|
Post by RudeAlert on Jun 3, 2017 13:16:13 GMT -8
Regarding the GMPC issue, I fully agree with the hosts that the character being described in the email was not a GMPC but rather a properly constructed NPC. I would say that what defines a GMPC has nothing to do with their power level, though they often will tend to be more powerful as a consequence of the type of GM that is likely to introduce GMPCs in their games and their motivations for doing so. Rather I would say that what qualifies a GMPC is their narrative significance. NPCs are inherently narratively inferior to the PCs (they're the extras, walk-ons, and supporting cast of the "show"), GMPCs on the other hand are either narratively equal or even superior to the PCs (basically main characters but played by the GM). As for whether the party NEEDS a tank, or healer, or talky-guy, or whatever, Hell Nah! The thing that makes a character/PC/NPC/"protagonist of any type" interesting is their flaws (I'm sure stork would agree with me on that one). I would argue that the same logic applies to parties. If a character is good at everything and is always prepared to deal with any challenge they face with little to no difficulty, they're frikin boring! How is it any different for a party of characters? If the party has every role covered, then every challenge is just a matter of getting the right character in the right spot and letting them do their thing... k, whatever. If, on the other hand, the party is missing a "crucial" character type, any situation that would normally be easily resolved by such a character suddenly becomes a far more interesting challenge for the whole group. How does the wizardless group deal with this magical doorway that can only be opened by magic so they can go slay the evil monster? How does the group of unruly, unkempt, and uncouth half-orc barbarians deal with the delicate matter of negotiating an alliance with another group to help fight off a major threat? Those are the stories worth telling and worth remembering! In the long run, no one cares about the endless streaks of easy victories by the perfectly balanced party, but that bunch of nerdy, scrawny, halfling wizards that took down an angry hobgoblin horde through cunning and sheer steely ballage, that's fucking 'MMMAAAAAZZIINNNG!!!!! (Had to channel Tappy for that level of enthusiasm.)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2017 13:51:13 GMT -8
As for whether the party NEEDS a tank, or healer, or talky-guy, or whatever, Hell Nah! The thing that makes a character/PC/NPC/"protagonist of any type" interesting is their flaws (I'm sure stork would agree with me on that one). I would argue that the same logic applies to parties. If a character is good at everything and is always prepared to deal with any challenge they face with little to no difficulty, they're frikin boring! How is it any different for a party of characters? If the party has every role covered, then every challenge is just a matter of getting the right character in the right spot and letting them do their thing... k, whatever. If, on the other hand, the party is missing a "crucial" character type, any situation that would normally be easily resolved by such a character suddenly becomes a far more interesting challenge for the whole group. How does the wizardless group deal with this magical doorway that can only be opened by magic so they can go slay the evil monster? How does the group of unruly, unkempt, and uncouth half-orc barbarians deal with the delicate matter of negotiating an alliance with another group to help fight off a major threat? Those are the stories worth telling and worth remembering! In the long run, no one cares about the endless streaks of easy victories by the perfectly balanced party, but that bunch of nerdy, scrawny, halfling wizards that took down an angry hobgoblin horde through cunning and sheer steely ballage, that's fucking 'MMMAAAAAZZIINNNG!!!!! (Had to channel Tappy for that level of enthusiasm.) uhh... What? Having a balanced group doesn't detract from the game. Just because your party has a wizard doesn't mean that all magical challenges are simply alleviated with no interest or difficulty. I'd go so far as to say you have this mostly backwards. Fish out of water stories are great and all, but would get old real quick. Oh, another dungeon full of deathtraps for the party where no one picked rogue? Do you just hate us, seriously? Players are giving their que to the GM when they pick what they want to play. Rogues want to sneak. P.I.'s want to work cases. It's the bat signal of "THIS IS WHAT I WANT!". You were closer to the money when you were talking about flaws. If you want a cool challenge, don't depend on the mechanics to create it. Place the characters values in the crosshairs. Will Batman use a gun if it is the only way to save Robin? Will your character really run into that burning building, even if it's to save the villain (for more heroic characters)? It's not the difficulty of the task, but the decision behind it that is interesting. You know what I think would be amazing? If GM's would get on board with their players and stop deciding for themselves what they think would be best. Your players already told you what they think is cool. If you have other ideas, go write your novel and stop trying to force it on everyone else.
|
|
|
Post by RudeAlert on Jun 3, 2017 14:26:03 GMT -8
Regarding stork's feelings towards Apocalypse World and that sort of ruleset, I am of the same mind. I want my actions in the narrative to also be supported and impacted by the mechanics of the rules, so I want rules that are more clearly outlined and specific than essentially, "do what you want and just roll for it." If my character has certain traits/attributes/ads/disads/whatevers, that will influence how I play the character and thus the overall narrative. If my character has certain abilities that work a certain way, that will also influence how I play that character. If I know that the rules cover certain types of actions in such and such a way, that will also influence how I play the character in reaction to events in the game. In the end it is a game, and the rules of the game will have an impact on how events unfold in the story. Rules that are too open or vague or leave a lot up to GM interpretation make the game as a whole a lot less defined for me as a player since a lot of things will be decided on the fly by the GM based on a very loose set of rules. Having more specific rules lays out a more solid foundation that allows players to be able to make better predictions about the likely consequences of their actions in the game. Much like in real life, the consistency of Earth's gravity, combined with my knowledge of my own strength, means that if I see a 5-foot gap, I know that I can realistically jump over it; a 20-foot gap on the other hand, is a whole other story. So, like Stork, I prefer a more defined system that isn't as loose, and provides a solid foundation on which to build a story that feels more consistent from session to session, and can be assimilated by the players in order to make informed and impactful decisions in the game.
|
|
|
Post by OFTHEHILLPEOPLE on Jun 3, 2017 17:44:33 GMT -8
Holy shit, Rob came prepared to wreck shit and take names.
|
|
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 Jun 3, 2017 23:28:45 GMT -8
I want my actions in the narrative to also be supported and impacted by the mechanics of the rules, so I want rules that are more clearly outlined and specific than essentially, "do what you want and just roll for it." I haven't listened to the episode yet, so I don't know the context of this statement. But that's really not how PbtA games work. The moves often do require more interpretation than the actions of some other games, but players don't "do what they want and just roll for it."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2017 0:20:35 GMT -8
Regarding stork 's feelings towards Apocalypse World and that sort of ruleset, I am of the same mind. I want my actions in the narrative to also be supported and impacted by the mechanics of the rules, so I want rules that are more clearly outlined and specific than essentially, "do what you want and just roll for it." If my character has certain traits/attributes/ads/disads/whatevers, that will influence how I play the character and thus the overall narrative. If my character has certain abilities that work a certain way, that will also influence how I play that character. If I know that the rules cover certain types of actions in such and such a way, that will also influence how I play the character in reaction to events in the game. In the end it is a game, and the rules of the game will have an impact on how events unfold in the story. Rules that are too open or vague or leave a lot up to GM interpretation make the game as a whole a lot less defined for me as a player since a lot of things will be decided on the fly by the GM based on a very loose set of rules. Having more specific rules lays out a more solid foundation that allows players to be able to make better predictions about the likely consequences of their actions in the game. Much like in real life, the consistency of Earth's gravity, combined with my knowledge of my own strength, means that if I see a 5-foot gap, I know that I can realistically jump over it; a 20-foot gap on the other hand, is a whole other story. So, like Stork, I prefer a more defined system that isn't as loose, and provides a solid foundation on which to build a story that feels more consistent from session to session, and can be assimilated by the players in order to make informed and impactful decisions in the game. PbtA isn't loose. It has stats just like other games. It has well defined rules for what happens on a move. It's not GM fiat. When you step up to the plate in Dungeon World and try to attack a monster you know your chances of success. You have a +2 modifier? Roll 8+ on 2D6 lets you do your damage with no reprisal or do your damage + 1d6 and get attacked in turn. 5-7 on the dice means you will hit and get hit in turn. 4- on the dice means the GM makes a move. Hence with a +2 you will 'fail' 16.6% of the time. You will only get a hard hit (8+) 41.6% of the time. Tell me how many other rpg's have a curve (so as to establish a degree of consistency, unlike a single die roll with a flat distribution) and let you know what number you will need to hit? You have concrete information. No guessing AC or having to memorize the monster manual. Dungeon World and PbtA is not a game of GM fiat. It has very specific rules for both player and GM. GM moves aren't just things pulled off the top of the GM's head, but taken from a specific list of options. If you get hit by a giant and go flying its not because the GM just 'decided' to have you go flying, its because of the forceful tag on the weapon. PbtA is not a game of GM fiat. I've never known someone who actually runs it that thinks that. Even most players understand, even though some of the information you need to understand is in the GM section. GM fiat only exists in PbtA as much as it does in any other system. Sometime the GM will have to make a call on what rules, if any, to engage in a situation. Thats no different than savage worlds, hero system, or any other game on the planet.
|
|
|
Post by Probie Tim on Jun 4, 2017 7:14:46 GMT -8
PbtA isn't loose. It has stats just like other games ... Tell me how many other rpg's have a curve (so as to establish a degree of consistency, unlike a single die roll with a flat distribution) and let you know what number you will need to hit? But that's not really what we were talking about, stats or dice curve. In PbtA, you have your attack move... whatever that's called, right? It could be Deliver a Beatdown/Hack and Slash/Smoke His Ass, whatever. What those represent is pretty much up to the player to narrate as they desire: exactly how are you Delivering a Beatdown? What does it mean to Hack and Slash an opponent? But now, look at Vampire: the Masquerade, for instance. You have a specific rules for a bite attack. For a slash attack. For a kick, for a grapple, for a punch, for a gunshot, for almost anything you want to do, and they are all specifically explained with specific rules. Stork prefers systems like V:tM to PbtA for those reasons. Not because of dice curves or stats, but because what he can do is more clearly defined. They work better for his brain; he wants the rules to give him specific options, because that's the way he thinks. No guessing AC or having to memorize the monster manual. I've never had my players have to guess AC or memorize the MM, for whatever that's worth.
|
|
|
Post by RudeAlert on Jun 4, 2017 10:40:55 GMT -8
PbtA isn't loose. It has stats just like other games ... Tell me how many other rpg's have a curve (so as to establish a degree of consistency, unlike a single die roll with a flat distribution) and let you know what number you will need to hit? But that's not really what we were talking about, stats or dice curve. In PbtA, you have your attack move... whatever that's called, right? It could be Deliver a Beatdown/Hack and Slash/Smoke His Ass, whatever. What those represent is pretty much up to the player to narrate as they desire: exactly how are you Delivering a Beatdown? What does it mean to Hack and Slash an opponent? But now, look at Vampire: the Masquerade, for instance. You have a specific rules for a bite attack. For a slash attack. For a kick, for a grapple, for a punch, for a gunshot, for almost anything you want to do, and they are all specifically explained with specific rules. Stork prefers systems like V:tM to PbtA for those reasons. Not because of dice curves or stats, but because what he can do is more clearly defined. They work better for his brain; he wants the rules to give him specific options, because that's the way he thinks. No guessing AC or having to memorize the monster manual. I've never had my players have to guess AC or memorize the MM, for whatever that's worth. ^^^^ All of this! Thank you Probie. Fuck it, I originally tried to expand on what Tim said, but I decided not to bother. There's no point in going over this, I fucking hate the Apocalypse engine and anyone who needs to believe that it's only because I "don't get it," fine, whatever helps you sleep at night. I tried to give it a shot mind you, I bought Dungeon World and got about halfway through it before I gave up and returned it to the store (luckily I was able to get a refund so no loss there, Sweet!). I tried to go further but I could not go more than two or three pages before I saw something that literally enraged me to the point that I couldn't keep reading because I was too distracted by my own internal rant about the stupidity of what I saw. So I figured there was no point in going further, even had I put up with reading more of it, I never would have run it anyways so not only would I have wasted my money, I would have wasted my time too. Before anyone assumes that I'm just a naturally angry and hateful person (mind you, you wouldn't be entirely wrong ), I have never had such a strong negative reaction to an RPG before, and I've read quite a few, though sadly only played a much smaller subset of those I've read. Incidentally, after getting roughly halfway through Dungeon World I decided that I needed a break for a while, a palate cleanser of sorts, so I decided to get another game that I know is extremely popular and that I had avoided for years, Savage Worlds. Long story short I got about 70ish pages into it and realized I don't like it either. (I also got a refund on that one too Turns out my friendly local gaming store is pretty cool.) I didn't hate Savage Worlds though, I just didn't like it. One weird thing really struck me though, about 70ish pages into it I realized something that I hadn't noticed in any other gaming book in a long time; the book exclusively uses male pronouns. I had never noticed that in a book before, not that I had never read a book like that, just that it had been such a long time that I actually noticed it in this particular book while reading it. And it actually got really distracting, it felt so dated and kinda weird and almost creepy in a way. Like that weird older relative who's really out of touch with the modern world and embarrasses everyone when they start spouting their outdated crap. Combined with my general lack of interest in the game, it made me decide to just return that one too. So the lesson I feel I should take from this is that I am both old enough, and experienced enough with RPGs that I really need to trust my instincts more. It'll likely be a cold day in hell before I try going for an RPG for the lulz ever again. I pretty much know what I like and what I don't like and from now on I'll just stick to that and won't let myself get distracted by whatever just happens to be popular (unless I actually find it appealing of course), even just out of curiosity.
|
|
tomes
Supporter
Hello madness
Posts: 1,438
Currently Running: Dungeon World, hippie games, Fallout Shelter RPG hack
|
Post by tomes on Jun 4, 2017 10:59:49 GMT -8
Honestly, I think there are merits on both side of this fence.
One the one hand, a good PbtA game does have specifically defined moves. They are triggered in a specific way, and have specific outcomes, with a specific set of numbers, that are affected by a specific set of stats or modifiers. So, in *some* ways that similar to these other games of which you speak.
However, I would argue there is a little more "GM fiat" (if you want to call it that; maybe "narrative influence on the mechanics") in regards to which move gets triggered when.
The example has been given before, but if you hack at the mega stone golem with your butter knife, as the GM I am not going to have you roll "hack and slash". I'm going to have you roll "defy danger" if I think you just put yourself in a spot with no chance of damaging the beast. Or, I might even have you roll "discern realities" if I want you to have a chance of discovering something of the nature of the beast, since you *are* so close (although I may also have you make a damage roll for putting yourself in this dangerous spot).
But what I'm not going to do is just say, "hmm... I don't know... roll +DEX and we'll kind of figure out what that means." That's not a move getting triggered... that's pure GM fiat house ruling. And I haven't seen a PbtA do that.
(That's a bit of a lie. My Fallout Shelter PbtA hack does have a move like that... all the pre-written moves are 2-D moves - from the app, until you do something unexpected, and then that's a 3-D move which we house-rule on the spot... cause we are playing an RPG and not a phone app.)
|
|
tomes
Supporter
Hello madness
Posts: 1,438
Currently Running: Dungeon World, hippie games, Fallout Shelter RPG hack
|
Post by tomes on Jun 4, 2017 11:05:07 GMT -8
I tried to give it a shot mind you, I bought Dungeon World and got about halfway through it before I gave up and returned it to the store Oh well, bummer... I played 3 games of PbtA before I was sold on it and found what I wanted in that game. But thanks for having an open mind and giving it a chance. It's definitely not for everyone. My friend Howie is one of my favorite long-term gamers, and really into role playing and story, but also an optimizer, and PbtA is just too fluffy and non-simulationist for him. He found Savage Worlds was the perfect little middle ground for loose rules but crunchy enough to feel like he had some mechanical control. To each their own.
|
|
|
Post by RudeAlert on Jun 4, 2017 11:17:24 GMT -8
There is a possibility, however small, that a small part of my intense dislike for the Apocalypse engine could be due to Dungeon World specifically. I found the writing and presentation in that book were really bad and needlessly opaque. Just highlighting game terms when they show up, like moves for instance, perhaps by capitalizing them or having them in Bold or Italics, would have made the text more visually appealing and less vague. But honestly that would have only made a very small difference for me, my main issue is definitely the system itself.
|
|
|
Post by OFTHEHILLPEOPLE on Jun 4, 2017 11:23:20 GMT -8
RudeAlert Have you tried maybe not reading the rules and having someone run it for you instead? I can get a good look at a t-bone by sticking my head up a cow's ass but I think I'll take the butcher's word for it, know what I mean?
|
|
|
Post by RudeAlert on Jun 4, 2017 11:52:20 GMT -8
OFTHEHILLPEOPLE That's not really an option but more importantly as I said in my long post, I think I'll just trust my instincts from now on and go with what actually feels right. Just looking at the rules of the system I know I most likely would either not enjoy playing the game, or would have significant issues with it that would make me prefer to play something else anyways.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2017 15:40:32 GMT -8
I bought Dungeon World and got about halfway through it before I gave up and returned it to the store (luckily I was able to get a refund so no loss there, Sweet!). I shortened your post to the only sentence that mattered to this argument. You didn't even read the full book, let alone play the game. You have no idea how difficulty is handled, so to you all attacks are the same. Sword? Hack n slash. Bite? Hack n slash. Yeah, you need this little thing called fictional positioning, which means you are going to have to defy danger to approach someone with a sword close enough to even try to bite them. Then, there has to be a spot vulnerable to biting, so if he's in full plate you are trying to open his visor to get at his face. Again, probably more defy danger since he's trying to kill you with his sword in the meanwhile. And it isn't just GM fiat that you must do all those things with a bite. There is a system of tags which let us know what range a weapon is effectively used at, etc. Using one's brain to surmise that it's impossible to bite through hardened steel isn't exactly 'fiat' either. I get having strong reactions. I've had them to rpg's before as well. What I wouldn't do is go spouting off about how I don't like them based on the mechanics I never finished reading or understanding. I won't play Urban Shadows because I was offended by the front blurb. I wouldn't buy it. I wouldn't play it. I also wouldn't jump into the fray on how the rules suck. In short, I don't think you represent someone with a well informed opinion on the matter. Hence I think your opinions on the matter don't hold any significance to me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2017 16:20:46 GMT -8
In PbtA, you have your attack move... whatever that's called, right? It could be Deliver a Beatdown/Hack and Slash/Smoke His Ass, whatever. What those represent is pretty much up to the player to narrate as they desire: exactly how are you Delivering a Beatdown? What does it mean to Hack and Slash an opponent? But now, look at Vampire: the Masquerade, for instance. You have a specific rules for a bite attack. For a slash attack. For a kick, for a grapple, for a punch, for a gunshot, for almost anything you want to do, and they are all specifically explained with specific rules. Stork prefers systems like V:tM to PbtA for those reasons. Not because of dice curves or stats, but because what he can do is more clearly defined. They work better for his brain; he wants the rules to give him specific options, because that's the way he thinks. PbtA is a little more subtle than having a full chapter of options with modifiers for how everything works. Let me break it down based on Dungeon World. Start off with your intent. This is the narrative. I want to do X! Let's say your fighter wants to bite the enemy. Maybe he's been captured and he's tied up without his sword, so he's going to leap up and try to rip an orc's throat out with his teeth (metal, amirite?). "Okay, cool. How are you getting close enough to that Orc to get at his neck?", the MC asks. Remember that the game is a conversation. Nothing happens just because you said you were going to do a thing. "Uh, well we've been alone in here right? So maybe I told everyone my plan was to lure the guard in by acting sick. Then when he comes to check on me, WHAM!", responds the fighter's player. "Yeah, I'll be calling for the guard to try and sell his rouse. 'Guard, we need some help in here! Guard!'", the bard throws in, positioning himself to aid our fighter (which is a move, so the MC can call on him to roll it. For our example he'll succeed and provide a +1 to the fighters attempt.) "So I'm like laying on my side, groaning like I'm delirious with fever.", the fighter says. "So the orc comes up to you and leans over, reaching out a hand to turn you onto your back. Are you going to spring into action?", the MC asks. "Yeah, I'm going to go for the throat.", our fighter responds "Ok. You've definitely lured him in. Your acting plus the Bard selling the story has taken him mostly off his guard, so you can make your hack and slash at +1 for the bards aid.", the MC responds as dice clatter. The reason this is a move at all and not just the fighter biting out the orc's jugular is that the orc can still fight back (fists covered in mail, etc) and the fighter is tied up, which makes that easier for the orc. "I got a 10!" "Okay, you have a choice then. You can either do your damage and escape without taking harm or do your damage with an extra D6, but he's going to be able to hit you back. "I don't think I'm getting a second shot at this, so I bite down really hard and don't let go even if he starts hitting me. *Rolls damage with +1d6* I do 9 points of damage.", the fighter responds. "So, you leap up and bite into his thick neck. He yowls in pain and tries to get you off, delivering blows with heavy mailed fists to your gut, bruising your ribs *MC rolls dice* and you take 3 points of damage. He doesn't dislodge you though, if anything the pain makes you grit your teeth! You rip one final time and come away with a his jugular clutched in between your teeth as his dark blood spurts onto your face and down your body. The two of you tumble to the floor as the strength leaves the orc's body. He spends his last moment alive clutching at his neck feebly as the blood pools on the stone floor between you two. What do you do?" ------------------ The only fiat in that whole scene is if the MC will require a roll from the player to trick the guard with his "i'm sick" routine. I decided it was good enough to get the player into position (all it needed to do). It probably wouldn't have stood up to more scrutiny without a check, but they didn't need to sell it long. This scene is a good example of fictional positioning. Unlike vampire which might require a roll to fake out the guard, who would then get a modifier for being surprised, which might then counteract the penalty for making a bite attack as a called shot to the neck; PbtA just asked us if the character was in a position to bring his weapon to bear. He was. So was the Orc, hence there was a roll to hack n slash. Fiction, rules, fiction. It's not very complicated, but takes a bit of work to get your head around.
|
|