Ayre el KaBeer Posted June 17, 2003 Share Posted June 17, 2003 Ayre:huh?Hehe sorry I do that to everyone who uses the "all your base are belong to us" line it's the Warcraft 3 big bad cheat, not sure where it started though. I'm a really big fan of Blizzard games, which explains the stupid signature I have... I think I'll translate it here: There is no cow level!At 6 seconds a round it's still only 30 seconds. The confused emoticon is the dryest one in the list, sort of going for sarcasm there but failed miserably. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knave Posted June 17, 2003 Share Posted June 17, 2003 LOL ::smokin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
operations Posted June 19, 2003 Share Posted June 19, 2003 And no... I have very little trouble calculating a 1 number times another number experience award - but most of the time I run progression rather than experience. Players tell me what they're working on... and when I get my grubby mits on their sheets I put up what I think they're getting better at based on what their characters are doing with special attention paid to their particular areas of interest. I don't care about 'game balance' I really couldn't care if Dorothy has ten more points than Roger. I care about story balance - the Wholeness and Validness of each character in itself and within the story - which I've always thought was the point behind the whole infantile 'balance' argument.Wow... so you play and run the characters for the players? Why not just hand them a script. ::sly I like D&D because I like to play fantasy settings occasionally. I dislike D20 for all the reasons mentioned. For me it doesn't work quickly enough, isn't specific enough and is overly constraining when it doesn't have to be. Whether or not you choose to accept my answer is immaterial because it is my answer.That sounds intellectually dishonest with yourself. You dislike it because it is overly constraining (read: lots of rules) yet also dislike it because it is NOT specific enough (read: lots of rules). Please make up your mind before taking someone's post way off topic in the future. ::confused Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knave Posted June 19, 2003 Share Posted June 19, 2003 Wow... so you play and run the characters for the players? Why not just hand them a script. Do you have a script for life? Do you always get to decide where you're putting your everyday XP?That sounds intellectually dishonest with yourself. You dislike it because it is overly constraining (read: lots of rules) yet also dislike it because it is NOT specific enough (read: lots of rules).Being detail oriented is not the same as being specialised. Please make up your mind before taking someone's post way off topic in the future. Please read a whole thread before you make judgements on it.-Knave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finbar Posted June 19, 2003 Share Posted June 19, 2003 Then how about someone who has...?FinbarThere were nice, simple ways to do things that were perfectly in the rules. You keep saying that either a) there aren't (by disregarding the feats rules), or making seem like they were a lot more complex than they really were....Sorry…Clarification then…Most of what you are trying to accomplish can be handled through multiclassing and feats, neither of which are hard to find or really difficult; even the charts are easy to find. The limitation is that it limits advancement in other areas, but that’s a price you’d pay in any system. Admittedly, I tend to do a lot of weird things as far as characters go, and (believe it or not) I tend to like looking at rules, but I use the rules as a diving board more often than not. Especially when you have my players…Do you actually have these wondrous devices? I don't doubt their existence - just their completeness and the size of their type.Actually, I’ve got one of each…Obviously they only put the important charts/rules on them, but that’s usually more than enough. Any good ref should know their system well enough to have at least locations memorized, or how to get to them quickly.You agree that D20 has more finely grained / more detailed / more nitpicky rules than storyteller for example. (Storyteller hardly being a perfect system, but then what is?). You also claim that D20 has no more rules than Storyteller. Actually, after looking at some of my books, I’m sort of debating this one…ST tends to have more developed build rules, plus more detailed equipment. D20 cannot do all the things ST can doNon-issue. Neither game is necessarily going to be able to handle all that the other does, and there’s a lot that’s in neither game. D20 undoubtedly places more emphasis on rules. D20 - particularly D&D is produced with far better quality control. I wouldn't dream of disputing that. Quality control however makes for a quality product, not necessarily an inspired one.It’s nice to know that an inspired product is not necessarily a quality product ::wink …The fact that you like rules and rules explanations and I don't. Sometimes it is nice to have examples of how some rules work. I appreciate the ability to make things up as you go, but it’s not always a good thing. Admittedly D20 has the experience of D&D to draw upon when writing the individual rules. BUT it would be nice if certain rules didn’t feel like a quick add-on, and if some sort of consistency check had been applied to the Aeon line. I wish that it could have been of higher quality.Also, I like rules because sometimes, if a rule is presented in an interestingly enough way, I can use it as a hook. It makes me curious to see what it would look like in play, so I find a way of incorporating it into the story.Again, I don't mind a general dislike for the system...That's one thing. My problem has been the knee-jerk reaction to hate the system, simply because it's the oldest system on the market. Sorry; my friends and I joke that I’ve got a 3-pt Curiosity flaw. I guess what I’m looking for is why you like D&D, but not the games that have decided to take advantage of its rules system. I appreciate that D20 is not D&D, but, well, that’s the problem with learning Champions a bit too intensely…a ranged weapon is a ranged weapon, it doesn’t matter if it’s a crossbow, a laser rifle, an M16; the only things that are different are the special effects. I guess I’m just curious why you like D&D, but dislike D20; I think it’s kinda neat what you can do with a rules system, and far you can take it before it no longer works. Sorta like seeing just how far you can push a Porsche…Also, another part of the issue is that, while discussing a setting, you merely said that you disliked D20, without backing it up. It makes little sense to say you dislike the system while discussing how a setting was handled…4) White Wolf are obviously knob heads for cancelling the best bunch of games to come out of their games 'studio'. Pah - profit. Who cares about steeeking profit!Part of that quality issue…Outside of some adolescent need to rebel against authority, I have yet to see a good argument why the system should be nailed to a wall...I love the young ‘uns…All I'm saying is that after all this time I don't like certain aspects of D20. Not because its D20 or linked to D&D - but because I don't feel I want to bother with certain things any more - not because I'm better than whoever does want them, but because they don't suit me. If others hear me and feel similarly or differently more power to them.This is what I was looking for…A lot of this discussion could have been skipped if this had been said earlier...Your assuming that I'm having some sort of 'reaction' to D20 is offensive.Look at from my perspective…You did have “some sort of reaction”; you didn’t specify what was wrong, you didn’t add to the discussion by giving us something to, well, discuss, and you didn’t say anything about the setting at hand. You simply said, “I don’t like D20.”I've been playing these things a tad bit longer, as well as a number of other systems, so I tend to get offended when I get a simple "I don't like the system" when someone's discussing a cool setting...If you don't like something, be an adult and say why, goshdarnit! Otherwise, you add nothing to the discussion and start it down another course it shouldn’t have gone down in the first place…All because you don’t like a system…AnonimityBut they need to be said sometimes…FinbarAlso worth noting that GURPS is a good reason to not argue "but it's taking over"; it's a point-based system that does what D20 is doing, but is cheaper and was more pervasive...At least with D20 you don't need to buy the D&D corebooks...(of course, most people use GURPS solely for the reference books, but that's another issue)...Same with D20…Overall, what I’m looking at is what amounts to a silly statement said to disparage discussion re: a setting, with nothing said about the system but “I don’t like it.” This followed by a lot of posturing (on both sides), as well as you not bothering to listen to the other side, or at least considering my perspective. I appreciate that you’ve got a lot of experience; that’s not a legitimate reason to ignore someone else’s opinion, or to just quip and hope no one will call you on it…(Then again, I expect to be called on that kind of stuff; but that’s just me…)In conclusion (I hope ::sarcasm ...), what do you think about the Judge Dredd game?FR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knave Posted June 19, 2003 Share Posted June 19, 2003 Also, I like rules because sometimes, if a rule is presented in an interestingly enough way, I can use it as a hook. It makes me curious to see what it would look like in play, so I find a way of incorporating it into the story.This is a fair point. I feel this way about some spell descriptions but far more about setting hooks. On the other hand there was a point where the party mage tried to stick my cleric of Tempus in the head with a dagger for publicly embarrassing him. When my cleric said 'What the hell are you trying to kill me for'. The mage said 'I'm not trying to kill you. I know no-one can kill you with a dagger.' Which is just a plain horrible debate to have to face - it's a lack of realism problem leading to a breakdown of suspension of disbelief in an otherwise excellent player... (try saying that 3 times fast. ::ninja ::crazy )Actually, I’ve got one of each…Obviously they only put the important charts/rules on them, but that’s usually more than enough. Any good ref should know their system well enough to have at least locations memorized, or how to get to them quickly.As I said before I'd rather read settings or pretty much anything than memorise rules and tables or locations. I refuse to belive that that makes me a bad GM if my players have enough fun to come back for more - and winning gaming cons and stuff. (though that is highly dubious process - how do you measure fun anyway)It’s nice to know that an inspired product is not necessarily a quality product …Quality takes money. Inspiration just takes inspiration and sweat. ::tongue Sorry; my friends and I joke that I’ve got a 3-pt Curiosity flaw. I guess what I’m looking for is why you like D&D, but not the games that have decided to take advantage of its rules system. I appreciate that D20 is not D&D, but, well, that’s the problem with learning Champions a bit too intensely…a ranged weapon is a ranged weapon, it doesn’t matter if it’s a crossbow, a laser rifle, an M16; the only things that are different are the special effects. I guess I’m just curious why you like D&D, but dislike D20;This question is like asking why someone likes icecream. I like D&D because swords and sorcery is fun - and it's what I played first. But I like sword and sorcery in general - not swords and sorcery ala d20 or ala basic / first ed / 2nd ed / d20.I could turn the question around and say - Why should I like D20 when I've found other systems that suit me better that can be used in the same place? If I can play a skill based, low on actual rules type system and have more fun than D20 - then I like that more than I like d20. I don't hate d20. I just dislike it in comparison. Which is what I've said. I don't like D20. I STILL don't like D20. I don't think I'll EVER like D20. I don't think I'll ever like vegetables either. They're all 'good for you' and stuff... ewwww.The point about a ranged weapon is a ranged weapon. Yes - and if you're shot with one you'll probably die. Something very badly modelled by D20. You could also say a lock-picking skill is a lock-picking skill... being a lockpicker of unparallelled ability doesn't mean that you've got 40 points of other thiefly abilities. It just means that you're better than the best thief in existence at picking locks. Maybe you're also good at playing golf. Does that mean you're a golfer with a rogue class? Or that you have the skills - Golf - Good. Pick Locks - Unparallelled? I think it’s kinda neat what you can do with a rules system, and far you can take it before it no longer works. Sorta like seeing just how far you can push a Porsche…My mates and I made a game system called X once. It was half ars magica, and 1/2 runequest. It kinda sorta worked. ::tongue Also, another part of the issue is that, while discussing a setting, you merely said that you disliked D20, without backing it up. It makes little sense to say you dislike the system while discussing how a setting was handled…I disagree completely. To me settings and systems are largely unrelated. Not completely, mind - just largely. For example - I've played D&D using Rolemaster / Runequest / Mage and Ars Magica rules on separate occasions. Why was it D&D? Well - it had characters from D&D campaigns. The spells were D&D flavour. The action was D&D flavour. People might have died with one stick of a dagger, but it was still D&D. My belief is that systems should try to simulate life with a flavour of their setting - rather than settings being moulded about a set of rules.The Systems that are so closely tied to their rules settings are things like and Ars Magica - where the Mythic flavour of the setting is central to the rules. Settings like Aberrant could just as easily be played using Fuzion, GURPS or whatever.This is what I was looking for…A lot of this discussion could have been skipped if this had been said earlier...Lol... but to assume anything else would be unthinkable. Truth be told I was pretty flummoxed when you replied to my original post... cause it wasn't adversarial. It literally - "Why I don't like D20" with the reasons... ok - I got carried away with the reasons... but I tend to get carried away with EVERYTHING. ::devilangel And what's more it was in response to your - Strangely enough, I like the D20 System...It's got a lot of crunchy bits , it's a LOT easier to track character progression, and it uses a lot less dice than some systems. So it was perfectly relevant.Lol - then I quote me - in my very first post in this thread.--- bottom line - everyone likes what suits them best... I'm a system tinkerer in my spare time, but when it comes to playing I want something to handle a few things quickly - everything else I will probably wing anyway and I couldn't care less what the rules say. I really REALLY don't want to turn to page 207 or whatever it is. On the other hand I want some realism - but that I inject through common sense more than relying on the system - which regardless of its complexity will fail at some point.Which was my criticism of D&D - it doesn't suit me because I like my games to be broad stroke stuff with the details left to me - or I'll end up making them that way anyway.I appreciate that you’ve got a lot of experience; that’s not a legitimate reason to ignore someone else’s opinion, or to just quip and hope no one will call you on it…(Then again, I expect to be called on that kind of stuff; but that’s just me…)Oh nonsense. I expressed my opinion. Never did I say 'This is crap - bin it'. I said things like 'This doesn't suit me. I don't like having to memorise 300 pages and examples. I like skill points more than I like classes - cause they let you specialise more'. That's all allowed you know! Your argument basically was that my opinion was wrong. Which is clearly a load of old codgers because opinions can't be wrong or invalid - they just are. At worst opinions are ill-informed - but since I've played the game - mine quite obviously isn't.Further - your counter examples were 'but you can do that using this finickety rule or that one.' Which kinda wasn't the point. I KNOW you can wangle and shake any system till rules fall out of the branches - games companies can release handbooks with more classes and kits and all sorts of schtuff. - my point has always been that's NOT WHAT I WANT.Now a good counter argument might be: D20 is good cause their supplements have lots of examples - I like that. Or maybe I like the way D20's class system creates useful groups. Or D20's handling of skills is better than any previous version of D&D and the classes reflect how people of setting might train anyway. Maybe even, I like being able to brag that I have a 20th level wizard with a staff of Serious Nukage.So don't tell me my opinion is wrong. That is just very annoying and really doesn't prove that I'm stupid or you're clever. It just proves how bloody minded we both are in not letting up on this STUPID BLOODY TOPIC. ::tongue what do you think about the Judge Dredd game?Lol... don't actually have it - but from your description it sounds really cool. (Minor Major 2000AD fan ::tongue ). I'd be more keen to buy it if it wasn't D20. I was quite disappointed by the D20 Star Wars setting which I bought a few years back - having put off buying the WEG version for so long that I couldn't get one... (drat).-Knave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
operations Posted June 20, 2003 Share Posted June 20, 2003 Do you have a script for life? Do you always get to decide where you're putting your everyday XP?Actually, I do get to decide where my personal life XP goes. I pick my job, and by default, to learn the skills associated with it. I choose what stuff I learn to fix at home, and what to contract out. I choose what games to learn to play, and how much HTML I learn. I short, I choose what I learn, and what I forget the next day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knave Posted June 20, 2003 Share Posted June 20, 2003 I short, I choose what I learn, and what I forget the next day.Cool... can I see you character sheet?My PCs choose skills by doing stuff rather than scribbling XP points on the backs of their hands - just like everyone else on the planet. I don't say 'here take this shiney new potato peeling skill - oooh' - but if I feel they've pushed their Psi to beyond their limits I might say - 'give yourself a point of Psi' or if they keep getting into fights I might make them put up a point of brawl. Once I've done that the players will generally say something like 'Now can I put my X skill up... I've been working on it for a while' - and I'll decide based on what I think is fair and by how much they've actually been using it - rather than by handing out an amount of XP. In other words - some of my players' character skills are dictated by the things they choose to do - and some of them are dictated by things that they might have to do.On the other hand I very seldom (if ever) force a group down a particular path during a game - so they have every chance to excercise whatever skills they might want to gain.-Knave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.