TNE and Centaurs

virgil · Post by **virgil** » Sat Dec 13, 2008 8:16 am

But not every setting needs to have a complete run-down of what's possible, all at once. That makes the task of making a game daunting, to say the least.

Mythic Greece would most definitely have centaurs in it, and once you do that, you open up the capability for some DM to decide to make his own homebrew setting that incorporates a different set of races with centaurs from the Greece setting thrown in; and there's virtually nothing you can do about it except refuse to make games because people might use houserules.

ckafrica · Post by **ckafrica** » Sat Dec 13, 2008 8:24 am

right frank, I don't see anyone arguing your point (at this point).

But you again fail to answer my questions.

What mechanic in TNE (not real world mechanics) prevents you from having centaurs or makes it an intolerable burden?

Why can't I run a game taking place on the plains that spot lights centaurs as a major race using TNE?

Elennsar · Post by **Elennsar** » Sat Dec 13, 2008 8:27 am

Presumably the same mechanic that prevents you from running a game about guys with tenacles for hands using TNE.

Its not designed to support that.

PhoneLobster · Post by **PhoneLobster** » Sat Dec 13, 2008 8:35 am

And aren't we ALL sick of elves and dwarfs and friends, so count me in for a seat on that stage coach of hate.

There is however the complication that these established races have established fan bases and people want to play as them. When presented with Franks cool "not-another-fucking-elf" or MY cool "not-another-fucking-elf" they won't be happy.

They will compromise on elf but once it's "not-another-fucking-elf" it had better be THEIR OWN PERSONAL "not-another-fucking-elf".

A toolkit of selectable abilities is the solution.

Toolkit, toolkit, toolkit.

Big arse with four legs should be in that toolkit.

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Sat Dec 13, 2008 8:36 am

What mechanic in TNE (not real world mechanics) prevents you from having centaurs or makes it an intolerable burden?

Why can't I run a game taking place on the plains that spot lights centaurs as a major race using TNE?

The value of all abilities would be altered in such a scenario.

Let's say that we create conceptual space for some Mongol-type characters. They have abilities related to riding around on the plains that are weighted for being situational abilities. But if you throw down centaurs as a major race, the ability to ride around is no longer situational, it's the default. Our Cossacks are now over powered because the amount they spent for being able to ride around and use their horsemanship some of the time hasn't changed and their power has been converted into something that is usable all of the time.

A world in which the adventuring space is defined by where a centaur can go rather than where a human can go values different abilities differently. Abilities related to tunnel fighting are now essentially worthless and abilities related to lances and horse archery are far greater in scope. To keep things remotely fair you'd need to reevaluate all the ability costs - essentially making an entirely new game. Now you'd be able to scavenge all kinds of bits and pieces, from generic action resolution systems to ability names and even some flavor text. But since the ultimate protein you'd be creating would be one that did something different, you would be using different amino acids in a different order and be making a new game.

Or you could just accept that things weren't balanced at all and that the game system you selected was to one degree or another a bad fit for what you were actually doing with it.

-Username17

ckafrica · Post by **ckafrica** » Sat Dec 13, 2008 9:00 am

Thanks, I appreciate the explanation.

I guess this might be why I'd tend towards classless or a FFTactics type multiclass format. You set out a selection of abilities for players to choose from (and be allowed multiple) with the race possibly dictating one of them. So a centaur would automatically have the horsemanship (or a slight variation of) ability in place of other choices and I could then strongly encourage non centaurs to take it as a choice as it would become a vital ability for the game. I would assume I wouldn't to push hard if my group had agreed to play a steppes game

My worry about your explanation is that it would almost indicate that they game would have to always be hopping from environment to environment because you can't ignore an ability that one of the characters have. If I have mad horse abilities and the DM never puts us on horses, then I have been defacto screwed for not ever having been allowed to use one of my purchased skills.

Cynic · Post by **Cynic** » Sat Dec 13, 2008 9:12 am

ckafrica wrote: <SNIP>
My worry about your explanation is that it would almost indicate that they game would have to always be hopping from environment to environment because you can't ignore an ability that one of the characters have. If I have mad horse abilities and the DM never puts us on horses, then I have been defacto screwed for not ever having been allowed to use one of my purchased skills.

I think it's been pointed out that Situational abilities are not equal to Situational Races for PCS.

that is the mongol rider can use his blade flourish while outside but if he has to go into the dungeon, he'll have to fight a different way. But he is still in teh dungeon.

The Centaur works well outside but when you come into tight-quarters (I don't care if this is a dungeon or the deep Jungle) then he is screwed.

You can't have a party work where a player is completely absent from scenes because of an inability to operate.

~

ckafrica · Post by **ckafrica** » Sat Dec 13, 2008 9:32 am

Cynic, you misunderstood my point in that paragraph. I had moved away from centaurs.

Frank points out that on the plains a tunnel fighter guy will need to be reweighted as they as many of his close combat situational bonuses. Situational abilities that you don't get the opportunity to use may as not be there. you are therefore defacto penalized by having chosen one if the DM never allows you to use it.

So this problem is equally true for the cavalier on an exclusive dungeon crawl as the pit fighter in the open plains adventure. So in order to not screw either you have to spend an equal amount of time in dungeons and open space if they are on the same team.

Now one of the advantages of a toolkit is it would make it easy for a DM to switch out a few situational abilities on classes that won't be used in his campaign for ones that are more appropriate.

PhoneLobster · Post by **PhoneLobster** » Sat Dec 13, 2008 9:43 am

The Centaur works well outside but when you come into tight-quarters (I don't care if this is a dungeon or the deep Jungle) then he is screwed.

The sheer degree of retarded, unimaginative and often as not ludicrously ignorant realism argument going on here depresses me.

I hope you are happy Frank, what you are doing here is bad for dialogue, bad for the den and bad for gaming.

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Sat Dec 13, 2008 12:14 pm

PL wrote:I hope you are happy Frank, what you are doing here is bad for dialogue, bad for the den and bad for gaming.

Actually, yes I am.

Let's consider two inclusions: the "Centaur" character race and the "Pilot Spaceship" character ability. Both of them are established parts of various fantasy settings and exist in source material of various kinds. Centaurs fight along side Xena and VARNians have to take control of a space ship away from the evil Sheltem. Sure.

But what does that do to the adventuring space? If someone has a spaceship piloting ability, that forces the adventuring space to include space terrain sometimes. If someone is a centaur, that forces the adventuring space to include centaur accessible areas all the time. Wanting to play a Centaur therefore causes a more radical impact on the adventuring space than does wanting to play a spelljammer pilot.

This means that at any level of game design, creating space for people to play spelljammer pilots is higher priority than creating rules space for players to play Centaurs. And frankly, I have no real intention of putting splljamming rules into TNE.

-Username17

Avoraciopoctules · Post by **Avoraciopoctules** » Sat Dec 13, 2008 4:58 pm

Centaurs and spelljamming?

I'm starting to think that a key point of this is how loosely you define "centaur".

I see a centaur as a creature with a humanoid upper half and a vaguely equine lower half.

baduin · Post by **baduin** » Sat Dec 13, 2008 5:10 pm

This discussion is mostly meaningless. If we are to make a D&D style levelled game in which you can fight outdoors and indoors, you must have balanced rules for both.

Each and every PC character must be able to fight the level-appropriate enemies everywhere where he can go. A Mongol rider can be very slighly better in the steppe, but the difference must be minimal. See Conan, who is good at see, on steppe and in tunnels.

In fact, I remember people recently dog-piled on Elennasar when he suggested elves can be better in the forest. The unanimous decision was that this is totally unacceptable for PCs.

This means that we cannot balance power level in different situations with the frequency of those situations. You cannot say the class A is effectively 2 levels higher in the steppe, and this is OK, because people will spend only 10% their time in the steppe. We will therefore balance it by making this class effectively 1 level below par in tunnels, because the game will spend only 20% time in the tunnels.

That kind of balance is no balance at all, because in practice a whole campaing can happen only in tunnels or only in the steppe.

On the other hand, a centaur physically cannot enter a cave. Therefore his ability to fight in the cave is immaterial. He cannot be a standard PC (since many adventure can involve fighting underground) but he can be a supplementary kind of PC, for steppe campaigns only.

What is the conclusion? The demands for Frank to "make centaurs" is completely unnecessary. You can take the rules for a Mongol on a horseback, adjust that slightly and call the result "Centaur". You are not children, and Frank is not paid to do anyone's work for him.

But that general demand, although in this particular case meaningless, clearly shows that what people want is D&D, but with good rules. They see that Frank can create good rules, and want them for the universal game, which they can use for their own purposes.

D&D offers a very imperfect, but commonly agreed standard for special effects. We know that being invisible is useful at lower levels, and meaningless at high levels, that it is quite easy to fly etc, that at high levels you must be able to teleport or bypass Forcecages and Solid Fogs in some other way to remain relevant, etc. The game which keeps to this standard, will be useful for all, because it will be easy to convert. It does not matter whether the original version will be about India or what.

On the other hand, if you will write a game where it is impossible to detect invisible enemies, and invisibility is the ultimate power, which you can gain only at highest levels, nobody will use it in practice.

shau · Post by **shau** » Sat Dec 13, 2008 6:02 pm

baduin wrote:

Each and every PC character must be able to fight the level-appropriate enemies everywhere where he can go. A Mongol rider can be very slighly better in the steppe, but the difference must be minimal. See Conan, who is good at see, on steppe and in tunnels.

This.

Wedge Antilles doesn't work as a PC in most games because his class, rebel pilot, is totally awesome at flying X-wings and totally unexceptional at everything else. If Wedge is in the party then he totally phones it in when the party is looking for clues on Tatooine or infiltrating the imperial base but totally rocks when fighting a star destroyer. But when the party is fighting a star destroyer Jerry's wookie isn't up to par and he is not having fun. The extreme version of this happens in Shadowrun, when certain characters get their own quests that other party members can't even take part in.

My solution to this is just to let Mongols and Cossacks ride their horses wherever they damn well please, and as long as that happens centaurs can join the party as well. The other solution seems to be finding a way to make horse riding cool enough that Genghis Khan feels like the horsemanship feats were worth it while not making Gimli, who can only ride a pony, feel left out. Gimli also needs awesome tunnel fighting feats, but nothing so awesome that Genghis feels bad.

Bigode · Post by **Bigode** » Sat Dec 13, 2008 11:56 pm

First off, once centaurs are made able to ... climb ropes, and bendy, perhaps they can cease having accessibility problems at all. That goes enough against any centaur myth ever that I'd make a point of not having it, but it's theoretically possible.

shau wrote:My solution to this is just to let Mongols and Cossacks ride their horses wherever they damn well please, and as long as that happens centaurs can join the party as well. The other solution seems to be finding a way to make horse riding cool enough that Genghis Khan feels like the horsemanship feats were worth it while not making Gimli, who can only ride a pony, feel left out. Gimli also needs awesome tunnel fighting feats, but nothing so awesome that Genghis feels bad.

If you actually demand that the actual horses (instead of weird centaurs as per the above) go everywhere, we're back to "everywhere" being too little. Anyway, yes, that'd balance centaurs and riders (except for a surprise advantage to centaurs) - but it's not in any way a counterargument to the fact that inserting any other meaningfully different race after the setting's done'll upset balance again.

Elennsar · Post by **Elennsar** » Sun Dec 14, 2008 2:01 am

It also neglects to explain how having centaurs as a race as well as whatever other races adds to either the available stories to be told or the quality of the stories you can tell already.

So somehow you make centaurs balanced with everyone else because centaurs overall wind up as equal to everyone else, whatever their situational advantages and disadvantages are.

Fine. Lovely. Awesome.

But what does having a race of guys that are permamently "horsemen" add to the story that having a Mongol/Cossack/Rohirric/whatever culture didn't?

Adding them just so someone who wants to play a "centaur" has that option doesn't seem to enhance anything.

I'm not saying we need to remove centaurs either entirely or from the list of PC options, but I'm not seeing how they enhance anything to be included because Bob has always wanted to play a centaur.

shau · Post by **shau** » Sun Dec 14, 2008 3:05 am

Bigode wrote:First off, once centaurs are made able to ... climb ropes, and bendy, perhaps they can cease having accessibility problems at all. That goes enough against any centaur myth ever that I'd make a point of not having it, but it's theoretically possible.

For ropes there is this or this as well as several others. As for bendiness I don't see it as being that much more difficult than huge people or people with wings.

If you actually demand that the actual horses (instead of weird centaurs as per the above) go everywhere, we're back to "everywhere" being too little. Anyway, yes, that'd balance centaurs and riders (except for a surprise advantage to centaurs) - but it's not in any way a counterargument to the fact that inserting any other meaningfully different race after the setting's done'll upset balance again.

Fair enough. I think at this point though we are just arguing about whether or not horsepeople, both people who ride them and people who are them, are viable characters.

Elennsar wrote: It also neglects to explain how having centaurs as a race as well as whatever other races adds to either the available stories to be told or the quality of the stories you can tell already.

I really don't have an explanation for this beyond "centaurs let people tell stories with centaurs in them." But then again, I can't explain why we need races beyond humans to tell good stories, so I don't think any race is going to satisfy that criteria. Shining Force is kinda interesting in that the knights are centaurs, but you could make Ken a guy riding a horse and its all good. For me, the fact that Bill wants to sit down and play a centaur is itself a reason to have centaurs.

tzor · Post by **tzor** » Sun Dec 14, 2008 3:50 am

Isn't the real problem with centaurs the fact that you graft a human sized torso on a horse sized body you are going to have a rather large creature that is normally not suitable for dungeon dwelling mostly because of its size.

The solution to that is to graft a halfling onto a warpony, getting a medium sized creature ... PROBLEM SOLVED and you have a fairly well designed dungeon adventurer.

Of course the other solution is you just supersize the dungeons. In fact that is a logical assumption to make, just like you don't see every dwarven dungeon with ceilings only 5' tall making most medium sized creatures unfomfortable.

I mean if Darleks eventually get the ability to levitate, it's hard to really put too many restrictions on a fantasy centaur.

Bigode · Post by **Bigode** » Sun Dec 14, 2008 4:35 am

shau wrote:For ropes there is this or this as well as several others. As for bendiness I don't see it as being that much more difficult than huge people or people with wings.

What're your plans with regards to the (presumably many at low levels) characters who wouldn't be capable of either if they were of other race? Make them pegasuspeople? Bendiness: if it was a European-warhorse-sized body, it'd be significantly harder than either "a 3m tall guy" or the small-winged people we often see - but of course, the centaur could be significantly smaller. Do note that they'd have to be worse at cavalry stuff because they're getting it all the time (unless you drop places where a normal horse can't enter, which should be a non-starter).

shau wrote:Fair enough. I think at this point though we are just arguing about whether or not horsepeople, both people who ride them and people who are them, are viable characters.

I think both arguments were made at one time or another - and in fact, it's important to keep them separate.

PhoneLobster · Post by **PhoneLobster** » Sun Dec 14, 2008 4:51 am

tzor wrote:Isn't the real problem with centaurs the fact that you graft a human sized torso on a horse sized body you are going to have a rather large creature that is normally not suitable for dungeon dwelling mostly because of its size.

The real problem is the sudden assumption that all (or ANY) adventures HAVE to happen in 3 foot wide 5 foot tall tunnels.

The rest is ignorant "realism" wanking over some imagined inability of horses to turn corners or fit into spaces that are actually the same size or larger than themselves.

I mean FUCK these idiots are still clinging to Frank's example of 2 men carrying another man on a stretcher in a non standard super cramped flat.

I mean FUCK!

Crissa · Post by **Crissa** » Sun Dec 14, 2008 7:22 am

Funny, a centaur or horse can still move at full speed and only be at half it's nominal standing height.

They're just dumb reasons either because people don't know what horses are, or somehow think that centaurs are humans grafted to the largest horses imaginable.

I mean, totally skipping the canon that Nessus was actually shorter than Heracles. Did anyone bother to follow my link?

-Crissa

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Sun Dec 14, 2008 7:58 am

PL, that's getting a horse to crawl in a straight line. Now try moving it from the front seat to the back seat. You know, actually fucking turn in such an environment. You can't do it. And that's the problem. My personal flat doesn't especially matter save that it's one I'm actually living in right now. In my time as an EMT I've been in many homes and offices where a horse can't go.

Yes, I realize that a horse can scrunch down and crawl in a straight line through surprisingly narrow areas. The problem is that while it can theoretically continue to crawl in a straight line as far as you want, as soon as continued progress requires a turn in an area substantially narrower than the horse is long, that's the end. A horse in the back seat of a car doesn't disprove my point in any way, it just makes you come off like a mouth breather. The damn horse is still facing the direction it came in through the door!

As for winged people, I genuinely don't see the problem. Fantasy winged people look like this:

And actual mammal wings fold up like this:

One is really small; and the other, while large, folds up completely. So pretty much regardless of whether you are going for fantasy standard or biologically believable it's not going to be a big problem. There's a reason bats live in caves.

-Username17

virgil · Post by **virgil** » Sun Dec 14, 2008 8:00 am

Hey, PL, the vast majority of your pictures look like ponies and such. I don't recall anyone having problems with the small ones, and Frank said himself that 'centaur' largely calls upon images of full-size horses, not a donkey or pony.

Thus, you're being just as much of an obstinant(sp?) jackass.

PhoneLobster · Post by **PhoneLobster** » Sun Dec 14, 2008 8:20 am

Unfortunately Frank winged people also look like this. And that's hardly even stretching it on potential fantasy wing size.

And you are making the mouthbreathiest argument of all a realism argument so I get do demand even bigger wings again in the name of even better realism bitch!

virgileso wrote:Hey, PL, the vast majority of your pictures look like ponies and such. I don't recall anyone having problems with the small ones, and Frank said himself that 'centaur' largely calls upon images of full-size horses, not a donkey or pony.

Firstly Frank is making it clear he thinks car pony there is totally unacceptable in any game world where goblins exist (and yet the goblins don't interfere with ogres and humans and Hawkman..!?)

Secondly I don't think you entirely understand the difference between a horse and a pony do you?

Now a pony IS a type of horse, and frankly many of them are better proportioned for a centaur than the REALLY big horses, a human torso would look silly small on one of those.

But calling "pony" or "non pony" is silly because pony and horse is a pretty rubbery barrier. Have a look at the hand heights here.

As far as I was aware here in modern times the horse people think of when they say horse is the Arab. It's 0.2 hands taller than one of the ponies on that far from complete list and only two hands taller than the shortest pony on that list.

Now go back and look at car pony. Stick a mans body on where the head is. Car pony is near perfect size.

I mean I'd give you other pictures but the internet is pretty eccentric and seems obsessed with Horses...In...cars rather than houses.

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Sun Dec 14, 2008 8:30 am

And mechanically every single one of those horse in cars fits exactly into my prediction: straight in, straight out or straight back, no turns!

Yes, a centaur can visit a human castle. They can go through the main gate and in through the great hall and stand before the throne. And they can turn around a leave. And they can even turn and go to a side door and walk through it. And then they can go as far forward as that side are goes in that dimension and then they can back out again. And that's not enough.

A human can belly crawl into some crazy tight spaces. They can infiltrate a giant weasel lair. It'll suck, but they can do it. A horse can't turn 90 degrees in an area that humans would call snug. They can't do it. And that's why it's unacceptable. Why it will always be unacceptable, and why every single picture you ever show of a horse crawling into and backing out of a house or car doesn't change that fact in any way.

-Username17

virgil · Post by **virgil** » Sun Dec 14, 2008 8:43 am

Guess I've been thinking of the pygmy horses or something. That's what I get for trying to assume I know anything about those things.

Don't Hawkman's wings bend (that rendition looks like he'd have trouble walking without dragging)? Frank has repeatedly brought up the fact that his problem is turning corners, and stuff that can bend for the most part can do it, though they'll be inconvenienced. Having things be inconvenient is a far cry from getting barred from egress. Oh no, he'll knock over vases, guess he can't interact with society...

I do wonder one other thing. What about a game set in ancient Greece? Forgoing centaurs would be just plain negligent, to say the least.