Lessa
Legendary Pubber
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2018
- Messages
- 1,777
- Reaction score
- 2,738
Or Bunnies & Burrows..I'm sure Prince Valiant would work just fine for GoT
Last edited:
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Or Bunnies & Burrows..I'm sure Prince Valiant would work just fine for GoT
I been told that playing in my AiME session felt like they were adventuring in Middle Earth. That my Harn campaigns felt more like being in a medieval world than my Majestic Wilderlands campaigns.Another point worth considering is: do RPGs really explore the kind of stuff that appeals in novels and series like GoT? I think not.
Or Bunnies & Burrows..
Because I think its reasonable to conclude that PvP would be important to a GoT game. And as such, some sort of support from the system would be welcome.Silva: why are you ignoring the fact you’ve just been given examples of social rules for NPC persuasion?
People are drawing the line at compelling other PCs, which is hardly the same thing.
Makes sense. I would play it. (on your last point, perhaps makes so the points are only useful as a bonus on arguments, so theres no point in abusing them, or else limit them to say, 5 per player or something)That said, one could use a system where the PC makes a roll (or not) to establish they have a good argument, just like for an NPC. If so, the other PC has the option of accepting the argument and receiving a fortune point, or refusing and not getting one.
Problems is how to prevent players colluding and having petty arguments just to get points.
Sorry I though you were teasing and not really serious. I agree with your assertion above. From what Ive heard of Valiant, it looks nice. Ill have to take a look in it.I dunno, don't know the game. Possibly, yes.
All you require for an effective RPG, is a framing for the discussion between players and GM, a resolution mechanic that the GM can apply to resolve disputes, and a method of translating characters into game terms to allow them to interact with the system. If B&B presents that, then you could run GoT with it. But I suspect D&D (or Prince Valiant) would be better.
No because I consider their Charisma stats in how I roleplay. I know they have a 16 and roleplay accordingly compared to a character with a 6 charisma.So if a player wants to make a persuasive PC at your table, his persuasion ability as a character is the same as his person in real life?
Again if I haven't won your trust after the first few session then perhaps my campaign is not for you. That includes trusting that I am factoring your character abilities in the things you don't see while playing.In other words, pure GM fiat.
What I expect is the rulebook to adequately describe how people act in Westeros and the different range of personalities involved beyond the main characters. I can take it from there. That one thing that The One Ring and Adventure in Middle Earth does very well. For those who want to just roll play the Audience mechanic is good for that. Add up the modifiers and make your roll.Is that the kind of social support you find appropriate for a game of interpersonal drama, be it GoT or whatever?
Doesn’t address well...through mechanics.
That assumes people want or need a meaty Social Conflict system that is more than Roleplaying and a skill roll with advantage/disadvantage.
For many, all they would need is a GM to custom-tailor some classes and off they go.
Will you apply the same reasoning to combat? (aka make it GM-fiat)No because I consider their Charisma stats in how I roleplay. I know they have a 16 and roleplay accordingly compared to a character with a 6 charisma.
It not about me just to get one over the player. It me trying to bring a setting to life in a way that the player felt like they been to the place and had a interesting time having adventures. Irregardless of system, I will incorporate the character's social stats and abilities in how I roleplay an NPC.
Again if I haven't won your trust after the first few session then perhaps my campaign is not for you. That includes trusting that I am factoring your character abilities in the things you don't see while playing.
What I expect is the rulebook to adequately describe how people act in Westeros and the different range of personalities involved beyond the main characters. I can take it from there. That one thing that The One Ring and Adventure in Middle Earth does very well. For those who want to just roll play the Audience mechanic is good for that. Add up the modifiers and make your roll.
However for those who want to roleplay also an excellent terse list of things that I need to factor in while roleplaying that character.
Your real life charisma compels me to agree.I'm pretty sure if I roll up a character with an 18 Charisma I should be able to tell all the other PCs what to do. Seems like everyone would enjoy that.
Kinda sad this is the legacy of modern D&D, people see it as a restriction limited to an isolated premise, rather than a toolbox that you can adapt to fit whatever campaign world you concieve of
View attachment 20479
In a superhero game do you need a system to determine if two PC telepaths can influence one another?
Why is telepathy and mind control any different than "role playing?"
...
Old school D&D really didn't. It assumed the only way to explicitly control PCs was mind altering magic, because things like charm and geas were the only social mechanics with rules. Newer school D&D is a bit different with rated abilities in interpersonal reaction, but just handwaves the mechanics and consequences.
That D&D is only suited to narrow dungeoncrawling and point/hexcrawls is more prevalent among the OSR than 5e I'd say.
how do you mean point/hexcrawls?
Also... https://theop.games/products/game/game-of-thrones-collectors-chess-set/I've been runnning Game of thrones with Snakes and Ladders for years but recently we tried it with Chess and it was a real eye opener. We had to replace the bishops with dragons for one side but other than that it worked great.
Wilderness adventures: in the point crawl the GM has selected location encounters on the map (e.g. Night's Dark Terror) and hexcrawls involve more random rolling to determine what is in a hex the PCs enter (e.g. Carcosa).
There it is. I knew it would pop out eventually.Or something. Anything is better than licking the GM balls to have what you want.
Oh OK, sure, that's very much what I'd consider one method of doing a sandbox (and honestly was way more common in my experience of D&D than actual dungeons).
Wait, what?
In general no, for a specific action perhaps if the result is clear cut.Will you apply the same reasoning to combat?
Odd, consider I am know for my love of GURPS and Harnmaster more than D&D.If not, you're a D&D zealot.
Having been speared in a groin by a errant branch while playing LARP event, I will take dice, grid, some miniatures, and detailed combat wargame for tabletop roleplaying any day.But trying to rationalize why socializing should be GM fiat while martial stuff should not is bullshit. Say it's just your tastes and leave it at that.
If I'm playing in a game where we play superheroes, is it important to rate telepathic/mind control characters on their ability to mind control others?
If I'm playing in a game where we play adventurers getting into fights with monsters, is it important to rate combatants on how well they hit and harm opponents?
If I'm playing in a game where we play negotiators trying to trick and manipulate others, should there be mechanical ratings for those abilities?
The prevailing answers seem to be Yes, Yes, No. Even though the third question is just the first question with different window dressing.
Well as that was part of the team that popularized the term. It was created as a shorthand to explain why it was worth paying $70 for the Necromancer Games Wilderlands of High Fantasy boxed set. Since most of us involved ran our campaign that way for years there nothing lost about it. But we did spread the word around.Ditto. Which is why when it is presented by some as this mind-blowingly novel or 'lost art' way to play D&D the OSR has 'rediscovered' I'm left scratching my head.
They aren't though, they state a lot about the character at a glance.And how would you use that to decide if they are more persuasive of the king than their rival? Numbers in isolation are pretty meaningless.
If I'm playing in a game where we play superheroes, is it important to rate telepathic/mind control characters on their ability to mind control others?
If I'm playing in a game where we play adventurers getting into fights with monsters, is it important to rate combatants on how well they hit and harm opponents?
If I'm playing in a game where we play negotiators trying to trick and manipulate others, should there be mechanical ratings for those abilities?
The prevailing answers seem to be Yes, Yes, No. Even though the third question is just the first question with different window dressing.
Lol. I updated the link. I don't think the page liked the one I originally put.
Well, I mean, one of those I can do sitting on the couch without getting up or there being any legal consequences...
I think it's due to the notion that "persuasion on other PCs = mind-control" as Brock cited above. Which perhaps was true a long time ago, in the 70s and 80s maybe, but nowadays is a moot point as there are lots of games that do social interaction with no mind control at all (we even had a thread about it months ago that discussed it).The prevailing answers seem to be Yes, Yes, No. Even though the third question is just the first question with different window dressing.
Getting into fights with monsters?
So to be clear this is what being talked about.It is particularly odd as similar to Finch's false claim that OD&D didn't have mechanics to find traps (dwarves had a roll to find traps and of course 'later' so did thieves) D&D, at least B/X, BECMI and 5e, do have mechanics to do so.
First Zen Moment: Rulings, not Rules
Most of the time in old-style gaming, you don’t use a rule; you make a ruling. It’s easy to understand that sentence, but it takes a flash of insight to really “get it.” The players can describe any action, without needing to look at a character sheet to see if they “can” do it. The referee, in turn, uses common sense to decide what happens or rolls a die if he thinks there’s some random element involved, and then the game moves on. This is why characters have so few numbers on the character sheet, and why they have so few specified abilities. Many of the things that are “die roll” challenges in modern gaming (disarming a trap, for example) are handled by observation, thinking, and experimentation in old-style games. Getting through obstacles is more “hands-on” than you’re probably used to. Rules are a resource for the referee, not for the players. Players use observation and description as their tools and resources: rules are for the referee only.
A simple example: the pit trap. By tradition, many pit traps in 0e are treated as follows. They can be detected easily, by probing ahead with a 10ft pole. If you step onto one, there is a 1 in 6 chance that the pit trap will open. And that’s all there is to it. By contrast, modern games usually contain character classes with specific abilities to detect and disarm traps. Let’s take a look at how a pit trap might be handled according to the 0e and the modern approaches.
Spanking monkeys doesn't count.No, that's date night...
So to be clear this is what being talked about.
Book I Men & Magic mentions of the word trap
View attachment 20491
View attachment 20495
View attachment 20494
Book 3 Underworld & Wilderness Adventures trap rules
View attachment 20493
From the Old School Primer