|
Post by ayslyn on Jun 27, 2017 16:37:10 GMT -8
Not from a Jersian. Jerseyite? Jersutian?
^.^
|
|
|
HJRP 19-13
Jun 27, 2017 16:44:58 GMT -8
via mobile
Post by ericfromnj on Jun 27, 2017 16:44:58 GMT -8
Not from a Jersian. Jerseyite? Jersutian? ^.^ But we give good hugs. I swear. Plus I have relatives in MA so I like New Englanders. And I think Jerseyites is something I have actually heard though most names are far less flattering.
|
|
|
Post by ayslyn on Jun 27, 2017 16:46:30 GMT -8
CT here. I know all about you people. ^.^
|
|
|
Post by zoomfarg on Jun 27, 2017 23:38:00 GMT -8
I know what it does. If you somehow think that I don't then I have to wonder if you are actually reading my posts. However, I am going to operate under the premise that you have been. [. . .] However, if you attempt to argue that montages like this don't limit your ability to adapt your narrative to the players actions more than not; you are simply, factually incorrect. And that's my point. I prefer the flexibility. He prefers the time savings. Both are valid choices. Yup totally missed that 😭 My bad. I guess I focused on instances of negative phrasing and misinterpreted them as fun shaming and missing the point. I'll try to be more attentive. As for whether montages limit to adapt the narrative to player input, I guess that depends on how you look at a session or campaign. If you look at it as a particular number of scenes/events ("every is always larger than a subset of every"), then sure, you miss some opportunities. But I guess I've always thought about sessions and campaigns in terms of time--a certain number of hours or sessions. In which case, time saving mechanics don't really result in net lost opportunity, and might even give a net gain.
|
|
shinigamitwo
Initiate Douchebag
Posts: 45
Preferred Game Systems: oWoD, Deadlands, D&D
Currently Playing: Deadlands HOE Classic - The Doctor Rides Agin!
Currently Running: Vampire 20th Anniversary
|
Post by shinigamitwo on Jun 28, 2017 11:50:45 GMT -8
I know what it does. If you somehow think that I don't then I have to wonder if you are actually reading my posts. However, I am going to operate under the premise that you have been. [. . .] However, if you attempt to argue that montages like this don't limit your ability to adapt your narrative to the players actions more than not; you are simply, factually incorrect. And that's my point. I prefer the flexibility. He prefers the time savings. Both are valid choices. As for whether montages limit to adapt the narrative to player input, I guess that depends on how you look at a session or campaign. If you look at it as a particular number of scenes/events ("every is always larger than a subset of every"), then sure, you miss some opportunities. But I guess I've always thought about sessions and campaigns in terms of time--a certain number of hours or sessions. In which case, time saving mechanics don't really result in net lost opportunity, and might even give a net gain. I disagree that I am "simply, factually incorrect." I disagree that I have subset a part of Every Scene in a manner that makes it so my players are getting less. I disagree that a montage prevents the narrative from receiving input from the players when constructed with the players. I'm just assuming that the players have already told me what kind of adventure they want and am moving to give them the most of that with the very little time we have. If they want to change midstream by giving me new input, that's what happens even mid-montage. But scaving and random encounters can and have consumed several sessions of actual plot, which is the communal reason for the game generated by all of us, and make them board game night, probably them vrs me. Not that that isn't fun, but it isn't what I was sold/sold my players. My experience at table with the montage is that my players had more opportunities to do stuff, not less. They have less actual rolls to do that stuff, but more actual stuff.
|
|
|
Post by Bill Roper on Jul 4, 2017 19:11:55 GMT -8
This is an awesome idea! There are a few places in Traveller where you use random tables after character generation. Some that immediately come to mind are the Odd Jobs, Space Encounters, and Salvage tables. I also recall a table where if you wanted to save on the cost of a Starship, you could get one that was older and had issues that were all generated from a random table.
I heartily encourage more random tables to make the story interesting.
|
|
sdJasper
Initiate Douchebag
Posts: 30
Preferred Game Systems: GURPS, Fudge, PDQ
Currently Running: GURPS Traveller Interstellar Wars
|
Post by sdJasper on Jul 5, 2017 4:58:14 GMT -8
This is an awesome idea! There are a few places in Traveller where you use random tables after character generation. Some that immediately come to mind are the Odd Jobs, Space Encounters, and Salvage tables. I also recall a table where if you wanted to save on the cost of a Starship, you could get one that was older and had issues that were all generated from a random table. I heartily encourage more random tables to make the story interesting. I ran a GURPS Fallout game a few years back (based more or less on the first Fallout game), where the players would have random encounters while traveling between locations. The table I used was broken into Scavenge Locations, Hostile Encounters, Quirky NPCs encounters and events, or a combination. I don't recall the ratio of each but they were not split evenly. I also had a secondary roll to determine if the group stumbled into the encounter, spotted it nearby, or spotted it far off (which gave them options to avoid, sneak in, etc.) Many of the sessions I ran were nothing more than travel and these random events/encounters. And it worked really well. It helped sell the post-apoc setting of ruined buildings, mutants, raiders, and the off-beat characters of the Fallout universe. But also felt very "natural" and rewarding. I think that is one of the biggest things to keep in mind when creating random encounters. They need to be things that the players would (at least some times) want to do, not just obstacles to get in the way of the real goal.
|
|
sbloyd
Supporter
WHAT! A human in a Precursor service vehicle?!
Posts: 2,762
Preferred Game Systems: Storyteller; Dresden; Mage
Favorite Species of Monkey: Goddamnit, Curious George is a CHIMP not a monkey! Stop teaching my daughter improper classification!
|
Post by sbloyd on Jul 5, 2017 5:10:35 GMT -8
I was trying to brainstorm how I'd GURPSify Fallout 4's settlement construction system at one point...
|
|
sdJasper
Initiate Douchebag
Posts: 30
Preferred Game Systems: GURPS, Fudge, PDQ
Currently Running: GURPS Traveller Interstellar Wars
|
Post by sdJasper on Jul 5, 2017 8:01:00 GMT -8
I was trying to brainstorm how I'd GURPSify Fallout 4's settlement construction system at one point... If you haven't already, you might want to check out GURPS City Stats. I'm hoping that the GURPS After the End line gets a settlement or rebuilding book that covers this sort of thing.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Jul 8, 2017 8:30:29 GMT -8
Random Encounters: I've always used a simple solution - I roll them up day in advance and have an encounter matrix: day by time. When a 'random' encounter is indicated I refer to the matrix to grab that encounter. I'll even have several different matrix's prepped for diffferent areas. More often than not the longer a random encounter gets unused the more I'll tinker with it during downtime to try and blend it with the developing narrative. From this method I now have my 'anarcho-communist' Gnolls who were last seen headed for 'glorious workers utopia, Highport' - they will return, if only because Highport is NOT what they imagine it to be; Norm and Norma the gnome siblings who survived the massacre of their forest patrol unit and are indebted to the PC's for saving them; the mysterious 'goat rustlers' of Gnarley Forest and the friendless 'lonely goatherd' (whose goats have been rustled) and a slew of other recurring NPC's who get changed slightly as time goes by (i.e.: the world changes even when the PC's aren't present). The other method is to use a set of laminated index cards with 'random occurrences/encounters' tied to the campaign meta-plot. When there is lull I just draw one at random and throw it in to the narrative . . . Aaron
|
|
Myddrin
Initiate Douchebag
Posts: 10
|
Post by Myddrin on Jul 13, 2017 8:37:56 GMT -8
Edward here - yes that strange new person who talked about LARPing and such on this episode
It seems that one of the contesting points of the random encounter discussion is whether the 'random' part refers to randomly generated via a chart on the spot or the PC's randomly encountering a thing on their travels.
The distinction is important because I think a large part of the "PC dying in random encounter= bad" viewpoints hearkens back to those charts. The characters are travelling through heavy forest, the DM rolls on the charts in the DM guide because that's what your supposed to do, oh look a pack of wolves just ate the faces of half of the 2nd level party...whoops... because the DM just followed the rules of the charts and didn't consider the balance of the encounter.
That is what I think of when I think of random encounters. Others here consider random encounters things that are not part of the main storyline, but rather side quest things or just world flavor that the PC's jumped on more than you expected (rawr!!! bear!!) which you go along with. It very well also could be a pack of wolves attacking you while you travel, but if that was stated/balanced ahead of time, then at least the encounter should be fair (or as easy or as tough as the GM wants it to be)
So while I don't do random encounters (first definition) I definitely have optional encounters. Similar to Kainguru's matrix thing , where I've pre-stated the critters and the circumstances. The difference being instead of rolling randomly as to whether they happen or not, I instead use them to help control my pacing i.e. the modular design ideas that Happy Jack's has pitched. Is this game taking too long and I want them to get to the main action? then no wolves or bandits find them while they travel. Are they getting there too fast? or maybe totally found a way to avoid combat on what I intended to be a fighting thing and I want to give my fighter types a little action? then hey wolves/bandits/bears/zombies or something show up. (within reason, as appropriate for the setting or action of the game). Random perhaps in the eyes of the PC's, but not by my viewpoint behind the screen
Mind you the game I have run in recent years have all been episodic one shots i.e. the main action of the episode needed to be done by the end of the time slot/evening so the PC's can go back to the bigger LARP events without unresolved stuff - similar to con game style. Hence why this is my approach.
Myddrin a.k.a. Edward a.k.a. that LARP guy who helps run Dying Kingdoms, who might be lurking less and posting more..
|
|
|
HJRP 19-13
Jul 13, 2017 12:17:17 GMT -8
via mobile
Post by uncommonman on Jul 13, 2017 12:17:17 GMT -8
Edward here - yes that strange new person who talked about LARPing and such on this episode It seems that one of the contesting points of the random encounter discussion is whether the 'random' part refers to randomly generated via a chart on the spot or the PC's randomly encountering a thing on their travels. The distinction is important because I think a large part of the "PC dying in random encounter= bad" viewpoints hearkens back to those charts. The characters are travelling through heavy forest, the DM rolls on the charts in the DM guide because that's what your supposed to do, oh look a pack of wolves just ate the faces of half of the 2nd level party...whoops... because the DM just followed the rules of the charts and didn't consider the balance of the encounter. That is what I think of when I think of random encounters. Others here consider random encounters things that are not part of the main storyline, but rather side quest things or just world flavor that the PC's jumped on more than you expected (rawr!!! bear!!) which you go along with. It very well also could be a pack of wolves attacking you while you travel, but if that was stated/balanced ahead of time, then at least the encounter should be fair (or as easy or as tough as the GM wants it to be) So while I don't do random encounters (first definition) I definitely have optional encounters. Similar to Kainguru's matrix thing , where I've pre-stated the critters and the circumstances. The difference being instead of rolling randomly as to whether they happen or not, I instead use them to help control my pacing i.e. the modular design ideas that Happy Jack's has pitched. Is this game taking too long and I want them to get to the main action? then no wolves or bandits find them while they travel. Are they getting there too fast? or maybe totally found a way to avoid combat on what I intended to be a fighting thing and I want to give my fighter types a little action? then hey wolves/bandits/bears/zombies or something show up. (within reason, as appropriate for the setting or action of the game). Random perhaps in the eyes of the PC's, but not by my viewpoint behind the screen Mind you the game I have run in recent years have all been episodic one shots i.e. the main action of the episode needed to be done by the end of the time slot/evening so the PC's can go back to the bigger LARP events without unresolved stuff - similar to con game style. Hence why this is my approach. Myddrin a.k.a. Edward a.k.a. that LARP guy who helps run Dying Kingdoms, who might be lurking less and posting more.. Finaly someone new to fight about fairness/killing characters/fudging dice rolls/cheating with. ;-) I think that unbalanced encounters are a good thing since it's more realistic - the real world doesn't balance encounters. I'm not advocating killing characters for fun or to force unwinnable encounters but to let the players know that sometimes an encounter isn't posible to win in a normal fight. I like your first definition of random encounters. I also like the concept of "pointless" character death for the same reason, let the dice decide and in the end it will be a better story. If you don't want to let the dice decide death for characters write a book or don't roll the dice. What do you think?
|
|
|
Post by chronovore on Jul 13, 2017 16:28:58 GMT -8
I'm honestly getting to the point where I wish that all "GMs who don't honor every roll they make are cheating" comment could be relegated to one thread instead of being brought up ad nauseum. Because I'm already ad nauseum'd of it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2017 21:18:13 GMT -8
I'm honestly getting to the point where I wish that all "GMs who don't honor every roll they make are cheating" comment could be relegated to one thread instead of being brought up ad nauseum. Because I'm already ad nauseum'd of it. I'm pretty sure all sides have made all the points that are going to be made. If people haven't come to a consensus yet, they aren't going to. But tell me, what do you all think about soak vs AC? Inquiring minds want to know! (I'm joking, I swear).
|
|
|
Post by chronovore on Jul 13, 2017 21:42:35 GMT -8
I'm honestly getting to the point where I wish that all "GMs who don't honor every roll they make are cheating" comment could be relegated to one thread instead of being brought up ad nauseum. Because I'm already ad nauseum'd of it. I'm pretty sure all sides have made all the points that are going to be made. If people haven't come to a consensus yet, they aren't going to. But tell me, what do you all think about soak vs AC? Inquiring minds want to know! (I'm joking, I swear). I went from a slow head-shake into a full-on chuckle. Thanks for that!
|
|