Fixing the Fantasy of Fantasy Gaming

[PoliteNewb]

Allow me to assist in dropping the centaur issue...

Firearms are HUGELY easier to train.

Just to derail the thread from Frank's stupid centaur derailment - no. This is utter bullshit. This is a commonly accepted bullshit, but still bullshit. The manuals on loading early-17th century arquebuses had the process split into several dozens of actions. Failure to perform many of them properly could potentially in misfire, your fuse going out and you being unable to fire, and so on. Complex evolutions a formation of arquebusiers needed to do on the battlefield added another level of complexity. Crossbows were much, much, much easier to use.

Hold up now. There's a big difference between something being complicated and it being difficult.

Loading an arquebus or other early gunpowder weapon was complicated (though it became less so, quickly, as people found better ways to load and use them)...but I don't believe it was more difficult to learn than how to accurately fire a longbow at long range and high speed, nor do I believe it was more difficult to perform than wielding a sword effectively against an equally armed and skilled opponent. Further, it could be done by just about anyone with a modicum of manual dexterity and intelligence...it did not require the physical strength needed to draw a 100-lb. bow or crush a man's skull with a mace.

For reference, regarding how tough it actually was to load early gunpowder weapons:

http://wapedia.mobi/en/Musket

http://www.asmainegoes.com/content/shoo ... and-videos

How long did it take to train troops to effectively load and fire an arquebus? How does it compare with the time required to train troops to wield sword, shield, and lance from horseback, or to draw and fire a 100-lb. longbow at long range?

Just because it wasn't "easy" doesn't mean it wasn't still easier than other methods of killing dudes.

[Prak]

Waitwaitwait. Is this debate/was the first debate about this* specifically that weird-shaped things like quadrupeds (example: Centaurs) can't work, or that all big things can't work? Or is it specifically Centaurs because "HAHAHA FUCK CRISSA" or something?

I believe that the first debate about this was in a TNE (maybe Atayala?) thread concerning races, and Frank said he wasn't going to support PC races who couldn't have free reign in human towns, examples including centaurs and fire people (tiny fey too?). Some people disagreed with the centaur part, and it's since become a rallying point for PL as near as I can tell.

Personally I don't see the need to care so much about it, because all it really means is that Frank won't make rules/stats for centaur PCs (waah, waah?).

Yes, in an edition that will likely never be finished, that I could easily write centaurs into myself if I cared, that few if any people will ever likely play.

My derailment? Please. PhoneLobster and Prak are the ones flipping out about how they want me to write fucking Centaur rules. And also the ones derailing the fucking thread.

Excuse me? I don't give a shit what you write, Frank. Also, it's not derailing the thread to talk about the viability of Centaur pcs, as that's one of the things I posted about (though with more focus on RP viability) in my original post. You know, the start of the thread?

I think I can just consider this argument won. No one can give me one good reason to deal with the hassle of a centaur other than "cuz I want it." With no positives and lots of negatives, the argument is done.

So you're just going to ignore my "It's my character, I'll cope with the world of bipeds, don't worry about designing for me, guys"?

...And if you take that, you also have to take my character concept: Mr. Ed von Blahhh. He was a heartless centaur thief working who was branded with a Mark of Justice to stay out of cities. While crossing the plains, he was bitten by a vampire, and now he's just trying to make his way in a world where he doesn't belong.

Also, he pathologically hates everyone.

That's not a problem, right?

No, see, I'll sit down with you and have a perfectly polite discussion about the problems posed by your character, not even getting into physicals, like ladders, because that's bull and easily dealt with. At the end you'll be at one of three conclusions:
1- Gee, maybe I should pick a concept that works in a cooperative roleplaying game better (like drop the mark of justice, and maybe the pathological hatred)
2- I have these ways of getting around certain weaknesses and limitations, and I'll just have the RP trouble
3- NO! I WANNA PLAY MY DUMB CHARACTER!!! (at which point I let the game go as it will, including the party likely abandoning you or killing you).

This all has me wanting to run a game with a party of non-standard PCs who have various problems mentioned in here, just to see how bad it would actually be.

[shadzar]

So you're just going to ignore my "It's my character, I'll cope with the world of bipeds, don't worry about designing for me, guys"?

The problem is they MUST worry about you, as you will become jsut another problem character for the group, like the evil character in an all good party. They will ahve ot all change their play to accommodate you specially just because your centaur just doesnt fit.

Everyone will have to wait longer for you to have to figure out how to cope with the biped world, try to figure things out with you, etc....

You would be come the problem player in the group because of your special needs character.

I say this from experience with a friend trying to play a wemic in a game. Everything had to sotp to figure out how to get the wemic to be a part of things where wemics weren't meant to go. Sure he was great outdoors or in a dragons lair, but everywhere else was playing "wait on the wemic".

[K]

I think I can just consider this argument won. No one can give me one good reason to deal with the hassle of a centaur other than "cuz I want it." With no positives and lots of negatives, the argument is done.

So you're just going to ignore my "It's my character, I'll cope with the world of bipeds, don't worry about designing for me, guys"?

I'm ignoring that because it's totally irrational. Pretending you aren't causing a problem doesn't mean you aren't causing a problem. Asking people to ignore the fact that you are causing a problem won't work either.

As for playing an all nonstandard game, its actually pretty easy as long as you are willing to accept that you are never going to do huge amounts of standard fantasy things that people expect from fantasy gaming, everything is going to be mysteriously handicap-accessible, and lots of design work beforehand is needed for each adventure.

I was serious about Praire War! You could totally do a game on the steppes or praires and have all quadrapeds heroes and villains. Then, no one will notice the the fact that you can't use a row-boat and "being in a tree" is as powerful as flight to you.

Of course, try to run most standard adventures and you are boned. I mean, if you tried Red Hand of Doom the way Frank and I played it, you'd have screwed us from the first fight onward.

[Prak]

My evil characters have never been a problem in groups of nonevil characters. At least not major ones. Plot hook problems, occasionally, but not "hurry up and wait" problems....

Anyway, alright, you have a valid point. Finally someone does.

I think I can just consider this argument won. No one can give me one good reason to deal with the hassle of a centaur other than "cuz I want it." With no positives and lots of negatives, the argument is done.

So you're just going to ignore my "It's my character, I'll cope with the world of bipeds, don't worry about designing for me, guys"?

I'm ignoring that because it's totally irrational. Pretending you aren't causing a problem doesn't mean you aren't causing a problem. Asking people to ignore the fact that you are causing a problem won't work either.

The point was to realize that your character approaches the world differently, and must be self-prepared to cope. but, Shad had a valid point, prepared or not, everyone waits on the centaur coping.

As for playing an all nonstandard game, its actually pretty easy as long as you are willing to accept that you are never going to do huge amounts of standard fantasy things that people expect from fantasy gaming, everything is going to be mysteriously handicap-accessible, and lots of design work beforehand is needed for each adventure.

I was serious about Praire War! You could totally do a game on the steppes or praires and have all quadrapeds heroes and villains. Then, no one will notice the the fact that you can't use a row-boat and "being in a tree" is as powerful as flight to you.

Of course, try to run most standard adventures and you are boned. I mean, if you tried Red Hand of Doom the way Frank and I played it, you'd have screwed us from the first fight onward.

No, that's the point of the idea. Run a normal game, with the players playing non-standard races to see how much of a difficulty they really face.

[K]

No, that's the point of the idea. Run a normal game, with the players playing non-standard races to see how much of a difficulty they really face.

I don't see the point. Players are going to be more accepting of you holding up the game because they are doing it too, and the DM is just going to spend extra design time making the adventures handicapped-accessible.

[Prak]

No, that's the point of the idea. Run a normal game, with the players playing non-standard races to see how much of a difficulty they really face.

I don't see the point. Players are going to be more accepting of you holding up the game because they are doing it too, and the DM is just going to spend extra design time making the adventures handicapped-accessible.

...You're really not understanding me, so I'm going to speak slowly, and in small words.

I want to have a group of players play things that would face the problems mentioned here in published adventures and see how difficult it is found to be.

[K]

No, that's the point of the idea. Run a normal game, with the players playing non-standard races to see how much of a difficulty they really face.

I don't see the point. Players are going to be more accepting of you holding up the game because they are doing it too, and the DM is just going to spend extra design time making the adventures handicapped-accessible.

...You're really not understanding me, so I'm going to speak slowly, and in small words.

I want to have a group of players play things that would face the problems mentioned here in published adventures and see how difficult it is found to be.

...and I'll speak even more slowly. IT. WON'T. MATTER. BECAUSE. EVERYONE. WILL. BE. HOLDING. UP. THE. GAME. THEY. WON'T. BE. AS. UPSET.

NO. CONTROLS. ON. AN. EXPERIMENT. MAKE. IT. INVALID.

IT'S. ALSO. EASY. TO. CHERRYPICK. ADVENTURES. TO. SUIT. A. NONSTANDARD. PARTY. THE. EXTRA. WORK. IS. THE. ISSUE.

[shadzar]

I want to have a group of players play things that would face the problems mentioned here in published adventures and see how difficult it is found to be.

will you be the DM or player, and please tell us how you centaur PC party coped with the various things presented in a biped-centric world, such as ladders, etc.

Have the players (including DM) fill out like a comment card that tells what parts they liked, where they saw problems, etc

I am curious as to what other problems we haven't already mentioned could come up as I am sure they are not solely limited to what has been listed thus far in this thread.

[Prak]

I want to have a group of players play things that would face the problems mentioned here in published adventures and see how difficult it is found to be.

will you be the DM or player, and please tell us how you centaur PC party coped with the various things presented in a biped-centric world, such as ladders, etc.

Have the players (including DM) fill out like a comment card that tells what parts they liked, where they saw problems, etc

I am curious as to what other problems we haven't already mentioned could come up as I am sure they are not solely limited to what has been listed thus far in this thread.

I figured I'd run it. Need to find enough players, is the problem.

[shadzar]

I figured I'd run it. Need to find enough players, is the problem.

OK so you are going to grab an existing adventure, and tell the players they will all be centaurs and see what kind of new challenges are created for those PCs as opposed to say a normal party?

I would say run the same adventure for 2 groups. One using only centaurs and one using a normal party. While different groups will always play differently, you will be able to see what differences being the quadruped party exposes over the bipeds in the bipedal world.

A one-shot would probably be enough to begin to tell the difference as long as it has those trapping of not being solely an outdoor adventure and has some in-town time where the centaurs must navigate not only structures, but society acceptance even when they can fit inside the structures as well.

Also I would love to know how you, as the DM, end up treating pack animals such as mules and horses, and if the centaur game somehow comes to let them in everywhere the centaur PCs are so that a band of cavalry are sitting in the bar and riding their horses in and out of it...

Your findings should be intersting for all.

[fectin]

...And if you take that, you also have to take my character concept: Mr. Ed von Blahhh. He was a heartless centaur thief working who was branded with a Mark of Justice to stay out of cities. While crossing the plains, he was bitten by a vampire, and now he's just trying to make his way in a world where he doesn't belong.

Also, he pathologically hates everyone.

That's not a problem, right?

No, see, I'll sit down with you and have a perfectly polite discussion about the problems posed by your character, not even getting into physicals, like ladders, because that's bull and easily dealt with. At the end you'll be at one of three conclusions:
1- Gee, maybe I should pick a concept that works in a cooperative roleplaying game better (like drop the mark of justice, and maybe the pathological hatred)
2- I have these ways of getting around certain weaknesses and limitations, and I'll just have the RP trouble
3- NO! I WANNA PLAY MY DUMB CHARACTER!!! (at which point I let the game go as it will, including the party likely abandoning you or killing you).

I think that's probably the best approach, no matter how minor or systemic the problems are. For less terrible centaurs too.

[Prak]

...And if you take that, you also have to take my character concept: Mr. Ed von Blahhh. He was a heartless centaur thief working who was branded with a Mark of Justice to stay out of cities. While crossing the plains, he was bitten by a vampire, and now he's just trying to make his way in a world where he doesn't belong.

Also, he pathologically hates everyone.

That's not a problem, right?

No, see, I'll sit down with you and have a perfectly polite discussion about the problems posed by your character, not even getting into physicals, like ladders, because that's bull and easily dealt with. At the end you'll be at one of three conclusions:
1- Gee, maybe I should pick a concept that works in a cooperative roleplaying game better (like drop the mark of justice, and maybe the pathological hatred)
2- I have these ways of getting around certain weaknesses and limitations, and I'll just have the RP trouble
3- NO! I WANNA PLAY MY DUMB CHARACTER!!! (at which point I let the game go as it will, including the party likely abandoning you or killing you).

I think that's probably the best approach, no matter how minor or systemic the problems are. For less terrible centaurs too.

My friend has had to do it with me probably far more times than really should have been needed. I tend to latch onto ideas that are problematic. Like demonologists.

OK so you are going to grab an existing adventure, and tell the players they will all be centaurs and see what kind of new challenges are created for those PCs as opposed to say a normal party?

I would say run the same adventure for 2 groups. One using only centaurs and one using a normal party. While different groups will always play differently, you will be able to see what differences being the quadruped party exposes over the bipeds in the bipedal world.

A one-shot would probably be enough to begin to tell the difference as long as it has those trapping of not being solely an outdoor adventure and has some in-town time where the centaurs must navigate not only structures, but society acceptance even when they can fit inside the structures as well.

Also I would love to know how you, as the DM, end up treating pack animals such as mules and horses, and if the centaur game somehow comes to let them in everywhere the centaur PCs are so that a band of cavalry are sitting in the bar and riding their horses in and out of it...

Your findings should be intersting for all.

Well, I've got one friend liking the idea over on facebook, so I need to find more people. The idea of running it with two groups is a good one, I'll have to do that for that nebulous control K was ranting about.

[PhoneLobster]

I ask if the problem people seem to have with centaurs extends to onocentaurs, aqrabuamelu, or silly product identity shit like wemics and bauriar.

Well see that's a hard question. For large quadrupeds wemics with the whole "agility of a lion!" business should be pretty much as non-problematic as they come.

But K tells us ALL large creatures are out. And Wemics as of the 3.x material I have are official abstract Large sized creatures and the only means of measuring them from the bullshit product identity shit tells us they are the exact same size as centaurs.

Frank mean while is contradicting K's defense of Frank's argument by telling us all that trolls and ogres and shit are totally cool (hold your breath five seconds and he will tell you how cool his insect taurs and snake legged naga tauric creatures which K rules out are totally cool too).

The contradiction is notable as this is utterly typical of every "realism" and "suspension of disbelief" argument ever explored in it's infantile depths. Every defender has a different idea of where to draw their "this much realism and no less I say!" line and a completely different understanding of the "facts" as they imagine them. Which is one of the many reasons these arguments should never be allowed in an RPG discussion on basic first principles.

Meanwhile however K HAS in fact given us something in this argument that Frank hasn't. Some examples of testable obstacles Centaurs fail at that he tells us EVERY viable character MUST pass.

And sadly Wemics fail the ladder test (too heavy, ladder breaks)

And Wemics fail the tiny ceiling hatch test (too big, can't fit)

And Wemics fail the griffon freedom railroad (too heavy for airlift)

Wemics also dislike civilization. I mean that's just light fluff but apparently if your character ever says "I would rather not take that job in the middle of a city" he is a tyrant so...

Wemics also, hilariously, quite possible have a feline hatred of dogs, and we already know the guy who hates dogs is also out according to K...

So by the Tyranny of K Wemics are definitely a nono. And indeed we have been told anything that isn't perfectly humanoid AND medium sized (or maybe also Small sized, but only because they get a mysterious waver from the "lets skip it" tests) is out so we can pretty safely say that if it's tauric it ain't happening in K's world. I mean Frank meanwhile has a list of tauric characters he is totally cool with because either he designed them himself or he just likes them more or something.

[Koumei]

Of course, my game the kobolds live in 3' high tunnels full of deadfalls, and the PCs do have to shrink up to get around in comfort. So the centaur's fucked, he can stay out and look after the Druid's bear, the Paladin's mount, the wagons, bullocks, two score archers, and dozen heavy infantry, and protect them when the Kobolds make a break for it.

I'm pretty sure if the Medium members of the party can't fit, they're saying "Fuck this" and just skipping it, flooding the kobold-nest with acid/fire/insecticide/boiling water, or finding a way to tear the roof off then tap-dance over the bloody thing.

I know groups who would react that way upon discovering "I can't take my mount/animal companion in".

[K]

I love how Phonelobster thinks I'm a tyrant because I won't allow things that ruin games.

By his logic, people should be allowed to take levels in Commoner if they really want, and I'd be a villain to disallow them.

[Prak]

If someone wanted to play a commoner, I'd let them, and then laugh when they were killed by a house cat.

[Koumei]

I do admit that I'd like it if the PCs went around looking like this (worksafe) sometimes, but I suppose as MC I would need to vaguely remember "Don't send the party to the place that is cold and lacks sunlight" and "Don't make a situation where they MUST use ladder no other way will work" (unless it's a super-strong one that just climbs with upper-body strength I suppose).

As much as Golden Mean is a fallacy, it seems both sides of this debate are kind of derping out a bit. Yes, there are times when almost any character is inappropriate for the area and thus a pain in the ass (too tall/short/fat/thin, too many legs/not enough legs, can't swim/can only swim, can't fly/can only fly and needs heaps of turning space, not fire resistant enough, too annoying/brooding/lonewolf/antisocial, too stupid/smart/blind/deaf/keen-sighted). By the same token, some things are legitimately such a pain in the ass that they're just not appropriate ("Hay guise can I play a Flesh Tearer Linnorm?" "So I'm one inch tall. Also I can't speak any languages." "I don't have a physical body, on any plane. I'm playing a phantasmal killer, an actual illusion. That's okay right?")

But by all means continue arguing with full intensity, I find this entertaining.

[K]

If someone wanted to play a commoner, I'd let them, and then laugh when they were killed by a house cat.

...and that's why you shouldn't run games, or even have a say in how games are run. That's some serious Gygax bullshit.

Not running a fun game is a mark of failure as a DM. Note that for future reference.

[PhoneLobster]

As much as Golden Mean is a fallacy, it seems both sides of this debate are kind of derping out a bit.

You might note I have mentioned that there is a line somewhere that you probably do need to draw with characters having difficulty going on adventures. It's just that Centaur isn't it and the particular way they are drawing it at centaur rules out a lot of other things that fall even below the centaur line (note that K isn't exactly denying that yeah, wemics really ARE out by his tests, and that's pretty sad, wemics are way cooler than centaurs an trolls)

Now had they decided to draw the line for how many let's skip it's are allowed at say... a Mermaid who needs a wheelchair and a giant fishbowl everywhere she goes I might be more charitable towards their position. But the reality is the "crippling disadvantage" of being a centaur who hunts dragons many times your own size in their hulking great lairs is not nearly the same degree of lets skip its.

We are talking a serious minority of adventures or obstacles here for the centaur, while the mermaid is easily refusing about as many adventures as your average bubble boy. The mermaid would be a sensible place for the line, possibly even well past it, certainly a wheelchair bound poster girl for the cause of drawing it somewhere.

But centaurs are just a fucking stupid place to draw the allowable "let's skip it" line. Because that's the same place a large number of entirely human characters are at. It's the same place as "I don't like the sound of this dungeon" is at. It's a place you just plain CAN'T get away with drawing the line because pretty much EVERYTHING is on the wrong side of that line.

[Prak]

If someone wanted to play a commoner, I'd let them, and then laugh when they were killed by a house cat.

...and that's why you shouldn't run games, or even have a say in how games are run. That's some serious Gygax bullshit.

Not running a fun game is a mark of failure as a DM. Note that for future reference.

Yes, which is why some ideas are flat out terrible. The only ways in which we differ is on which ideas are terrible, and how we deal with players that come to the table with flat out terrible ideas.

I'm of the mind that people can play what they want, even if it's a terrible idea, or greatly annoys me (whisper gnome rogue intent on making the ettin think it has a voice in it's head when there are only two characters. seriously). But I'm also open to letting them find some way of changing things when it's no longer fun to play whatever their idea was. But if you come hellbent to play a character that can be killed by house pets, I'm going to let you learn through the school of hard knocks if I don't think the school of rational discussion will have any effect.

And while I'm sure your games have always been made of maximum fun for all involved, and you've never failed as a gm... stuff it.

The mermaid would be a sensible place for the line, possibly even well past it, certainly a wheelchair bound poster girl for the cause of drawing it somewhere.

I give mermaids amulets of air breathing and one of the following: 1)magical slig leg-pants, or 2)Ursela's legs amulet, and call it good.

[A Man In Black]

I give mermaids amulets of air breathing and one of the following: 1)magical slig leg-pants, or 2)Ursela's legs amulet, and call it good.

What the fuck's the point of playing a mermaid at that point? You can play a super-intelligent shade of the color blue as long as you have a magic widget that turns you into a human.

[Koumei]

No really, Prak, that's a fucking terrible idea - the "Let them make the rope you hang them with" bit. Indeed it's literally the exact shit that Gygax used to pull.

[PhoneLobster]

Oh don't get me wrong, I would and could accommodate a mermaid PC. And contrary to K's claims that would be totally cool and everyone would not just be fine with it but would find it an enjoyable and quirky diversion.

But there IS a great deal more accommodating to be done.

While the centaur PC, troll PC, and wemic PC need little more than a "wuts a wemic?" rundown at character creation not particularly more thorough or important than a "wuts an elf?" talk, a mermaid PC needs a "mermaids, how do they work?" talk with the player in which I would need to discuss with the player precisely how the heck we are going to make it work (Is this an aquatic campaign?, do you have working lungs and air dry safe skin? can we run you as a Mermaid from the movie Splash type Mermaid? can you have a Troll or Centaur or something sensible who just carries you everywhere?)

Because while the centaur needs a minority of the time fix not particularly greater or different than the minority of the time fixes required by actual human companions the mermaid probably does need a majority of the time fix, or a majority of the time favorable campaign.

Personally I would just organize for that majority of the time fix or favorable campaign to be provided and that would be fine. But I could see that particular level of customization being overlooked or even deliberately ignored at a broader game design level.

Still it would help if mermaid PC creation was supported at some primitive level by the system, even if the mitigations and accommodations were left to the GM to deal with.

Or again, it could just be the Mermaid from the movie Splash type mermaid, but I'm assuming we wouldn't be using such a generally convenient Mermaid type for an example of an inconvenient Mermaid...

[Prak]

I give mermaids amulets of air breathing and one of the following: 1)magical slig leg-pants, or 2)Ursela's legs amulet, and call it good.

What the fuck's the point of playing a mermaid at that point? You can play a super-intelligent shade of the color blue as long as you have a magic widget that turns you into a human.

keep in mind, the last, and only, person I had want to play a mermaid was an irrational girlfriend with a "Iwannabespecial" complex.

No really, Prak, that's a fucking terrible idea - the "Let them make the rope you hang them with" bit. Indeed it's literally the exact shit that Gygax used to pull.

*sigh* yes. It is. And I hate that I'm of a mind to do ...anything gygaxian. Though on the other hand, no one reasonable has ever had such a shitty demand, and the people who have, it was literally a demand. It was "let me play a commoner, or I won't play" and I'm harder up for a D&D game than I am for sex around these parts. Of course it is the gaming equivalent of being so desperate you'll fuck a syphilitic midget, so that should really be all the illustration I need.

Hey, look, I can learn. I just need someone to lead me to looking at the idea in such a way as to plainly illustrate how stupid I'm being.