upcoming game, the game will start at 1pm. I will not call you, or chase you down, or anything else - at 1pm, the game will start. If you cannot be there at 1:00, and show at least a tiny modicum of respect to me and your fellow gamers, please do not attend. Secondly, this is "Dungeons and Dragons". Not "Dungeons and Dragons and Texting and AIMchat." When you arrive at game, I will confiscate your cell phone. Matt, my roommate, will probably be watching golf in his room, he will set all your phones in front of him. Should one of them ring, he will answer it, and, should a family member be dying or gravely ill, he will come and fetch you. Otherwise, he will state that you are otherwise occupied. Alternately, if you don't want Matt acting as your secretary, you may simply turn your phone off. Again, if you are so pressed-on for your company that you must stay in constant contact with the world outside of the game, go do that instead. I am trying to create an immersive world that features you - the players, a group of heroic adventurers, friendships forged in battle, banded together to defeat evil - taking on unique challenges. This does not work if everyone is continually late, distracted and eager to get out. If there is anything I can do to make your experience better - from speak louder, to give you more stuff to do that your class does well, to totally resetting the campaign to be in Forgotten Realms, anything at all, please let me know, and I will try to accommodate you. Thanks, Your Friendly Neighborhood Dungeon Master
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2009 23:02
|
|
|
Thought I'd post this bit as something to "toss out there." On the old Necromancer boards, Clark was talking about how he'd like his daughter to play D&D as it is today (i.e. pen/paper). But here's the thing... and I could be completely smoking the deep stuff. D&D will not survive as a table top RPG. It won't. Now I'm not saying it'll go away or even become an online MMO. But things like iPhone, Sony's eReader, Amazon's Kindle, and other phones will get to the point, along with software companies using the internet as the OS, where people will be using the DDI online from their phone, rolling their dice from their phone, and updating their characters in real time action, from their phone. Not in the next five years or anything but ten? Twenty? When you take the math away from the actual sitting of the rules and don't have to keep track of all the crazy stuff that players can do and how it impacts with everything around them, then yeah, the MMO experience of the rules being fully in the background will be realized. And this was before the whole WoTC PDF thing happened. Opinions?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2009 08:51
|
|
|
*points to the cave entrance*
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2009 19:51
|
|
|
Mr. Heliotrope posted:I wish it was available as a separate program though, even with limited options like things only from the first Player's Handbook. I have the demo and I really like it, but I don't play D&D enough to pay for a monthly subscription. It keeps working after you unsubscribe, you just can't update it anymore. If you just want to update the program 2 or three times a year you can just grab one month subscriptions every now and then.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2009 20:24
|
|
|
DeclaredYuppie posted:never doubt rpg.net There's a racism debate going on now but sadly nothing really quotable.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2009 19:53
|
|
|
Martial Controller: Samurai Kill Bill vol 1; the fight-scene agains the Crazy 88. That is what the martial controller should look like. With the Ki power source presumed dead, the other power sources are now able to swoop in and snatch up all of its flavor. Part of the problem with designing martial controllers was trying to figure out a distinctive flavor for it. With oriental sources to draw from now, we have that distinctive flavor. The Samurai wields a daisho (a long sword in the main hand and a shorter sword in the off-hand) and spins around rapidly slicing dudes in half while yelling crazy warcries. Maybe the Samurai could have a splash of defender as a secondary role. Perhaps with powers that mark, but with no 'Combat Challenge' analogous feature, so that the Samurai's marks are only a -2 penalty to attacks. Ideas: Quickdraw as a bonus feat. A power that lets you tilt your blades to reflect light like mirrors, blinding enemies in the light. An attack that lets you swing your swords with enough force that the air pressure is enough to damage enemies beyond your melee reach. You yell 'Hiya!!!' and all the enemies are paralyzed with fear. An attack that kicks up sand and dust as you swing your blades and blinds enemies. What do you think?
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2009 06:14
|
|
|
(note: the lack of gender attached to the term "Bitch" is intentional. Yes, I'm covering my tail, but...)
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2009 20:11
|
|
|
Joe Anglican posted:Traditional Games > TG Discussion: Really; read the BoEF > grognards.txt Have you read the BoEF? I mean, really read the BoEF?
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2009 22:23
|
|
|
Pope Eggs Benedict posted:Courtesy of the SJGames forums. Pulver's actually a really good game designer, so it's a shame he posts things like that (and writes things like BESM) every now and then.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2009 08:53
|
|
|
RagnarokAngel posted:That's pretty much going to be everyone's answer. Anime the RPG + this, basically. I could overlook the anime stuff if the game system wasn't a terrible, unbalanced work.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2009 00:26
|
|
|
TG Discussion: Get it from this post Edit: TG Discussion: Socially submissive gays
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2009 00:08
|
|
|
Even the romans know what the best die is for playing D&D: http://www.christies.com/Lotfinder/lot_details.aspx?intObjectID=4205385
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2009 07:53
|
|
|
Mikan posted:I will go to any lengths to bring the grognards to grognards.txt Practitioners of this style are advised to employ this method judiciously. Allowing foreign objects to enter one self may bring about unexpected, and unwanted, consequences.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2009 09:31
|
|
|
Limited is the only format that takes more skill than money
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2009 08:49
|
|
|
The following is a repost of something I made over on the WotC forums. I'm not exactly sure which forum to put it on, as it's intended for a variety of purposes. It's here mostly because I'd like to get some feedback from knowledgeable minds, but it's also a useful tool, much like a handbook, and available for use. My general philosophy is that the only balance that really matters in D&D is the interclass balance between the various PCs in a group. If the group as a whole is very powerful and flexible, the DM can simply up the challenge level and complexity of the encounters. If it's weak and inflexible, the DM can lower the challenge level and complexity. Serious issues arise when the party is composed of some members which are extremely powerful and others which are extremely weak, leading to a situation where the DM has two choices: either make the game too easy for the strong members, or too hard for the weak members. Neither is desireable. Thus, this system is created for the following purposes: 1) To provide a ranking system so that DMs know roughly the power of the PCs in their group 2) To provide players with knowledge of where their group stands, power wise, so that they can better build characters that fit with their group. 3) To help DMs who plan to use house rules to balance games by showing them where the classes stand before applying said house rules (how many times have we seen DMs pumping up Sorcerers or weakening Monks?). 4) To help DMs judge what should be allowed and what shouldn't in their games. It may sound cheesy when the Fighter player wants to be a Half Minotaur Water Orc, but if the rest of his party is Druid, Cloistered Cleric, Archivist, and Artificer, then maybe you should allow that to balance things out. However, if the player is asking to be allowed to be a Venerable White Dragonspawn Dragonwrought Kobold Sorcerer and the rest of the party is a Monk, a Fighter, and a Rogue, maybe you shouldn't let that fly. 5) To help homebrewers judge the power and balance of their new classes. Pick a Tier you think your class should be in, and when you've made your class compare it to the rest of the Tier. Generally, I like Tier 3 as a balance point, but I know many people prefer Tier 4. If it's stronger than Tier 1, you definitely blew it. Psionic classes are mostly absent simply because I don't have enough experience with them. Other absent classes are generally missing because I don't know them well enough to comment, though if I've heard a lot about them they're listed in itallics. Note that "useless" here means "the class isn't particularly useful for dealing with situation X" not "it's totally impossible with enough splat books to make a build that involves that class deal with situation X." "Capable of doing one thing" means that any given build does one thing, not that the class itself is incapable of being built in different ways. Also, "encounters" here refers to appropriate encounters... obviously, anyone can solve an encounter with purely mechanical abilities if they're level 20 and it's CR 1. Also note that with enough optimization, it's generally possible to go up a tier, and if played poorly you can easily drop a few tiers, but this is a general averaging, assuming that everyone in the party is playing with roughly the same skill and optimization level. As a rule, parties function best when everyone in the party is within 2 Tiers of each other (so a party that's all Tier 2-4 is generally fine, and so is a party that's all Tier 3-5, but a party that has Tier 1 and Tier 5s in it may have issues). The Tier System Tier 1: Capable of doing absolutely everything, often better than classes that specialize in that thing. Often capable of solving encounters with a single mechanical ability and little thought from the player. Has world changing powers at high levels. These guys, if played well, can break a campaign and can be very hard to challenge without extreme DM fiat, especially if Tier 3s and below are in the party. Examples: Wizard, Cleric, Druid, Archivist, Artificer, Erudite Tier 2: Has as much raw power as the Tier 1 classes, but can't pull off nearly as many tricks, and while the class itself is capable of anything, no one build can actually do nearly as much as the Tier 1 classes. Still potencially campaign smashers by using the right abilities, but at the same time are more predictable and can't always have the right tool for the job. If the Tier 1 classes are countries with 10,000 nuclear weapons in their arsenal, these guys are countries with 10 nukes. Still dangerous and world shattering, but not in quite so many ways. Note that the Tier 2 classes are often less flexible than Tier 3 classes... it's just that their incredible potential power overwhelms their lack in flexibility. Examples: Sorcerer, Favored Soul, Psion, Binder (with access to online vestiges) Tier 3: Capable of doing one thing quite well, while still being useful when that one thing is inappropriate, or capable of doing all things, but not as well as classes that specialize in that area. Occasionally has a mechanical ability that can solve an encounter, but this is relatively rare and easy to deal with. Challenging such a character takes some thought from the DM, but isn't too difficult. Will outshine any Tier 5s in the party much of the time. Examples: Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, Crusader, Bard, Swordsage, Binder (without access to the summon monster vestige), Wildshape Varient Ranger, Duskblade, Factotum, Warblade, Psionic Warrior Tier 4: Capable of doing one thing quite well, but often useless when encounters require other areas of expertise, or capable of doing many things to a reasonable degree of competance without truly shining. Rarely has any abilities that can outright handle an encounter unless that encounter plays directly to the class's main strength. DMs may sometimes need to work to make sure Tier 4s can contribue to an encounter, as their abilities may sometimes leave them useless. Won't outshine anyone except Tier 6s except in specific circumstances that play to their strengths. Cannot compete effectively with Tier 1s that are played well. Examples: Rogue, Barbarian, Warlock, Warmage, Scout, Ranger, Hexblade, Adept, Spellthief, Marshal, Fighter (Dungeoncrasher Variant) Tier 5: Capable of doing only one thing, and not necessarily all that well, or so unfocused that they have trouble mastering anything, and in many types of encounters the character cannot contribute. In some cases, can do one thing very well, but that one thing is very often not needed. Has trouble shining in any encounter unless the rest of the party is weak in that situation and the encounter matches their strengths. DMs may have to work to avoid the player feeling that their character is worthless unless the entire party is Tier 4 and below. Characters in this tier will often feel like one trick ponies if they do well, or just feel like they have no tricks at all if they build the class poorly. Examples: Fighter, Monk, CA Ninja, Healer, Swashbuckler, Rokugan Ninja, Soulknife, Expert, Paladin, Knight Tier 6: Not even capable of shining in their own area of expertise. DMs will need to work hard to make encounters that this sort of character can contribute in with their mechanical abilities. Will often feel worthless unless the character is seriously powergamed beyond belief, and even then won't be terribly impressive. Needs to fight enemies of lower than normal CR. Class is often completely unsynergized or with almost no abilities of merit. Avoid allowing PCs to play these characters. Examples: CW Samurai, Aristocrat, Warrior, Commoner And then there's the Truenamer, which is just broken (as in, the class was improperly made and doesn't function appropriately). Now, obviously these rankings only apply when mechanical abilities are being used... in a more social oriented game where talking is the main way of solving things (without using diplomacy checks), any character can shine. However, when the mechanical abilities of the classes in question are being used, it's a bad idea to have parties with more than two tiers of difference. It is interesting to note the disparity between the core classes... one of the reasons core has so many problems. If two players want to play a nature oriented shapeshifter and a general sword weilder, you're stuck with two very different tiered guys in the party (Fighter and Druid). Outside of core, it's possible to do it while staying on close Tiers... Wild Shape Variant Ranger and Warblade, for example. House Rules So, last time I posted this I was asked about potencial house rules that might help balance out the Tiers a bit more. This post will be on that topic. First, some quick and dirty house rules that are easy to impliment: Option #1: Point Buy modifications. This is a quick and dirty fix that helps a bit. It's not perfect, but it's certainly something. Tier 1s get 24 point buy. Tier 2s get 28 point buy. Tier 3s get 32 point buy. Tier 4s get 36 point buy. Tier 5s get 40 point buy. Tier 6s get 44 point buy. Result? At low levels, their Tiers are nearly reversed, with CW Samurai having awesome stats while Wizards really are weak bookish types. By the high levels, the Tiers are back in order, but the difference is less pronounced through the mid levels. Obviously, you can adjust what the differences are, but this works pretty well, and most importantly it's extremely easy. The big downside is that you really can't allow much multiclassing or else it all goes out of whack. Other similar methods include rolling but letting lower Tiers get extra rerolls or bonuses after the roll, and giving free LA points to low tier classes (so, everyone Tier 3 and below gets 1 free LA, and everyone Tier 5 and below gets 2 free LA). Option #2: Partial Gestalt. Tier 1s and 2s are normal. Tier 3s and 4s may gestalt their levels with an NPC class of their choice (Adept, Expert, Commoner, or Warrior). Tier 5s and 6s may gestalt their levels with any other Tier 5 or 6 class of their choice, or Adepts. Result? Again, a healthy power boost for the low Tiers. Suddenly the Rogues can have full BAB and lots of hitpoints, and the Monks can have Fighter powers too. Very handy. Plus, multiclassing works... it's just that if you start as a Fighter//Monk and want to take a level of, say, Ranger, that level must have an NPC class on the other side. If for some reason you wanted Sorcerer, you wouldn't be gestalt at all in that level. Lord knows Fighters get a lot better when they can be Fighter//Monks or Fighter//CA Ninjas or whatever. Option #3: Mass bannings. Clunky method, but simply saying "no, you can't be Tier X and above" does work. You pick the level that you want to deal with (let's say Tier 3, because that's my favorite) and then ban the ones higher than that (no Tier 2 or Tier 1). Some would ban the levels below that too (say, no Tier 5s or 6s) but I actually find that unnessesary... sometimes those weaker classes might work for your build as a dip. Honestly, I don't favor this method, because sometimes players can't find a class that fits their concept just right this way, but it is an option. And then, here's a much more convoluted bit of house rules, as an example of how you can personalize your campaign while taking into account relative class power. In my game, I wanted a low magic game, with characters using skills and martial abilities to solve problems instead of spells. So, I did the following: Psionics don't exist (not familiar enough with them) When preparing a spell (or preparing a spell slot, which spontaneous casters must do), you must take 1 hour per level of the spell. At the end, the DM makes a hidden DC 10*spell level check, where any D20 roll equal to or less than the level of the spell is an automatic failure. The skill for the check is Knowledge Nature for nature casters (Druids, Rangers, etc), Knowledge Religeon for divine casters (Clerics, Paladins, etc), and Spellcraft for arcane casters (Wizards, Bards, etc). When you try to cast the spell, if you've succeeded on the check it goes off normally. If you fail, the spell fails and you take a backlash effect, randomly chosen depending on the school of the spell you tried to cast (so failed necromancy spells do things like cause permanent wisdom decreases and negative energy damage, failed conjurations summon powerful things that attack you or teleport you into physical objects, etc). The save DC against backlash effects, if there's a save at all, is 5*spell level. Every time you cast a spell there's a chance of dying. As such, spellcasters are HEAVILY nerfed, and not expected to be played. When creating magic items, the spells required must be cast every day... so bad idea! No humanoids or monsterous humanoids (which includes all PCs) can use Spell Like abilities, except for those granted by the Binder and Warlock classes (since those classes draw their power from outside sources). The game is Gestalt. All players get the benefits of Vow of Poverty, plus the bonus feats from that are any bonus feat you want (not just exalted), without the drawbacks (you can still use gear). However, there are no useful magic items in the game, so it's all mundane gear. As such, gear is far less important in my game... any random sword works as well as any other, so you can lose all your stuff, punch out a guard, steal his sword, and rock out. All players heal rapidly when out of sight and no one's after them (fast healing equal to your HD, only when I as the DM decide you're between encounters). Classes that had casting can, with DM permission, swap out their casting for any one other class substitution ability... for example, the Bard can swap casting for an Animal Companion because of the UA Fey Varient Bard. Basically, it's a low magic heroic fantasy game. And remember, I like Tier 3 as a balance point. So what do these house rules do to balance? Well, Tier 1 and 2 are completely gone. All of them depend on spellcasting which is now nerfed, so most of those classes drop to Tier 5-6 (except the Druid, who's Tier 3... yeah, Wild Shape is that powerful). The top tier classes are now the normal Tier 3 guys plus the Druid, except that the Beguiler drops to around Tier 5/6 and the Dread Necromancer does too. Sadly, the Healer and Warmage are also nerfed, but they didn't fit in the campaign world anyway. The gear changes mean certain specialized equipment dependent builds don't work (Warblade Crossbow archers, for example), and Wild Shape based classes get pumped up (Druids and Wild Shape Rangers) but otherwise changes are minimal as far as balance is concerned. Healing classes are basically unnecessary, though still handy, so Crusaders are useful to have. Warlock and Binder invisibility powers are awesome against other humanoids. Overall, that's about the effect I wanted. The entire party can optimize like crazy and they're still maxing out at Tier 2 if they really work at it, and are usually Tier 3 otherwise. The current party at this time (we just added two players) is I believe: Warblade//Swordsage, Barbarian//Swordsage, Factotum//Bard (with a gecko familiar), Binder//Ninja/Rogue, Scout//Warlock. Conveniently enough, all of them are basically Tier 2-3 (gestalt raises them up a bit).
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2009 18:31
|
|
|
I don't think it's that simple, actually. I was pretty annoyed with various self-declaried "Furries" long before Somethingawful or 4chan existed, and long before the whole "Furries = sex perverts" thing started (which I think can largely be blamed on huge amounts of Furry/Anthro porn and fics on the early internet, again, as I was aware of it before 4chan or Somethingawful). Why? Because this was a subculture full of people who regarded themselves as non-human (despite evidence to the contrary), and who regarded themselves as better than human, and were generally kind of assholish about it, even by early internet standards. They also tend to like childish stereotypes of animal behaviour and traits, rather than the actual behaviour (unless it feeds into a fetish, but let's avoid that), which wound me, as someone who really likes real animals, up the wall. There really used to be a LOT of them on the internet, in especially in role-playing-y places. Many of them were what would now be called Otherkin (i.e. though they were Tru Dragyns or the like). You barely ever see them nowdays, though, unless it's the "lol sexual fetish" deal. Ignoring sex stuff completely, I think there's a pretty clear distinction between a "Furry" race and an "Anthropomorphic" race in RPGs. An anthropomorphic race will typically be a race that is basically humanoid, that resembles, to some extent, an animal. They will probably possess some of the characteristics of the animal, but they won't be fetishisticly detailed, nor will they be "simply better than" humans, and they will typically have some negative characteristics. And they won't usually look like cartoon animal-men. They will also probably possess faces that are either fully non-human, or only very slightly animal. Their customs and society may or may not reflect the animal they're inspired by. For my money, the Jackal-men and Lion-men in Unearthed Arcana both fit into this, and make a good example of a race that doesn't have that "Furry" vibe for me. They're not particularly attractive, they have fully non-human faces, they're not "just better" than humans, they have interesting origins, and so on. Furry races, on the other hand, tend to purely superior to humans (similar to the way elves are in some settings, some kinds of vampire, and so on). Longer-lived, smarter, very often more charismatic and agile, and so on. Their societies will usually be basically normal human society with a very slight spin put on it, and not thought-through, and they will almost always exist in the context of many other animal-people. They will have personalities that emphasize the most childish human-perceived qualities of the animal, and generally only the positive or "funny" ones (Furry cat-people are never cowardly, for example), not the "real" characteristics. Oh, and they probably look like pretty cartoon animals, rather than scary animal-people who might give a child nightmares. It's always about the ideal. It's hard to think of examples of this in RPGs, but I'm sure they're out there. Some RPGs that let you play Dragons which are pretty close to the Furry "better than humans at everything and much more important and special!" deal, though. Confusing the matter, there's a third category, the one where animals simply stand in for people. They don't think they're animals, they don't have characteristics of the animal they look like, particularly, they're just animals because the artist likes to draw animal-people, or wants to make philosophical or political point or whatever. Albedo falls into this category, in RPGs, as far as I remember. Of course, with such criteria, there's a subjective element, but it's like porn. You know it when you see it. So yeah, for me, there's a big difference between "Furry" and "Anthro" (and also "people-alternative"). It's just not as precise as might be wished. NB: Furry isn't the only subculture that has this whole "better than human" bullshit going on, nor the only one which might show up in RPGs. Don't even get me started on "Real vampires" or the like oh jesus. Perhaps we have all misjudged Joshuawoulf
|
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2009 12:06
|
|
|
I do not have parents or a family. As Athena springs from Zeus's head, so I spring from my character sheet.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2009 22:11
|
|
|
Which one of you is this: in 4ed they ruined the vampire template powerwise and the stats in the monster manual contradicted the template as far as powers go so i personally decided that despite making it both less and more complicated at the same time from the old dnd system i would prefer not to play it since my one track mind sticks on vampire issues. Though i did always enjoy the 3.0 and 3.5. There is a good movie about roleplaying in D&D The Gamers: Dorkness Rising You might check it out.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2009 01:55
|
|
|
etherwindtriesdesperatelytobandwagonontosomeonelesslikedthanhim.txt
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2009 21:03
|
|
|
Kerison posted:Why is that grognardy? Because he's using big words you wouldn't use in conversation? Do you want grinding, bean-counting, or errand-running in your tabletop games? Look, we can't all afford longbows at character creation.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2009 23:16
|
|
|
*smoothes skirt*
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2009 07:27
|
|
|
no wordsquote:Sure, it's flavorful, but when push comes to shove games are about abstract systems; we could skin Tetris so that pieces resembled concentration camp prisoners being pushed into a communal grave by nazis, and people would get the same kick out of it (save for the usual hypocrites trying to make it into the newspapers; and NO, before you ask I have no sympathy for nazis or anti-semitic movements, so move along now).
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2009 22:04
|
|
|
50 Foot Ant posted:Have to agree with the DDI subscription thing tho. Congrats, you have no idea what you're talking about
|
|
#
¿
Aug 16, 2009 22:35
|
|
|
Pros of DDI: Tons of stuff to read Character builder makes characters take like 10 minutes to make, complete with customized power cards The compendium gives you access to every monster ever printed Monster builder makes monsters take like 10 minutes to make You don't have to buy a *whatever* power book ever You don't have to buy a monster manual ever You don't have to buy an adventurer's vault book ever Cons of DDI: It doesn't work too well in a virtual windows environment on a mac
|
|
#
¿
Aug 16, 2009 23:08
|
|
|
Fuego Fish posted:I laughed at this, literally laughed out loud, and as I caught my reflection in the monitor I knew that I had become the grognard I had once reviled.
FirstCongoWar fucked around with this message at 21:15 on Aug 18, 2009 |
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2009 21:11
|
|
|
This is probably a nitpick considering the actual problems with Pathfinder, but why is all of the art in the "racial traits" section people in their underwear? Gnome chicks in their bra and panties aren't what drives me to play as a gnome. Edit: I do have to say, the PDF version is pretty incredibly well put together. If the book was worth reading, it would be totally worth the 10 bucks they're asking for it. FirstCongoWar fucked around with this message at 05:27 on Aug 21, 2009 |
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2009 05:20
|
|
|
Etherwind posted:There are three feats that every high-level combat mage should choose: Improved Counterspell and Improved Initiative leading to Reactive Counterspell. people should just not play a system where this stuff happens with any regularity.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2009 06:30
|
|
|
Perfectly formed breast cups beaten into breastplates are possibly the most grognard thing
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2009 20:08
|
|
|
I really liked the 1st edition of Exalted, it was a pretty cool sword and sandals type setting that had anime and eastern influences, but they weren't terrible and overwhelming. Then they released like Alchemicals and Fair Folk and Savant and Sorcerer and then 2nd edition happened. A few 1e supplements, like the first Scavenger Lands, Blood and Salt, and Savage Seas are really goddamn good. Edit: Manacle and Coin, too Edit Edit: run a game FirstCongoWar fucked around with this message at 23:55 on Aug 25, 2009 |
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2009 23:52
|
|
|
TG Discussion: +1 Vixen With Reasonable Breasts
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2009 10:57
|
|
|
Mikan posted:In my fair and unbiased opinion, Alchemicals owned and is literally perfection printed onto paper My favorite part was either the part where they get lightsabers or the part where the cool flavor hinted at in that old adventure (that introduced the concept) was systematically stripped out.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2009 22:59
|
|
|
You wrote in the lightsabers I knew it
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2009 23:26
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure that nobody who would play in a Maid game over skype is capable of feeling shame.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2009 00:35
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 08:21 |
|
|
TG Discussion: Eh, I'm technically otaku
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2009 02:40
|
|