|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Jun 30, 2013 13:48:46 GMT -8
CC don't intimate I'm a fool that's a cheap personal shot. YOU may not like flame wars BUT there are plenty of people, like me and STU, who DO. intimate I'm a fool or any such and I will make a scathing personal attack in public return . . . take this flame war of a thread for what it is. If you don't like flame wars or you think that bring mature is to sit in self righteous indignation and dismissivness of them then you are cutting yourself off from NORMAL social interaction . . . Flame wars are the Internet equivalent of shooting the shit with a bunch of mates sat around a table in a pub - you don't agree with each other, you argue the toss and it gets lively. Better than just sitting around with warm beers staring at each other wondering if you should get your dick out to provoke some fucking life from them. To quote Withnail "the first thing I'll do is put in a fucking jukebox to liven up you stiffs". Besides I did offer a coherent counter argument that you choose to ignore. Hippy shit is hippy shit and thespians and real role players are as asinine as munchkins and min maxers. You yourself have previously said as much, yet to maintain an indefensible position you change politic. At least I remain consistent in being a fence sitting douch bag - the middle road may not be popular but I stick to it. Fucking hippies. Aaron I simply state that I will not argue with fools, or suffer them gladly for that matter, just to be someone's entertainment. I am not doing anything but quoting a known proverb - even linking to it. You are reading into it. I do not understand your argument as it is unclear to me what you are saying in relation to the very specific statement I made that the podcast of D&D Next reveals the fallacy behind the claim that 5e will be backwards compatible to AD&D.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Jun 30, 2013 14:27:54 GMT -8
Oh fuck off - I made it quite clearly above. Read what I fucking wrote - its clear as day. Twice now you've called me a fool to support your factitious argument. You told people who don't agree with you they are wrong but failed, in all the verbage, to actually coherently counter THEIR contention. You believe your opinion is somehow graven in the structure of the universe and shouldn't be questioned. You confuse debate with being contrary. You've made snide personal remarks to all posters who call bullshit on your argument. You sit there and claim some special dispensation as a high school drop out which gives you the right to be confrontational without reasoned or coherent structure to your argument. I'm not a high school drop out and I'm sick of pulling punches because I should feel guilty for finding high school easy and higher degree studies more pleasure than trauma. I'm sick of trying to be polite in pointing out inconsistencies in the logic of an argument - and arguments must have a definite logic and internal consistency or be of no merit. I'm sick of hearing about people's personal issues and adolescent traumas as a justification for poorly reasoned contentions. Do I blame being bi polar for the failure of my stated contentions? No. But then again I fucking read my critics with an open mind and modify my position accordingly when my own contention fails the test. So instead of resorting to fucktard junior high level of argument by implying I'm a fool answer the questions I've asked at least twice before: 1) what is wrong with having tactics as a part of any RPG game? 2) why is total immersion the holy grail? How do you reconcile that with your previous criticism s of thespians and real role players. 3) given that thespians and real role players were identified with the same disregard, and at the same time (in the same conversation at the same convention), as munchkins and min maxers - what suddenly makes them of value compared to the others? Or has the point of the original observation that gave rise to these labels that any extreme is bad been missed? Fuck hippies fuck incoherent bullshit fuck people who think 'clever' is using the thesaurus function on their PC. Next time I'll reply in fucking Latin just to be real arse Make it personal again and it'll go well beyond flame war chatter - don't call me a fool or think that implying isn't the same as declaring Aaron
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Jun 30, 2013 15:09:01 GMT -8
Regarding your original contention: Dare pondus idonea fumo. Delphinum natare doces. Age quod agis Adversus solem reliquitor. Componere lites - ad verecurdiam Aaron
|
|
|
Post by Stu Venable on Jun 30, 2013 21:09:03 GMT -8
There are times when I'm in the mood for tactical combat, and there are times when I just want to get the combat over with so we can get back to the story. It depends on the game, the mood at the table and my own mood.
The system I'm currently working uses narrative rather than a map. One of the reasons for this is because games over Google+ are becoming more and more plentiful, and having a system that doesn't REQUIRE tactical combat would be a plus for on-line play. For example, take a game like DnD4E, which has tactical combat integrally woven into the system. Playing it on G+ would require some sort of mapping application, or a camera on a map or some such thing. Whereas Traveller (Mongoose) with its range bands and such could (and has been) easily run via voice chat.
So I think that's one of the reasons many recent games have relied on narrative for combat.
That said, there are times when I come up with an idea for a game or scene that really needs a more tactical system.
I ran Fantasy adventure at a con a while back, and there was a fight in the upstairs of an inn. There was one narrow hallway that about a dozen rooms opened in to. It made for a tactically hellish fight, where characters were isolated from each other, unable to gang up or help each other out.
It would have been a pain in the neck to try to run something like that relying on narrative, as it would have been a bunch of arguing and grousing -- "why can't I get next to him?" "How come I can't pass the fighter in front of me?" "What do you mean I might hit the thief? Can't I just move to the side?"
We used to use battle mats with old 1st Ed DnD all the time. That's why we painted miniatures!
|
|
|
Post by Arcona on Jul 1, 2013 1:56:06 GMT -8
Its one thing to say
"I dont do battle mats because it doesnt work for my group"
Its quite another to basically say 'If you use a battlemat you are doing it wrong and you cant roleplay because you need a battlemat.' hence inferring you are right, we are wrong, goodnight and qq. and add to this 'and dont contradict me cause I was bullied hence if you contradict me those feelings come back'.
I dont want to make it personal but especially with you CC there are loads of contradictions in your own 'what I consider proper roleplaying'.
You FORCE someone to be a mapper and use a map and yet consider battlemat a disgrace. You explain how you count in 10 foot squares, describe the scene and then have them positioned on a grid with marching order and everything and yet if someone says 'er... yea, thats what you do on a battlemat' you feel they are doing it wrong.
RPGs came from Wargaming. Gygax and his pals playing wargames decided that 'hey you know, this guy here... why is he fighting?'. And they started adding more and more 'roleplaying elements' and a 'narrative' to their wargaming battles.
And presto, you had DnD. A roleplaying game for fighting Dragons IN Dungeons.
So, like all things in nature being cyclical, RPGs have come a full circle and returned to the battlemat age. Granted in some cases this becomes extreme and the minutia of using the battlemat drag play down... but so does the not having the visual representation there either. I like to imagine things and a visual aid (a picture, a handout like those in the Deep Below uber published campaign , a minitature and a battlemat) helps me with this.
Difference is I dont say those who DONT use it play the game wrong. You do! And while from many others I might ignore it, I cant do that from you because you have a very holier than thou attitude and speak as if Gary was some kind of flawless guru who is the paragon of human life. Thanks but no thanks!
And so that I am not seen (even by you) as a contrarian douchebag I will give another example of inconsistency...
You lament that some of your players are so foolish in that they immediately thought your music focused Cleric was a bard. Pah! What fools that went by what is traditional into pigeon holing the poor new player.
And then...you give us a 'speech' about how you give XP based on performance of set party roles. The wizard who wanted to be a fighter gets Poor performance because a wizard must stay in the back and cast spells while your player went to the front! Aha! You are playing the stereotype wrong! You have (P)oor performance and gets 50% of the XP! And god Forbid the warrior use tactics, flee or withdraw or such stuff! God forbid he has character and isnt yet another carbon copy big stupid fighter type guy! If he isnt on the front line he is not fulfilling the Holy Mandate of Classes indicated by Lord of the Universe Gygax and hence deserves no XP at all! Cause he is also doing it wrong!
So yea,
Battlemat, no battlemat... the world is open. RPGs are varied and free and thats what I want from them. I want to be able to play the stereotypical Paladin today and the completely out of the box Wizard charging the orcs headstrong tomorrow! And while I am it, I will make the wizard a dwarf! Oh the humanity!
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Jul 1, 2013 4:27:19 GMT -8
And presto, you had DnD. A roleplaying game for fighting Dragons IN Dungeons. Besides it was Arneson that put the Dragon the Dungeon in the first place. I'd disagree about where we are on the pendulum at the moment - except for 4e and the growth of exclusively miniatures games - I'd say we're on the wrong side of extremely narrative combat. But then again I'm really having trouble with something I heard a few months ago when I thought I'd listen to some other podcasts thru the week on the long drive to work. A podcaster sat there talking about something he called 'deep roleplaying' - then he described what was going on in this aaamazing session of 'deep RP'. They were PRETENDING to eat a meal, no actual food or drink . . . The entire session was PRETENDING IN THE REAL WORLD to eat and drink. I was basically 'WTF THAT SHIT IS DISTURBED', disturbed in a 'that's hipster self indulgent naval gazing Ouroborus human centipede bullshit' way, disturbed in a 'it's a game not theatre sports' way, disturbed as in 'what the fuck is wrong with props especially food to be consumed props?' way, really really disturbed in a 'fuck I know several treatments I can recommend and my fee starts at a base £25/hr sit in the comfy chair I'm listening' way. This was on one of the bigger RPG podcasts and I haven't listened to it since. 'Deep RP?', nah hippy shit . . . Like 'look at me man I'm so cool and like in touch with my genital chakras I can just like roleplay soooo much better than all you unenlightened ordinary people and the best you can do is listen and wish you were like me and my cool mates not that we care about being cool because we're just like beings of pure light who exist on this plane to like observe and teach and ooh . . . is that a unicorn?'. That's why I hate hippies and that's why I think 'the story' is beginning to over shadow 'the game' again - to it's detriment. Last time story trumped everything D&D ended up with system endorsed rails as a consequence . . . Specifically fucking Dragonlance and all the modules that emulated it (because, come on, if you chose Tanis you knew you'd be there to the very end . . . and it was an obvious choice . . .) Aaron
|
|
maxinstuff
Supporter
Posts: 1,939
Preferred Game Systems: DCC RPG, Shadowrun 5e, Savage Worlds, GURPS 4e, HERO 6e, Mongoose Traveller
Favorite Species of Monkey: Proboscis
|
Post by maxinstuff on Jul 1, 2013 4:58:15 GMT -8
And presto, you had DnD. A roleplaying game for fighting Dragons IN Dungeons. Besides it was Arneson that put the Dragon the Dungeon in the first place. I'd disagree about where we are on the pendulum at the moment - except for 4e and the growth of exclusively miniatures games - I'd say we're on the wrong side of extremely narrative combat. But then again I'm really having trouble with something I heard a few months ago when I thought I'd listen to some other podcasts thru the week on the long drive to work. A podcaster sat there talking about something he called 'deep roleplaying' - then he described what was going on in this aaamazing session of 'deep RP'. They were PRETENDING to eat a meal, no actual food or drink . . . The entire session was PRETENDING IN THE REAL WORLD to eat and drink. I was basically 'WTF THAT SHIT IS DISTURBED', disturbed in a 'that's hipster self indulgent naval gazing Ouroborus human centipede bullshit' way, disturbed in a 'it's a game not theatre sports' way, disturbed as in 'what the fuck is wrong with props especially food to be consumed props?' way, really really disturbed in a 'fuck I know several treatments I can recommend and my fee starts at a base £25/hr sit in the comfy chair I'm listening' way. This was on one of the bigger RPG podcasts and I haven't listened to it since. 'Deep RP?', nah hippy shit . . . Like 'look at me man I'm so cool and like in touch with my genital chakras I can just like roleplay soooo much better than all you unenlightened ordinary people and the best you can do is listen and wish you were like me and my cool mates not that we care about being cool because we're just like beings of pure light who exist on this plane to like observe and teach and ooh . . . is that a unicorn?'. That's why I hate hippies and that's why I think 'the story' is beginning to over shadow 'the game' again - to it's detriment. Last time story trumped everything D&D ended up with system endorsed rails as a consequence . . . Specifically fucking Dragonlance and all the modules that emulated it (because, come on, if you chose Tanis you knew you'd be there to the very end . . . and it was an obvious choice . . .) Aaron Me and my son Rp'd the other day - he was Grimlock and I was Galvatron. He shot me in the face until I died from it. It was some deep shit.
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Jul 1, 2013 6:05:28 GMT -8
Deep Role Playing. enuf said
|
|
|
Post by Stu Venable on Jul 1, 2013 7:43:44 GMT -8
I think I'll record a deep RP actual play next year for April Fools Day.
|
|
|
Post by greatwyrm on Jul 1, 2013 15:33:26 GMT -8
So, I found what appears to be the streamed session on YouTube. www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_2iyvdF_qoI say "appears" because I don't see any minis on a battlemap. I admit, I flipped through it in fast forward. I see James Wyatt (?) drawing on a white board. I see an old-school style map that's probably scanned in or from a pdf. And the people involved seem to be roleplaying at times. Must be my mistake. This clearly can't be anything from Next/5e.
|
|
HyveMynd
Supporter
Dirty hippie, PbtA, Fate, & Cortex Prime <3er
Posts: 2,273
Preferred Game Systems: PbtA, Cortex Plus, Fate, Ubiquity
Currently Playing: Monsterhearts 2
Currently Running: The Sprawl
Favorite Species of Monkey: None
|
Post by HyveMynd on Jul 1, 2013 19:24:50 GMT -8
Me and my son Rp'd the other day - he was Grimlock and I was Galvatron. He shot me in the face until I died from it. It was some deep shit. I almost fell out of my chair at that one. *slow clap* I haven't finished watching the video, but I'm not all that impressed with it. I don't think Mearls is that great of a GM. Also, Kainguru could you give me the name of that podcast you listened to? THe one with the "deep roleplaying" about eating a meal. I want to go punch that guy in the junk for giving hippie/indie gamers a bad name.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Jul 1, 2013 21:36:07 GMT -8
I don't even think it was an indie game necessarily - NB: I'm not using the term hippy in reference to that game type rather in reference to a mindset/personality type outside of gaming parlance. Hipster would probably be a better term, but in 1977 England Johnny Rotten made the declaration 'never trust a hippy (or anyone over 30)' and it stuck Now I hate to speak ill of certain podcast celebrities, but the gentleman concerned contributes to several podcasts usually via Skype. He is often treated with a degree of reverence normally accorded the pope by the other hosts of these podcasts he contributes to. The podcasts concerned involve footwear and under dark mail . . . I think that should clue the more savvy without starting inter podcast warfare. NB the opinions and declarations of the person concerned are held in high enough regard by the listenership to brook no challenge . . . Though I am mystified as to why and with what badge his authority is assumed. Aaron
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Jul 1, 2013 22:22:47 GMT -8
So, I found what appears to be the streamed session on YouTube. www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_2iyvdF_qoI say "appears" because I don't see any minis on a battlemap. I admit, I flipped through it in fast forward. I see James Wyatt (?) drawing on a white board. I see an old-school style map that's probably scanned in or from a pdf. And the people involved seem to be roleplaying at times. Must be my mistake. This clearly can't be anything from Next/5e. Thanks for the link greatwyrm I will set the time aside to see this now that it is up. Highlights (taken from comments because I was going to bed): I am interested to witness how he makes use of the map bound into the book. Reading between the lines, using the battlemat means no thought of a mapper role exists in D&D 5e. The battlemat usage signifies to me that I would still be receiving those beatings after this game. As an aside, I have now figured out where the hippie rage comes from. See, if I hold my tongue long enough, the answers come without shitting all over where I live. I had read it as an attack against me because I emphasised, here, role-playing - often confused with playing an asshole safely and conveniently behind the mask of a persona ( cue Lumberjack song) rather than picking up the agreed upon role/function to contribute as part of the team of players using their combined player skill in the game, for which the GM presents the challenge in game. Some one once called me impatient when I was 22 and I have worked on my patience steadily ever since.
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Jul 2, 2013 4:36:47 GMT -8
My opinion... jesus, do i really have to say the obvious and add more words to my posts... as of 12 minuutes, beyond the DM's necessary commentary to set up this game (end 5.27 minutes), Mearles is leading a Pick Your Path to Adventure book with roll play to determine which page he turns to and reads from. [/blockquote] [*] you got a little informatipomn [*} list of rumours reported to players [*] this confirms your suspicion (they were not suspicious - telling players what they are) [*] roll play Intelligence check for lore - casino time! Lore needs a new pair of shoes. 30! Winner! [*] you heard a specific story - no role play. No name for the rumour giver. No nothing. DM reports. [*] zzzzzz [*] The humanoids look nervous... - what does that look like? Immaterial data. [*] I do like the use of his hands in giving visuals. [*] Added information reported because of the dice roll of 30. [*] player asks for information to be given to him by DM rather than role-play with NPCs - good example Mearles and this is about player agency implicitly stolen by example. [Asking permission is to seek denial.] [*] (just before 17:00) flat, unenergetic role-play Mearles with Mearles. Tell us how it is done. [*] back to reading description from book This is actually painful for me up until here. 20 minutes and no role-play. Narration and reading. Passive. zzzzz [*] 20:00 possibility to interact with Orc working on something. [*] roll play - Wisdom check [*] Mearles describes what the Orcs feel. Tells what the Orcs are thinking. This is the Pathfinder game I have no feeling for. [*] More information. Telling players what they feel, know, act... etc. These four players are not redundant.24 minutes in. Another Widom check. Orc throat slit. NO ONE ASKED FOR A CHECK, of course they never had a reason to check because everything is spoonfed to them. More spoonfeeding: you know the guy is professionally killed. [*]26:20 Minutes - FIRST PLAYER PARTICIPATION WITH GAME: I want to look around the temple... [*] wait for it... Roll Play Intelligence or Wisdom. 9 [/ul] Is this what is meant by immersion? Is this immersion? It is far from player engrossment. 28 minutes, player interact with each other. Player skill discussing Dopplegangers, infiltration, and making a plan. It is a shame they are basically regurgitating the DM instead of hashing information out themselves. 20+ minutes into the game, this is the highlight for me. Almost turned it off. Glad I did not stay awake to watch this live. Keeping in mind that these players know the module, this is a lost opportunity to demonstrate gripping role-playing that inspires. The first 30 minutes makes Perkins look like a God in comparison to Mearles. I would rather play 3.5 (no I wouldn't) going by this video. [*] CON check. I am failing. First combat: Initiative promotes individuality rather collective group bonding. Feats activated. No battlemat (and that is good). Meta Game discussion about AC... "Action Points" surge! This is role-played according to the script of the character record. Cannot tell if the players actually imagine this or are guided in their actions by the stats on their PC record. IF I something engages me, beyond the first 47 minutes, I will add it. I do not see a battlemat but the roll play carries it off without the necessity of the chess tiles. = = = = Last 10 minutes involves a Q&A that basically explains how all the munchkin mechanics work. Very 4e. Now, about the meat pies.... given the fact the Orcs would be looking for a reason to leave their post, I would not have let any roll decide. Serendipity! The Orc motives would have been known to me and the player would have been lucky off the bat. IF something else had been said, something not aligned with either the Orc motives or the predisposition as a race (i.e. alignment), I would have rolled a reaction check. That is AD&D 1e. Anyways. It is what is it is. But it does not make 5e = 1e or 2e. There is a combination of 3e and 4e. That is the kind of game 5e appears to be. I was not impressed with the DM. I was unhappy with the depiction of role-playing. I would have stood further away from the players than the DM.
|
|
kevinr
Journeyman Douchebag
Posts: 158
|
Post by kevinr on Jul 2, 2013 6:24:02 GMT -8
I have not watched the video and I probably wont. However a video like this is not going to show you how to or how they roleplay, it is going to show you how the module runs with the RAW system. As R&D you want to get as many rules and rolls tested in the limited time you have, to show how they work and behave with each other. If you actually did roleplay it would take 5x as long to go over half as much of the system. WOTC is not trying to sell the people watching such a video on roleplaying(I assume most of us have drank that kool aid a long time ago) they are trying to sell them their fancy new rules system.
To get an idea of how the new system is actually played you would need to run it yourself or find an actual play video/podcast with fans playing the system and not someone demonstrating how the rules work/have changed.
|
|