Probability: Elennsar MUST Read

[Neeeek]

You know, all I have seen so far from you is a whole lot of ... nothing. You post some very vague ideas and anytime somebody else comments on them or questions you you answer with "it depends". By now I'm not even sure if you like deadly games,

One of his problems is this: Given the exact same rules, exact same set-up and exact same desire to screw the players, a game with Elennsar as GM and Frank as one of the players wouldn't be nearly as lethal as a game with Frank as GM and Elennsar as a player.

[Elennsar]

You know, all I have seen so far from you is a whole lot of ... nothing. You post some very vague ideas and anytime somebody else comments on them or questions you you answer with "it depends". By now I'm not even sure if you like deadly games, which is where that whole mess started if I remember correctly.

Because I don't have "I know exactly what I want to refer to and I know exactly how I want the probability to look and so on."

If you actually want to help design, then stop bloody expecting that I can describe the setting from top to buttom anytime I feel like it but am refusing to do so.

It -does- depend on what you do. What are you imagining doing? Are you charging on horseback? Are you armored when the other guy isn't?

You are however annoyed every time people insist you answer a question they feel sure you must have the answer to. Try putting yourselves into their shoes. Someone

No, try putting yourselves into my shoes and seeing that I don't have this planned out so well that I can give "Oh yes, 80% of the time."

If I did, I'd post it. The reason I don't is why I'm looking for help in writing this.

Example:
Denizen: Where did the bad man touch you?
Ellensar: Where did you get that great hat?

Example of why all of your so-called help is somewhere worse than useless. It isn't trying to assist or help, it is just "what do you want things to be? Tell us exactly what you want because the possibility that you're working things out while the thread progresses is totally unreasonable and no sane person would ever develop a project as they go along."

If you really intend to only "help" by pestering and prodding and insisting that I explain exactly how likely you are to die from a given attack, then you're not helping. Full stop.

Nor is the mockery doing anything but encouraging me to think that asking you for help would be even worse than nonproductive.

[Roy]

You post a reply, which does not answer my question.

Specifically, he posts a question, which contains the same first two words as your question, that is completely unrelated to your question.

Example:
Denizen: Where did the bad man touch you?
Ellensar: Where did you get that great hat?

I'm sure there is a name for this rhetorical technique. It feels like something the Greeks would think is cool.

Idiocy?

[Tshern]

Elennsarian rhetoric?

[Roy]

Elennsarian rhetoric?

That works.

[Orion]

Elennsar, what kind of help do you want form us? What can we do for you?

(I, on the there hand, know what kind of help I want with Bad Juju. Hint.)

[Elennsar]

Two things.

1) I'm sorting out fluff. This is inspired by Arturius, it isn't meant to model fifth century Britain - there are strong elements of things like Alfred the Great involved.

So figuring out "what elements are desirable? Should religion matter? What exactly makes it necessary for the King's Companions to be anything beyond elite bodyguards?" is one thing.

2) Mechanics - should "Berserk" be an advantage or a disadvantage? Should it even be an option to be ambidexterous (I'm honestly leaning on "No.")?



I have a basic idea of what kind of setting I want, but "a setting inspired by the historical Arthur, Alfred the Great, with tragedy, failure, and success through hard work and determination, along with people being heroes (in the sense of doing noble and brave acts) despite the hardships because it is better for the whole to do that and the right thing to do." is not enough to start playtesting even crudely, so sorting out what things from the range of source material come up and what don't is vitally important to do.


I don't jknow if it would be good for the characters to regard a good shield as almost as important as a good sword, or if a shield breaking is a disadvantage but not a crippling one.

I don't know whether or not I want any elements of fantasy (I do know that if I do I want to be fairly small) and I'm not entirely sure how many men the Companions (the PCs, to be precise) can take on at once - it does really depend on what you do, but what that adds up to I'm not sure. I know I like the idea in Seven Samurai that forty proficient enemies are bad, bad news for seven somewhat more skilled bushi.

I'm not sure I want "three survivors out of seven", however.

[NineInchNall]

So really ... You don't know what you want OR don't want. You've got a nebulous, nascent inspiration, which is fine.

So here's what you do:

1. Take the very few things you do want with respect to fluff.
2. Write them down.
3. Fill in a bunch of (fluff) blanks with remotely appropriate details.
4. Look at what you've got so far.
5. Adjust, remove, or add.
6. If satisfied, go to next step; else, go to step 4.
7. Ask for help with mechanics.

To the rest of us it looks like you're refusing to get past step two.

For example, you say you don't know whether a character should value a sword more than a shield or the reverse. So what you do is pick one, go with it for a while, and if you like it that way so much the better; if you don't, then you change it.

[Elennsar]

I know some of what I want and what I don't want.

Big difference betwewen "some of" and "none of".

To the rest of us it looks like you're refusing to get past step two.

If you actually want to help, then -help-. If you want to pester, prod, nag, bother, annoy and otherwise frustrate, then keep up insisting that I write something down just to have it on paper.

Suggesting that I write something down so I have something down is not helping.

[Kaelik]

1) Notice how in like eight straight posts Elennsar has complained about how we don't want to help because he doesn't know what it is he wants and it is unreasonable for us to expect him to know.

Hint: If it wasn't satisfactory the first eight times you said it, why is the ninth going to be any different?

2) Elennsar's strategy of game design is something like this:

a) Make vague pronouncement with no details that doesn't help at all.
b) Insist that without any details of anything at all, we should somehow help him.
c) Tell us that all our suggestions for anything and everything are wrong. You have a mechanic he can use? That mechanic sucks. You have a probability analysis? More concerned about the spirit of the rules then reality. Comment on his fluff, of any kind? You don't understand what he wants (but no he can't explain it better).
d) All questions are personal attacks, because he doesn't know the answer to any of them, and gets defensive. Do you want attacking or defending to be encouraged? "I don't know, you aren't helpful, try to understand but don't ask questions." ect.

Basically, Elennsar wants us to read his mind, discover the one thing in the universe that he actually likes, even though he can't think of anything he likes at all, and then present it to him in one complete package without forcing him to do any assembly, so that he can then have the one fucking RPG he would actually ever like.

Unfortunately for him, and for all of us, there is no RPG that he will ever like, because he wants attacking to be highly penalized, but he wants all his heroes to go forth and attack shit all the time to be courageous, and he wants those heroes to have a very low chance of success, but to magically succeed anyway.

What Elennsar actually needs to do is go write a damn book instead of trying to get other people to assemble an RPG, because the one thing he hates most is the idea of evil stupid players and DMs and dice ruining his perfect ruleset that creates heroes who have a 100% chance of death but somehow never die.

[Elennsar]

You have a real knack for completely misunderstanding what I have said, Kaelik. Its almost comical.

[Orion]

Elennsar --

you want to work on fluff, and shelve mechanics for a while? Okay, we can work with that. They are connected to a degree though -- ideally we want the combat mechanics to reinforce the types of warfare we want to see in the game, and so on. If characters are supposed to have heirloom swords that are part of their pesonality, we shouldn't allow sundering, and so on.

But let's talk fluff. You have a vague idea; you want to solidify it. How can we help you with that?

[Elennsar]

ideally we want the combat mechanics to reinforce the types of warfare we want to see in the game, and so on. If characters are supposed to have heirloom swords that are part of their pesonality, we shouldn't allow sundering, and so on.

Right. But without knowing if we want heirloom swords that are part of someone's personality (or something to that effect), we don't know whether or not sundering would be that bad (if a sword can just be replaced after the fight, it might well not be worth doing).

But let's talk fluff. You have a vague idea; you want to solidify it. How can we help you with that?

First off, read the idea.

Second off, comment. What does that bring to mind? What things does "inspired by the historical Arthur with elements of things like Alfred the Great" mean to you? I know what it means to me, but I can more easily explain it if I know where its not clear then writing out every detail including those "too obvious to need to be explained" (and until knowing what needs to be explained, I obviously don't have an idea what is already clear)

Third off, (related to part 2), suggestions. There are things in there that may be cool (religion being an issue, for instance) but also may well not be cool. The difference between commenting and suggesting (for purposes of this list) - suggesting is the bold part here "This doesn't seem like such a great idea (for whatever reasons), but what about something like this?"

Fourth off, please post any of the above in the new thread (set in the invention forum).

Bam. If you want to get rolling, that ought to get things going.

[Heath Robinson]

Right. But without knowing if we want heirloom swords that are part of someone's personality (or something to that effect), we don't know whether or not sundering would be that bad (if a sword can just be replaced after the fight, it might well not be worth doing).

Well, you're the head honcho for making this game, we're just here to check your working. Do you want heirloom swords?

[Elennsar]

If you just want to check this, then kindly stay away from it until its finished (or beta testing level) and stop pestering me.

If you actually want to help, then help.

[Aktariel]

If you actually want to help, then help.

For the love of God, man, How?

I've been away from the Den for probably a month now, hoping that the furor you caused would have died down, but that's apparently not the case. You're still going strong.

As other people have said, you don't even seem to know what the hell you want. Examples get offered, and you shoot them down. We try to ask you what you want, and you tell us you don't know and get snippy and defensive. Guidelines, suggestions... nothing seems to please you.

Perhaps what you don't get is how much work designing something takes. And sometimes, when you work, you have to commit to something that you later decide is complete shit. But the fact that you sat down and did something, and it wasn't the right thing, gives you a very good idea of what the "right" thing is.

But you can't just blunder around trying to figure it out, because you're going to waste an ungodly amount time, and possibly never get to actual work.

The phrase that might be nicely applicable here is "successive approximations." You try something, it doesn't work. You try something a little different, and it's a little closer to what you want, but still not it. So you try something little more different in that same direction, and get closer. And so on, until you get to something you can live with.

[Elennsar]

For the love of God, man, How?

Make (polite) comments. Offer suggestions. Comment on what "inspired by the historical Arthur and elements of things like Alfred the Great." come off as meaning. Ask whether or not I'm planning on a certain element with an observation on what you make of whether it would be good, bad, indifferent.

Don't say "What are you going to do? What are you going to do? What are the available actions? Tell us the rules!" - help me write the damn rules.

As other people have said, you don't even seem to know what the hell you want. Examples get offered, and you shoot them down.

I do know what I want in some areas, and I do know that some things are not what I want whether I know what exactly I do want yet or not.

We try to ask you what you want, and you tell us you don't know and get snippy and defensive. Guidelines, suggestions... nothing seems to please you.

Because you (plural) pester and nag and bother and irritate and insist that I come up with something so you have a percentage.

I'm snippy and defensive because those claiming to "help" have mostly done a termendous amount of asking questions and virtually nothing to help come up with answers to those questions.

But the fact that you sat down and did something, and it wasn't the right thing, gives you a very good idea of what the "right" thing is.

Sometimes. Quite often not. And "30%" just to satisfy the cries for a percentage would give no idea whatsoever whether or not it was the right thing or not.

[norms29]

so what you're saying is, Conan can't be killed, because the author won't let it happen, but Conan doesn't know that.

so Why can't it be the same for PCs, the players know they can't be killed, but the Characters don't?

because you've gotten close to adressing this question, but you haven't produced an answer other then giant frog.

[Elennsar]

Because you are refusing to acknowledge that there's a difference between a possible event that doesn't happen and an impossible event.

Also, if representing Conan in a game as close to the novels as possible includes dependable plot armor, why not the script?

That way, Conan is scripted only to step on the "Safe" squares, or at least the ones that won't kill him, and we can avoid having to buy dice, too.

[Draco_Argentum]

For the love of God, man, How?

I've been away from the Den for probably a month now, hoping that the furor you caused would have died down, but that's apparently not the case. You're still going strong.

Hes mostly confined to a few threads that have been about him from the start now. Also there is ignore now, hes ignoring me for sure. I can tell since hes still responding to some people telling him he is a moron but not me and some others. Like with MartinHarper and the bad touch comment.

Makes things far more fun when you can watch the ignore cloud spread.

[norms29]

Because you are refusing to acknowledge that there's a difference between a possible event that doesn't happen and an impossible event.

.

that's because in single author fiction there is no such difference

repeat after me; Conan is not real life.

[RandomCasualty2]

Also, if representing Conan in a game as close to the novels as possible includes dependable plot armor, why not the script?

That way, Conan is scripted only to step on the "Safe" squares, or at least the ones that won't kill him, and we can avoid having to buy dice, too.

Because it's a game, and part of a game is making choices.

People want to be able to lose if they make poor choices, because for the game to be meaningful, your choices should affect the game world and your own fate.

However, people also want to play the Conan they see in movies. They don't want to die to some nameless archer's arrow, because if they did, they wouldn't be playing Conan, they'd be playing some pansy ass red shirt warrior. When I say I want to play Conan, that means I want to do shit that Conan can do. And being skilled enough not to worry about a few mooks is part of that.

[Heath Robinson]

Because you (plural) pester and nag and bother and irritate and insist that I come up with something so you have a percentage.

I'm snippy and defensive because those claiming to "help" have mostly done a termendous amount of asking questions and virtually nothing to help come up with answers to those questions.

Because we can't answer those questions for you. We're pestering you about the basic assumptions of the game most of the time. The average lethality isn't something we can do for you without it becoming our game instead of yours. You are the one who keeps on saying that our conception of a good game doesn't match yours, so manperson up and take responsibility for making your game fit your own conceptions.


Helping will always involve asking the person who claims to be in charge questions that need to be answered. Sometimes that looks like pestering, but it's because those questions need to be answered before we can do anything. We want to get things done, but answering those questions for ourselves will destroy any coherency the end result has.

[Elennsar]

We want to get things done, but answering those questions for ourselves will destroy any coherency the end result has.

If you want to help with this project, then help. Make a suggestion. Recommend something.

Either offer actual assistance and actual aid and actually try to answer the questions that come up in designing something or stay the fuck out of my project.

Your choice.

If I like your suggestion, I'll say so and work it in. If I don't, I'll say so and work out something else - maybe some other idea from someone, maybe something that it triggered.

But if you're not going to make suggestions, go with option B. Seriously.

[Kaelik]

Either offer actual assistance and actual aid and actually try to answer the questions that come up in designing something or stay the fuck out of my project.

You are a motherfucking idiot.

People already did this. They did it a long time ago, then they gave up because you rejected 100% of all ideas with no justification for any of the rejections at all.

Seriously, fucking shut up already.

Step one was determine what type of goddam RNG you wanted.

1d20 or 1dX rejected because of the variance and the likelihood of getting max or min.

3d6 or XdY, rejected because you don't like the fact that it rolls lots of average.

1d8-4, not variable enough.

rolling a dice pool for successes, "I don't like it."

Every possible suggestion has been made. You rejected every single one.

Different people have suggested different fatality rates ranging from 0% to 60% in every fight. You rejected all of those.

There are no more fucking suggestions to be made. You have to tell us which of the 100% is a good fatality rate.

I'm suggesting right now, you can pix any integer 1-100 for your fatality rate in an average fight against your equivalent in the opposition army.

Now you can tell us which of those numbers you like, or you can continue to be an unproductive dick and say that you don't know which of those 100 numbers you like.

But here's the thing, those 100 numbers are all the possible numbers. And there is no magic answer going to swoop into the thread.

You have two choices, be a defensive unproductive idiot, and make a huge ass post complaining about how mean and wrong I am and how you don't have enough information because you don't know every single choice that every player is going to make, or you can shut up, bite the bullet, and fucking actually evaluate how you want an "average" combat to go, and give us a goddam percent.