It is currently Mon Jan 21, 2019 10:31 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 80 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Multiple Successor Games -- Surely Not!
PostPosted: Thu Mar 24, 2011 3:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 8:06 am
Posts: 1495
Location: Vienna, Austria, Europe
Please, dear collaborators, before we go ahead any more, could we please settle for good and once and for all on definite ranges for Attributes?

Higgins has proposed a range from 0 – 5. Initially, this has met with little enthusiasm, myself being the only one seeing any merit in it at all. Thing is: The original detractors have remained completely silent after the “publication” of higgins’ compilation. Does this mean that they now agree with the range 0 – 5 or that they have already said before all they care to say about it? Please, people, speak up.

Because, if I am the only (half-hearted) supporter of 0 – 5, things have changed. I don’t support a range that narrow anymore. From a mechanics-standpoint, 0 – 5 is much to granular for my tastes; 0 – 6 is the utmost I could still support with a bearable degree of bellyache.

So could each and every one of us please sound off “yea” or “nay” to 0 – 5 so that we know whether we can go ahead with this range at all?

With me, it’s “nay”.

_________________
My real name is Michael; use it, if you like.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EoS: Pre-Alfa Playtesting - Controversial Concepts
PostPosted: Thu Mar 24, 2011 6:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 16, 2008 10:00 am
Posts: 511
Location: Cary, North Carolina
Grettir wrote:
So could each and every one of us please sound off “yea” or “nay” to 0 – 5 so that we know whether we can go ahead with this range at all?

With me, it’s “nay”.


I vote "nay" as well.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EoS: Pre-Alfa Playtesting - Controversial Concepts
PostPosted: Thu Mar 24, 2011 8:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 4:39 am
Posts: 346
Location: Orange County, California
I am definitely OK with 1-5 (no one will have an attribute of 0 unless they're dead) because in EOS it is almost always rolled in combination of another attribute, which means a range of 2-10. This is what TROS was to begin with, and it is what the Difficulties have been assuming. A pool of 2 with max 10 is the tried and true range used in nWOD, which has a higher TN (8). With a low TN like 6 for most rolls, I think 1-5 for each attribute is FINE! Ramping up the average attribute dot value means looking again at Difficulties, TNs, and overall dice pool math - something I definitely don't want to do again.

_________________
"Remember it well, then... this night, this great victory. So that in the years ahead, you can say, 'I was there that night, with Arthur, the King!' . . . For it is the doom of men that they forget."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EoS: Pre-Alfa Playtesting - Controversial Concepts
PostPosted: Thu Mar 24, 2011 8:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 16, 2008 10:00 am
Posts: 511
Location: Cary, North Carolina
Sean, put down the baseball bat!

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EoS: Pre-Alfa Playtesting - Controversial Concepts
PostPosted: Thu Mar 24, 2011 8:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 4:39 am
Posts: 346
Location: Orange County, California
:lol: Did that come across strong? I didn't mean it that way. To be honest, I'm going to have characters in my game that have more than 5 dots - but they're going to be all the supernaturally strong and fast ones. Honestly, though, I don't see how 1-5 so different than 1-6 in terms of granularity, especially when you'll be combining them with other attributes and Skills and Proficiencies and a usual TN6.

_________________
"Remember it well, then... this night, this great victory. So that in the years ahead, you can say, 'I was there that night, with Arthur, the King!' . . . For it is the doom of men that they forget."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EoS: Pre-Alfa Playtesting - Controversial Concepts
PostPosted: Thu Mar 24, 2011 9:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 8:06 am
Posts: 1495
Location: Vienna, Austria, Europe
I disliked the 1 – 5 range (1 – 10 with skill) twenty years ago when I first picked up Vampire and began playing it, I disliked it fifteen years ago when I stopped playing it, and I dislike it today. The range is just too narrow for me to be comfortable with it when I compare one character’s Attribute with another’s, and the fact that it will only rarely be rolled on its own does nothing to alleviate this chunkiness of the progression. At the very least – and this is not my preferred solution but already the farthest I am able to move towards a narrow Attribute range – I want two possible Attribute values below the average value and a human maximum of at least double the average value; and this requires at the very least a range of 1 – 6.

Sean, I find it very commendable that your energy imparted forward momentum to the project, but the downside is that in taking much of higgins' document for granted you unfortunately went ahead of the field. Enthusiastic about the idea of scaling down, higgins based his document around it, knowing full well that I was the only one ever to have anything positive at all to say about it. Already many weeks ago, in this very thread, I asked for others’ opinion on the 1 – 5 range, but unfortunately wasn’t heard. Before any more actual numbers are proposed it is now more than high time to settle this once and for all.

As I think we all know where higgins is standing: Ian, please make yourself heard.

And, oh yes: While I am at critizing how higgins’ personal preferences did in parts colour his document above and beyond what had been discussed before I would also like to point out that it does also gratuitously ignore the proposition of using the d12 instead of the d10, even though the discussion was leaning towards the d12. :twisted:

_________________
My real name is Michael; use it, if you like.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EoS: Pre-Alfa Playtesting - Controversial Concepts
PostPosted: Fri Mar 25, 2011 2:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 16, 2008 10:00 am
Posts: 511
Location: Cary, North Carolina
Ouch Michael! Get out of my head!

Seriously though, Michael's thoughts in many ways mirror my own. I must admit I am not enthused about the way EoS has moved towards being a White Wolf offering with TroS SAs and Combat stapled to it. I think we as a community can do better, I think we can be more imaginative than that.

And hell yes, I think that going to a D12 system is a start towards a fresh vision of the game! I said it two years ago but its still worth repeating; Put together a steering committee and create a Table of Contents, advancing the project page by page, dealing with the boring crap as well as the sexy stuff, in an orderly fashion. Thats the only way the project will ever truly move forward. Yes, its a grind, but thats how you get the job done.

But, as Michael has pointed out, we first have to come to some consensus about the basics. Aye for D12! And thumbs up for keeping Attribute range 1-10!

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EoS: Pre-Alfa Playtesting - Controversial Concepts
PostPosted: Fri Mar 25, 2011 4:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 11:50 pm
Posts: 78
Location: East Coast, US
Thought I'd throw my two cents in. I am a "yay" for a 1-5 system, although I will admit I like 1-6 far better.

And d12s make me feel ..funny.. inside. Not funny 'ha ha' either.

_________________
"They must find it difficult...
Those who have taken authority as the truth, rather than truth as the authority"
-Gerald Massey


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EoS: Pre-Alfa Playtesting - Controversial Concepts
PostPosted: Fri Mar 25, 2011 6:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 8:06 am
Posts: 1495
Location: Vienna, Austria, Europe
pbj44 wrote:
(...) advancing the project page by page, dealing with the boring crap as well as the sexy stuff, in an orderly fashion.

Amen to that, brother!

pbj44 wrote:
I must admit I am not enthused about the way EoS has moved towards being a White Wolf offering with TroS SAs and Combat stapled to it.

Twice amen to that. No, three times amen.

pbj44 wrote:
Aye for D12!

And amen to that. :)

_________________
My real name is Michael; use it, if you like.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EoS: Pre-Alfa Playtesting - Controversial Concepts
PostPosted: Sat Mar 26, 2011 6:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 10:43 pm
Posts: 2112
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Grettir wrote:
...The original detractors have remained completely silent after the “publication” of higgins’ compilation. Does this mean that they now agree with the range 0 – 5 or that they have already said before all they care to say about it? Please, people, speak up...


I have said in the past that I believe that there should be more than one successor game to TRoS. This is because System Matters, as they would say over on The Forge. I have stopped participating in these discussions because this 'World of TRoSness' style of game doesn't suit me personally. There isn't any point me critiquing the mechanics because the design philosophy behind them doesn't suit the way I like to play -- so it is only natural that the mechanics don't suit me.

Let me stress at this point that I don't think there is anything wrong with the game -- I'm only saying that I'm not qualified to comment, as my comments would be based on design philosophy that the game isn't meant to support.

So I fall into the latter group -- I've already said what I see as the inherent problem with high-stepping, low-granularity mechanics. In short, they don't suit me -- but I'm certainly not saying that they are bad.

Regards,

_________________
Ian Plumb
Illustrations for Gamers
Lyonpaedia
Griffin Grove Gaming
Kraftworks for Kids School Holiday Program


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EoS: Pre-Alfa Playtesting - Controversial Concepts
PostPosted: Sat Mar 26, 2011 7:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 8:06 am
Posts: 1495
Location: Vienna, Austria, Europe
Ian.Plumb wrote:
I've already said what I see as the inherent problem with high-stepping, low-granularity mechanics. In short, they don't suit me -- but I'm certainly not saying that they are bad.

I’m hearing you.

For myself, EoS was always about creating a successor to TRoS that takes the concepts introduced by TRoS to their logical conclusion and strengthened its Nar part, to create a true hybrid. And while my own gaming preferences nowadays lean towards Nar with a sprinkling of Sim, I wished EoS to be the game that I can turn to when I occasionally want a more even balancing of these elements. So you could say that my vision of EoS was not one of my perfect system, but rather of a good system I would like to play.

I can’t say the latter about the nWoD-inspired incarnation that has been slowly, step by step, emerging over the last few months, so I guess I will from now remain silent in the design threads of this particular incarnation of a successor to TRoS as well.

_________________
My real name is Michael; use it, if you like.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EoS: Pre-Alfa Playtesting - Controversial Concepts
PostPosted: Sat Mar 26, 2011 8:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 11:50 pm
Posts: 78
Location: East Coast, US
Ian.Plumb wrote:
I have said in the past that I believe that there should be more than one successor game to TRoS. This is because System Matters, as they would say over on The Forge. I have stopped participating in these discussions because this 'World of TRoSness' style of game doesn't suit me personally. There isn't any point me critiquing the mechanics because the design philosophy behind them doesn't suit the way I like to play -- so it is only natural that the mechanics don't suit me.


Grettir wrote:
I can’t say the latter about the nWoD-inspired incarnation that has been slowly, step by step, emerging over the last few months, so I guess I will from now remain silent in the design threads of this particular incarnation of a successor to TRoS as well.


Forgive me for asking.. and I'm certain that if I dug through the .. nigh-infinite amount of threads where this has all been discussed back and forth, I could find the answer on my own.. but..

Having not had any experience with the World of Darkness systems myself:

A) What elements/directions have been cropping up that suggest the WoD leaning?
B) Briefly, what are the objections to these in summary?
C) Have any viable alternates been presented that accomplish these tasks in a more preferable way?

Personally, I loved the fact that TROS was basically a sim game that was intended to be played with narrativist story telling. That said, any game I've played has been skewed heavily towards narrative styling because that's simply how I run them. On the other hand, the gritty realism of combat has been a huge draw for me and my groups simply because it allowed things to feel more..real. More cinematic. Rather than clumsy imaginings of exactly what 11HP of damage meant. An ideal successor to TROS for me would be something that retained that feel and flexibility, preferably with a sliding scale of how much "crunch" one wants to put into it (I do not believe we ever fooled with fatigue and some of the other bits).

I'll apologize again - I know the information is out there and probably argued out in-depth, and I hope that you both might humor me.

As well, if one feels that the response to this would totally derail the present discussion feel free to respond as a new topic and we will proceed there.

Thanks again, all.

_________________
"They must find it difficult...
Those who have taken authority as the truth, rather than truth as the authority"
-Gerald Massey


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EoS: Pre-Alfa Playtesting - Controversial Concepts
PostPosted: Sat Mar 26, 2011 9:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 10:43 pm
Posts: 2112
Location: Melbourne, Australia
KazianG wrote:
Having not had any experience with the World of Darkness systems myself:

A) What elements/directions have been cropping up that suggest the WoD leaning?
B) Briefly, what are the objections to these in summary?
C) Have any viable alternates been presented that accomplish these tasks in a more preferable way?


I don't think this can be answered.

When it was said that EoS now feels like nWoD with combat manoeuvres and SAs tacked on, that was literal. In other words, when Higgins and Seanachai were looking for a way to accomplish something in EoS they turned to nWoD first and based their mechanic on how that game handles it. There is nothing inherently wrong with this -- they like nWoD and they like TRoS combat so they've married the two into EoS. However that's not everyone's idea of a successor to TRoS.

For each mechanic discussed -- in other words, in every thread in here -- alternatives to the nWoD approach were suggested. When the draft was released, many suggestions for alternatives were put forward. The result was to make the game more like nWoD.

I have no problem with this. There should be a successor game to TRoS that plays to those that like nWoD -- in the same way that Codex Martialis makes d20 play like TRoS, and thus encourages players of that game to migrate towards our game. It's just that I personally don't want to play either of those games.

Regards,

_________________
Ian Plumb
Illustrations for Gamers
Lyonpaedia
Griffin Grove Gaming
Kraftworks for Kids School Holiday Program


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EoS: Pre-Alfa Playtesting - Controversial Concepts
PostPosted: Tue Mar 29, 2011 6:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 16, 2008 10:00 am
Posts: 511
Location: Cary, North Carolina
Grettir wrote:
so I guess I will from now remain silent in the design threads of this particular incarnation of a successor to TRoS as well.


Count me in on the boycott!

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EoS: Pre-Alfa Playtesting - Controversial Concepts
PostPosted: Tue Mar 29, 2011 6:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 8:06 am
Posts: 1495
Location: Vienna, Austria, Europe
Grettir wrote:
so I guess I will from now remain silent in the design threads of this particular incarnation of a successor to TRoS as well.
pbj44 wrote:
Count me in on the boycott!

Well, honestly, I hope this isn't perceived as a boycott. I think that higgins and Seanachai are driving a particular incarnation of a successor game of TRoS into a direction that is mechanically sound - I just can't see myself ever playing the kind of game that is emerging. And as I won't, I think this particular design is better off without trying to make allowance for my preferences and compromising with them. My contributions would now only be so much dead weight around the design's process, and I don't want that.

_________________
My real name is Michael; use it, if you like.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 80 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron


Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group              Designed by QuakeZone