Good Games?
Moderator: Moderators
-
- Journeyman
- Posts: 103
- Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2015 3:00 pm
Good Games?
Since you lot seem critical of most every rpg system ever, what aren't shitty systems and what can we learn from them? Anything?
-
- Journeyman
- Posts: 103
- Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2015 3:00 pm
-
- Knight-Baron
- Posts: 717
- Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 12:52 pm
Let people give their opinion at their own leisure.
Fishing for responses isn't exactly seen as being very polite.
Fishing for responses isn't exactly seen as being very polite.
"Lurker and fan of random stuff." - Icy's occupation
sabs wrote:And Yes, being Finnish makes you Evil.
virgil wrote:And has been successfully proven with Pathfinder, you can just say you improved the system from 3E without doing so and many will believe you to the bitter end.
The den doesn't block web crawlers, all those hits could've been Google scanning the page.
Koumei wrote:...is the dead guy posthumously at fault for his own death and, due to the felony murder law, his own murderer?
hyzmarca wrote:A palace made out of poop is much more impressive than one made out of gold. Stinkier, but more impressive. One is an ostentatious display of wealth. The other is a miraculous engineering feat.
-
- Journeyman
- Posts: 103
- Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2015 3:00 pm
- deaddmwalking
- Prince
- Posts: 3891
- Joined: Mon May 21, 2012 11:33 am
There's been a lot of discussion of good games and elements of good games on the den over the years. I've learned a lot by reading through the threads.
But it's not exactly reasonable to demand that people provide you a dissertation on why some games are 'good' and what makes them 'good'.
What the Den has been pretty adept at is defining the objectives of a game and considering whether it succeeded or failed in that regard. A game could still be bad even if it achieves its objectives, but good and bad are definitely subjective.
In general, people on this board are fairly pro-3.x. The main reason is that it has a reasonably robust resolution mechanic that empowers players. The Den, in general, is pretty intolerant of vague mechanics that allow the GM to choose any option they want, regardless of the input or success/failure of the players.
Of course, there are a lot of people on the Den, and there is no such thing as complete agreement.
But it's not exactly reasonable to demand that people provide you a dissertation on why some games are 'good' and what makes them 'good'.
What the Den has been pretty adept at is defining the objectives of a game and considering whether it succeeded or failed in that regard. A game could still be bad even if it achieves its objectives, but good and bad are definitely subjective.
In general, people on this board are fairly pro-3.x. The main reason is that it has a reasonably robust resolution mechanic that empowers players. The Den, in general, is pretty intolerant of vague mechanics that allow the GM to choose any option they want, regardless of the input or success/failure of the players.
Of course, there are a lot of people on the Den, and there is no such thing as complete agreement.
-This space intentionally left blank
-
- Journeyman
- Posts: 103
- Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2015 3:00 pm
- Josh_Kablack
- King
- Posts: 5318
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: Online. duh
When the fuck has the Den ever given half a shit about politeness, you barrelsucker?icyshadowlord wrote:Fishing for responses isn't exactly seen as being very polite.
My honest opinion is that ghost_whistler is a grade-a-gobslotch; the sort of willful ignoramus whose impertinence earned him a slot on my ignore list a long time ago. That he can't be fucked to use search or browse old threads is expected, and his continued references to the rest of the 'den with veiled hostility such as "you people" at times when he pretends to want honest feedback barely ever crosses my moron-o-meter.
-
- Knight-Baron
- Posts: 717
- Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 12:52 pm
@Josh
Yeah, polite might have been the wrong word. I would have gone with intellectual, but that seemed a bit out of place too.
Edit: I also haven't run into this guy before. Then again, I haven't been around for a good while either way.
Yeah, polite might have been the wrong word. I would have gone with intellectual, but that seemed a bit out of place too.
Edit: I also haven't run into this guy before. Then again, I haven't been around for a good while either way.
Last edited by icyshadowlord on Tue Apr 26, 2016 6:11 pm, edited 2 times in total.
"Lurker and fan of random stuff." - Icy's occupation
sabs wrote:And Yes, being Finnish makes you Evil.
virgil wrote:And has been successfully proven with Pathfinder, you can just say you improved the system from 3E without doing so and many will believe you to the bitter end.
- OgreBattle
- King
- Posts: 6820
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 9:33 am
Almost certainly for the L5R LCG thread, in which ghost whistler:
- Does the classic troll tactic of demanding specific extra evidence and then using the fact that nobody wants to do extra work to ignore the evidence already provided.
- Bitches about ad hominem attacks before going on to accuse Frank of being an rpg.net moderator. Twice. And then calls him, "Trollboy".
- All so that he can stubbornly defend AEG's more racist setting decisions.
- By repeatedly posting the n word to make a point about how his favourite game is no more racist than Pulp Fiction.
- But the thing that seems to have actually pushed you over the line was how he responded to accusations that he was just doing a gish gallop by claiming he doesn't need to read the book being discussed and then quibbling over the definition of the phrase "gish gallop".
Last edited by Grek on Tue Apr 26, 2016 7:58 pm, edited 2 times in total.
FrankTrollman wrote:I think Grek already won the thread and we should pack it in.
Chamomile wrote:Grek is a national treasure.
As far as actual good rulesets go, I've been extensively enjoying the Spheres of Power system for Pathfinder. Pathfinder is like a minefield of shitty rules, but SoP is a refreshing ray of sunlight shining down on the cow patties.
FrankTrollman wrote:I think Grek already won the thread and we should pack it in.
Chamomile wrote:Grek is a national treasure.
-
- Master
- Posts: 274
- Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2013 11:48 am
From what I recall The Extraordinary Adventures of Baron Munchausen- commonly called Munchausen for short- is the best designed rules-light system. It's literally just a prompt for telling a story with mechanical interaction from the other players. If you want a narrative RPG, that's your bag.
A Man In Black wrote:I do not want people to feel like they can never get rid of their Guisarme or else they can't cast Evard's Swarm Of Black Tentacleguisarmes.
Voss wrote:Which is pretty classic WW bullshit, really. Suck people in and then announce that everyone was a dogfucker all along.
deaddmwalking wrote:In general, people on this board are fairly pro-3.x. The main reason is that it has a reasonably robust resolution mechanic that empowers players. The Den, in general, is pretty intolerant of vague mechanics that allow the GM to choose any option they want, regardless of the input or success/failure of the players.
Aaaand ghost whistler goes on ignore.ghost whistler wrote:I never play DnD, least of all 3rd ed. What is so great about that system?
Tumbling Down wrote:An admirable sentiment but someone beat you to it.deaddmwalking wrote:I'm really tempted to stat up a 'Shadzar' for my game, now.
- phlapjackage
- Knight-Baron
- Posts: 680
- Joined: Thu May 24, 2012 8:29 am
Is deaddmwalking going to continue his holy crusade? Or was silva the only worthwhile opponent for him? I can't wait to find out!
Koumei: and if I wanted that, I'd take some mescaline and run into the park after watching a documentary about wasps.
PhoneLobster: DM : Mr Monkey doesn't like it. Eldritch : Mr Monkey can do what he is god damn told.
MGuy: The point is to normalize 'my' point of view. How the fuck do you think civil rights occurred? You think things got this way because people sat down and fucking waited for public opinion to change?
PhoneLobster: DM : Mr Monkey doesn't like it. Eldritch : Mr Monkey can do what he is god damn told.
MGuy: The point is to normalize 'my' point of view. How the fuck do you think civil rights occurred? You think things got this way because people sat down and fucking waited for public opinion to change?
-
- Journeyman
- Posts: 103
- Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2015 3:00 pm
What about the Fate system? Is that any good?
Can dice pool systems work?
Can dice pool systems work?
Last edited by ghost whistler on Wed Apr 27, 2016 9:39 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Journeyman
- Posts: 103
- Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2015 3:00 pm
Well that's your loss.brized wrote:deaddmwalking wrote:In general, people on this board are fairly pro-3.x. The main reason is that it has a reasonably robust resolution mechanic that empowers players. The Den, in general, is pretty intolerant of vague mechanics that allow the GM to choose any option they want, regardless of the input or success/failure of the players.Aaaand ghost whistler goes on ignore.ghost whistler wrote:I never play DnD, least of all 3rd ed. What is so great about that system?
You've misunderstood my point: i don't dislike DnD at all, i just never play it because i don't run it and neither does anyone else. I've never played 3e and so I don't know how it works.
No need to assume the worst.
- deaddmwalking
- Prince
- Posts: 3891
- Joined: Mon May 21, 2012 11:33 am
Brized was pointing out that I already explained 'what was so great about that system'. Specifically, I said 'it has a reasonably robust mechanic that empowers players'.
But your question seems like an invitation to a worthless time sink of a debate. While not everyone on this board is pro-3.x, the majority are. If you want to learn about why these posters find it 'so great', you could try it, or at least review the rules. They're mostly available for free online via the System Resource Document (SRD).
What about the Fate System? Did you try it? Did you like it?
Dice pool systems can work. Dice pools allow characters to stay on the same number range, but the probabilities can become very difficult to calculate. For example, if you say that every 5+ is a success on a d6, we know you have a 33.3% chance of succeeding if you have 1 die. But what about 6 dice? What if you need 3 successes? They are in some ways more difficult for a designer, and they can also be somewhat difficult at the table - especially if the number of dice in a pool becomes excessive.
D&D doesn't use Dice Pool systems.
But your question seems like an invitation to a worthless time sink of a debate. While not everyone on this board is pro-3.x, the majority are. If you want to learn about why these posters find it 'so great', you could try it, or at least review the rules. They're mostly available for free online via the System Resource Document (SRD).
What about the Fate System? Did you try it? Did you like it?
Dice pool systems can work. Dice pools allow characters to stay on the same number range, but the probabilities can become very difficult to calculate. For example, if you say that every 5+ is a success on a d6, we know you have a 33.3% chance of succeeding if you have 1 die. But what about 6 dice? What if you need 3 successes? They are in some ways more difficult for a designer, and they can also be somewhat difficult at the table - especially if the number of dice in a pool becomes excessive.
D&D doesn't use Dice Pool systems.
-This space intentionally left blank
-
- Journeyman
- Posts: 103
- Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2015 3:00 pm
I have never tried Fate. Is it any good with or without the weird dice?deaddmwalking wrote:Brized was pointing out that I already explained 'what was so great about that system'. Specifically, I said 'it has a reasonably robust mechanic that empowers players'.
But your question seems like an invitation to a worthless time sink of a debate. While not everyone on this board is pro-3.x, the majority are. If you want to learn about why these posters find it 'so great', you could try it, or at least review the rules. They're mostly available for free online via the System Resource Document (SRD).
What about the Fate System? Did you try it? Did you like it?
Dice pool systems can work. Dice pools allow characters to stay on the same number range, but the probabilities can become very difficult to calculate. For example, if you say that every 5+ is a success on a d6, we know you have a 33.3% chance of succeeding if you have 1 die. But what about 6 dice? What if you need 3 successes? They are in some ways more difficult for a designer, and they can also be somewhat difficult at the table - especially if the number of dice in a pool becomes excessive.
D&D doesn't use Dice Pool systems.
If other people like 3e they can tell me, that's the whole point of this thread. I'm not sure what you are trying to achieve telling me this discussion is a waste of time.
- deaddmwalking
- Prince
- Posts: 3891
- Joined: Mon May 21, 2012 11:33 am
I'm telling you this discussion is a waste of time because you haven't explained why you're asking. If I like talking about 3.x, perhaps I can write you a book, but will you even read it? Are you considering playing 3.x? Are you looking for design elements for a game that you're building?
If you don't explain what you hope to gain from a discussion of the benefits then the only type of discussion we'll be able to have is 'I sure do like it, yep'.
At that point, we might as well be talking about chocolate. I like chocolate too. It tastes good to me. Most of my friends like chocolate, so it's easy to share. You haven't tried chocolate? I bet you would like it if you did - it tastes good. Are you willing to try chocolate? No? Well, trust me, it's really good.
If you don't explain what you hope to gain from a discussion of the benefits then the only type of discussion we'll be able to have is 'I sure do like it, yep'.
At that point, we might as well be talking about chocolate. I like chocolate too. It tastes good to me. Most of my friends like chocolate, so it's easy to share. You haven't tried chocolate? I bet you would like it if you did - it tastes good. Are you willing to try chocolate? No? Well, trust me, it's really good.
-This space intentionally left blank