shadzar wrote:So other than writing L&L, what the fuck IS Monte doing exactly? does anyone know?
I suspect they're bouncing ideas for 5E off him, like Paizo did with Pathfinder RPG.
if it is the same Monte i remember, then there is plenty of room for Paizo and WotC to bounce off of him....but i dont know so much about ideas, cause his only idea is rules complexity and over codification... Monte wants to make a board game, plain and simple.
will Lorraine Williams ever be expunged form D&D? Monte was gone, then Bill, but Monte is back, and Rich never left...
those were her 3 big lackies...and 2 of them still have things to do with D&D...
They are like damn cockroaches, and you just cant get rid of them!
Play the game, not the rules.
Swordslinger wrote:Or fuck it... I'm just going to get weapon specialization in my cock and whip people to death with it. Given all the enemies are total pussies, it seems like the appropriate thing to do.
Lewis Black wrote:If the people of New Zealand want to be part of our world, I believe they should hop off their islands, and push 'em closer.
good read (Note to self Maxus sucks a barrel of cocks.)
They are like damn cockroaches, and you just cant get rid of them!
Somewhere, somehow there is some irony is shadzar saying this.
But on the previous topic, why would anyone think a system that goes:
S - A - B - C - D - U
is any better than:
A - B - C - D - E - F
I can figure out that the U stands for untrained though it doesn't make sense to only use the first letter for that one. Though I can't figure out why the fuck you'd ever use an S. I think most people would just find that confusing.
They are like damn cockroaches, and you just cant get rid of them!
Somewhere, somehow there is some irony is shadzar saying this.
But on the previous topic, why would anyone think a system that goes:
S - A - B - C - D - U
is any better than:
A - B - C - D - E - F
I can figure out that the U stands for untrained though it doesn't make sense to only use the first letter for that one. Though I can't figure out why the fuck you'd ever use an S. I think most people would just find that confusing.
i really never thought to look into the Japanese programs, games, and products that use SABCD...etc.
ask Lago?
i remember Monster Hunter way back when used it to, not just Naruto...
S for Special?
i just figured that system would work, since there are lots of games and anime influences many things now, they might try to capitalize on the same system.
Play the game, not the rules.
Swordslinger wrote:Or fuck it... I'm just going to get weapon specialization in my cock and whip people to death with it. Given all the enemies are total pussies, it seems like the appropriate thing to do.
Lewis Black wrote:If the people of New Zealand want to be part of our world, I believe they should hop off their islands, and push 'em closer.
good read (Note to self Maxus sucks a barrel of cocks.)
In Japan and South Korea, and therefore, I extrapolate, other Asian countries, the scale goes low to high B A S. With S being the best. I have no idea why. Maybe the Asian character that makes an S sound is first in their alphabet? Maybe it's just there.
No idea, except I know that Starcraft Code S is highest, then Code A, then Code B, then other stuff, and that people get Ses on their exams in anime and are happy about it.
In Disgaea characters have skills with different weapons. Being C ranked is shit but you can still make use of it, being A ranked is good, and the best is S ranked. It's the sort of thing that makes sense in East Asia. As the player, you can get an S Rank in a lot of games.
In Viewtiful Joe, you can get a "V Rank", but S for Super is a lot more popular.
Yeah. For a -lot- of Japanese produced stuff, it goes...
E
D
C
B
A
S
With various pluses and minuses to indicate subrankings. So C+ is less than B-, which is worse than a flat B, and S+ kicks all ass.
S is sometimes supposed to be Super-A.
He jumps like a damned dragoon, and charges into battle fighting rather insane monsters with little more than his bare hands and rather nasty spell effects conjured up solely through knowledge and the local plantlife. He unerringly knows where his goal lies, he breathes underwater and is untroubled by space travel, seems to have no limits to his actual endurance and favors killing his enemies by driving both boots square into their skull. His agility is unmatched, and his strength legendary, able to fling about a turtle shell big enough to contain a man with enough force to barrel down a near endless path of unfortunates.
--The horror of Mario
Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
At least now I know why Dead Rising 2 has such odd names for the multiple endings (S, A, etc).
Kaelik, to Tzor wrote:
And you aren't shot in the face?
Frank Trollman wrote:A government is also immortal ...On the plus side, once the United Kingdom is no longer united, the United States of America will be the oldest country in the world. USA!
I find it odd that some people didn't understand about whole S to D rankings? I figured it was rather quite common knowledge these days, haven't the sonic games being use something like these for quite sometime as an example? Hell, even the 4th edition class guides, did something like that with color coding, where had light blue as the "A" and Gold color for "S" options to denote something so super special awesome, that your character type has it, full stop.
Also, is it bad that I like the sound of this skill system? Like Seerow, would agree to want to have room within the grades, so if you have C-rank in a skill, not stuck just at C, but can go out to B a little even, and just rock the rest below you. Although since want to keep the bonuses very tight in this system, so want to avoid options that give straight up +x bonuses, so given designers probably want options to modify with the skill system, what would work? Such as if something like a magical Ring of jumping, give +X to jump checks = bad, so instead stuff like rerolls or roll two dice, use best be good? I'd imagine another bad, would be something that messes with the ranking system, like an option that lets you attempt a rank 1-2 higher, with a DC 20, or worse, some added one out of nowhere of like 25. So then probably have PC's pulling S-rank moves from just like a B or even C rank, unless that would be alright when limited (like 1/day kind of deal).
As for Shadzar, seems to just be concerned about giving these ranks naming conventions, feeling it will break up the flow of the game, when have "expert" rank, and someone calling their character an Expert, at this skill..Which I guess for maybe the youngest, and dumbest of players, might be baffled when they can't do "expert" tasks, without that rank, and feel their self portrayed backstory should qualify instead.
What I find wrong w/ 4th edition: "I want to stab dragons the size of a small keep with skin like supple adamantine and command over time and space to death with my longsword in head to head combat, but I want to be totally within realistic capabilities of a real human being!" --Caedrus mocking 4rries
"the thing about being Mister Cavern [DM], you don't blame players for how they play. That's like blaming the weather. Weather just is. You adapt to it. -Ancient History
Aryxbez wrote:
Also, is it bad that I like the sound of this skill system? Like Seerow, would agree to want to have room within the grades, so if you have C-rank in a skill, not stuck just at C, but can go out to B a little even, and just rock the rest below you. Although since want to keep the bonuses very tight in this system, so want to avoid options that give straight up +x bonuses, so given designers probably want options to modify with the skill system, what would work? Such as if something like a magical Ring of jumping, give +X to jump checks = bad, so instead stuff like rerolls or roll two dice, use best be good? I'd imagine another bad, would be something that messes with the ranking system, like an option that lets you attempt a rank 1-2 higher, with a DC 20, or worse, some added one out of nowhere of like 25. So then probably have PC's pulling S-rank moves from just like a B or even C rank, unless that would be alright when limited (like 1/day kind of deal).
Yes. That's bad, because it means that you are so stupid that it is entirely possible that you can't dress yourself. If you have a numeric bonus that puts you somewhere on a range between being able to perform C-ranked tasks (which also have a numeric range) and B-ranked tasks (and their own numeric range), then the actual B and C ranks do not fucking do anything. There's a numeric range, and you have a fucking number. The thing where numbers between X and Y are B-Rank is flavor text and not a fucking game mechanic.
Comparing the rank and then comparing the number is provably slower than just comparing the number and provides no more information or functionality.
Aryxbez wrote:As for Shadzar, seems to just be concerned about giving these ranks naming conventions, feeling it will break up the flow of the game, when have "expert" rank, and someone calling their character an Expert, at this skill..Which I guess for maybe the youngest, and dumbest of players, might be baffled when they can't do "expert" tasks, without that rank, and feel their self portrayed backstory should qualify instead.
anyone in favor of this that complains about THAC0 having the step of multiply by negative one, should slap themselves in the face for hypocrisy.
having to look at, memorize, or otherwise associate a number with some "keyword" named rank, is an extra step, when you already have the number and they are intuitive as they can be. 5 is greater than 1 so it is a higher level/rank/order of magnitude. if you have 5 ranks, then just number them and cut out the extra steps of the entire names.
my problems with the naming conventions in general is they dont really express the same thing. again see the term "level" as it has been used throughout the game that SO many people complain about.
for those that dont know...rank is a synonym for level...so it is the same thing to have called everything ranks, and the dungeons floors would be the only thing to change that isnt a rank from a level.
Play the game, not the rules.
Swordslinger wrote:Or fuck it... I'm just going to get weapon specialization in my cock and whip people to death with it. Given all the enemies are total pussies, it seems like the appropriate thing to do.
Lewis Black wrote:If the people of New Zealand want to be part of our world, I believe they should hop off their islands, and push 'em closer.
good read (Note to self Maxus sucks a barrel of cocks.)
Winnah wrote:Out of curiosity, what should a D20 based skill system look like?
If this has already been discussed, a link would be appreciated.
define d20 based? there have been several built around using a d20...
Play the game, not the rules.
Swordslinger wrote:Or fuck it... I'm just going to get weapon specialization in my cock and whip people to death with it. Given all the enemies are total pussies, it seems like the appropriate thing to do.
Lewis Black wrote:If the people of New Zealand want to be part of our world, I believe they should hop off their islands, and push 'em closer.
good read (Note to self Maxus sucks a barrel of cocks.)
Winnah wrote:Out of curiosity, what should a D20 based skill system look like?
If this has already been discussed, a link would be appreciated.
It has numerous times. There are basically a couple of ways to do it, but they all revolve around the fact that the RNG is not actually very big and you have to decide whether you want to break out of it or not. If you decide that you want higher level characters to be using skills to do things lower level characters can't on a regular basis then you actually want skills to scale substantially faster than +1/level. If, on the other hand, you want higher level characters to still have to climb things and use oil on hinges, then you want skills to scale very slowly or not at all. Ranks are a bad idea and basically can't be salvaged because they don't produce level appropriate effects.
So the 2nd edition AD&D secondary skills is an example of a salvageable system for a set of design goals that include high level characters being mediocre gem cutters. 4e's skill system is flawed in that if you wanted things to work like that you'd probably want skills to advance at least four and probably six or eight times faster than that. 3e's skill system only works at extremely low level when it can be confused for 2e AD&D's system in a bad light.
So, if you want skills to be superpowers on the level of 3e spells, I guess you would need, like, +10/level to keep people doing level-appropriate stuff?
Yeah, by d20 based system I meant D&D. I wanted to use a neutral term in order to avoid any edition war derailment. I could have been more specific with my inquiry though.
Thank you for the concise explanation of RNG issues. I would ask how opposed skill checks should be adressed in a game, but that query probably belongs in another thread.
Ranks, or Tiers or Mastery or Letter Grades on top of numeric bonuses only make sense if they do things which the numeric bonuses don't.
In theory you could build a hybrid skill system where a character's running speed was determined by an Athletics roll, but what they could do with running was on a letter rank system detached from the actual bonus. Something like:
E tier lets you noncombat run at quadruple your base speed,
D tier lets you keep your Dex bonus when running at 4x,
C tier lets ignore fatigue from running,
B tier lets you run up vertical walls and across liquid surfaces,
A tier lets you Air Walk at full steam, and
S-Class or AAA+ lets you teleport without needing to cross the intervening space.
But building such a hybrid system only makes sense if you sometimes want the untrained kid with decent stats (E tier, but decent bonus) to be able to run down the corridor faster than the guy with super-Athletics teleport can get there (S / AAA+, poor bonus possible)
Even if you do want that sort of result to be part of the system, it's still a whole lot of conceptual space for players to have to remember what both numeric and grade-based skill properties mean for each skill. Even if you have a 4e system with only like 15 skills, then having six letter grades with meaningful differences means there are 90 different gradations for people to try to keep track of. Something like 3e where you have 36+ skill makes that absurdly complicated.
Last edited by Josh_Kablack on Mon Oct 03, 2011 5:11 pm, edited 5 times in total.
"But transportation issues are social-justice issues. The toll of bad transit policies and worse infrastructure—trains and buses that don’t run well and badly serve low-income neighborhoods, vehicular traffic that pollutes the environment and endangers the lives of cyclists and pedestrians—is borne disproportionately by black and brown communities."
Winnah wrote:Yeah, by d20 based system I meant D&D. I wanted to use a neutral term in order to avoid any edition war derailment. I could have been more specific with my inquiry though.
Thank you for the concise explanation of RNG issues. I would ask how opposed skill checks should be adressed in a game, but that query probably belongs in another thread.
well they shouldnt be any sort of skill system, less D&D is just turned into a button-masher.
skills as they have always been are just another collection of bonuses, that dont really offer anything to the game.
the simplest was NWPs, but it should have left out the bonuses for "ranks". then that leaves with the ability scores to just check against.
the higher your ability score, the more likely you are to do something using it, a skill if you will, so just use the d20 and roll under that number.
that is how it should be, anything else developing a system that uses the ability scores solely for modifiers, should just have a d6 used for ability scores, and roll for the modifier they give, and have them have no other meaning at all. no need for such big numbers is those numbers only mean to look-up a chart to tell what modifier they add to something else.
pick one:
a. ability scores that have a use
b. a set of modifiers to add to everything else
Play the game, not the rules.
Swordslinger wrote:Or fuck it... I'm just going to get weapon specialization in my cock and whip people to death with it. Given all the enemies are total pussies, it seems like the appropriate thing to do.
Lewis Black wrote:If the people of New Zealand want to be part of our world, I believe they should hop off their islands, and push 'em closer.
good read (Note to self Maxus sucks a barrel of cocks.)
Simple easy to remember and understand tiered skill system.
0-~ 0 is low. Go as high as you want.
0- Unfamiliar with the concept.
1- Seen it a few times
2- Done it before
3- Does it for money
4- Does it for lots of money
5- Top of human achievement
6- Magic and stuff.
You buy ranks.
No more ranks than your relevant stat.
You can't do anything of a higher rank than you.
You can do anything of a lower rank than you.
If it is your rank, you roll 1d20+ stat (+Mods if you want). DM rolls 1d20 + rank. You win you can do it.
If it is an opposed check, whoever has higher wins. If both the same rank, roll opposed d20+stat (+optional mods)
Stuff should add rerolls not +mods. (unless you want to use + mods)
Obvious flaws, or reasons this isn't what they should do? Seems really cut and dry for a simple system. I sort of find it hard to see anything but this general concept for a ranking system?
I'd be ok with this idea in future DND, and it would really cement the idea that you only have to farm muck for a level or so at most. "No I don't have to farm muck [DM]. In fact I auto-succeed to farm Krusk Berries, the best fruit in the mortal realm. I am way beyond farming muck".
Ok, looks like he's talking about getting rid of mandatory magic item drops and wealth by level. That's good, right?
Wait, so the magic items ARE there to make PCs more powerful if they beat challenges? So are we balancing encounters around PCs with magic items or not? No answer? Sigh.
Oh, hey, +X items. Look, if you don't want magic items to be mandatory, kill this shit. Now. Otherwise we balance around them, or PCs go off the RNG when they don't get them. And people will pass up the +1 sword of looking like a boss in favor of the +2 sword, because the latter makes them better.
Oddly enough, the magic items are all from 3.X. There aren't any 4e items, which is fucking hilarious.
So no crafting magic items without sucking DM cock. I'm somewhat ambivalent about that.
Thoughts?
Last edited by CapnTthePirateG on Tue Oct 04, 2011 3:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
OgreBattle wrote:"And thus the denizens learned that hating Shadzar was the only thing they had in common, and with him gone they turned their venom upon each other"
-Sarpadian Empires, vol. I
