Quote from: HappyDaze on July 13, 2024, 11:44:08 AM

Quote from: Osman Gazi on July 13, 2024, 11:05:54 AM

Quote from: HappyDaze on July 13, 2024, 10:52:05 AM

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on July 12, 2024, 02:20:32 PMThe problem I can predict with the freakshow approach is that it messes with the logic of how adventurers determine "is it a monster or not?" If the PCs look like monsters, then how do they keep track of what monsters are okay to kill? Do they wait to be attacked? Do monsters have red circles around them to indicate they're hostile?

So, "Looks Different = OK to Kill It" is a desireable state of play?

I'd say it was definitely the way us Junior-and-Senior-High kids played it in the late 70s/early 80s.  All Orcs & Goblins evil, kill 'em all.

Was that desirable?  Don't know.  It was fun.  But as I age, I tend to think having all members of a sapient race as "evil" or "good" simplistic.  It can be fun, sure ("not that there's anything wrong with that"), but depending on how believable (in the context of a game with magic, dragons, and other supernatural creatures) you want the game to be, it may not be the best.

For my group, FASA broke that habit with Shadowrun and Earthdawn in late 80s/early 90s. Those games seemed far more interesting to us than D&D and, while we've played D&D since, we never played it the same way again.

Nowadays I find the concept of dungeon crawling, killing, looting, all for xp to be rather bizarre, but what else are you gonna do? As much as I'd love to play an X-Files inspired game, my only realistic option is Delta Green and that has Cthulhu mythos baggage that I'm not interested in.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on July 13, 2024, 04:57:05 PM

Quote from: HappyDaze on July 13, 2024, 11:44:08 AM

Quote from: Osman Gazi on July 13, 2024, 11:05:54 AM

Quote from: HappyDaze on July 13, 2024, 10:52:05 AM

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on July 12, 2024, 02:20:32 PMThe problem I can predict with the freakshow approach is that it messes with the logic of how adventurers determine "is it a monster or not?" If the PCs look like monsters, then how do they keep track of what monsters are okay to kill? Do they wait to be attacked? Do monsters have red circles around them to indicate they're hostile?

So, "Looks Different = OK to Kill It" is a desireable state of play?

I'd say it was definitely the way us Junior-and-Senior-High kids played it in the late 70s/early 80s.  All Orcs & Goblins evil, kill 'em all.

Was that desirable?  Don't know.  It was fun.  But as I age, I tend to think having all members of a sapient race as "evil" or "good" simplistic.  It can be fun, sure ("not that there's anything wrong with that"), but depending on how believable (in the context of a game with magic, dragons, and other supernatural creatures) you want the game to be, it may not be the best.

For my group, FASA broke that habit with Shadowrun and Earthdawn in late 80s/early 90s. Those games seemed far more interesting to us than D&D and, while we've played D&D since, we never played it the same way again.

Nowadays I find the concept of dungeon crawling, killing, looting, all for xp to be rather bizarre, but what else are you gonna do? As much as I'd love to play an X-Files inspired game, my only realistic option is Delta Green and that has Cthulhu mythos baggage that I'm not interested in.

I play Delta Green/CoC with my girls, about 1 out of 4 adventures (the other 3 being Traveller). However, I pulled out the hard core Cthulhu parts and run it with a more X-File / Evil (the TV Show) / Dracula / Nefarious / Screwtape influences. The big evils are cultists of (insert ancient Biblical/Mesopotamian/Egyptian/other myth evil god) and not of the Cthulhu mythos. Demensional Shamblers are demons, etc. Even things that are Cthluhu are easy to morph into African or South American myth (Nearlothoep becomes a multi-cultural evil god of flies and etc). Well I am starting to use some King in Yellow flavor, but that doesn't count ;-)

I got rid of the 'unnatural skill' and added various religious / magical skills from medieval and later views of magic and miracles (and dark corrupting magical arts too) for the magic occult unnatural elements of the game. I even have an NPC (the group hasn't really gotten into using so far) that is a religious preacher skilled with miracles exorcism etc.

For the rules I LOVE CoC and DG. I mush them together (CoC Luck, Credit Rating, half & 5th skill etc, DG look on if you have a skill above X you get info no matter what - I do still have them roll a check to see how long it takes or if they get bonus info etc - projecting san loss onto bonds, character development between sessions) Plus the sanity rules for both are great.

So with that, I'd encourage you to pull the trigger on DG / CoC and run with it as X-Files etc and not keep it btb Cthluhu mind bending baggage.

Quote from: Opaopajr on July 13, 2024, 12:41:43 AMPeople skim and scan, which is close to "skip and scam," because what you allow is what will continue.

Some of the ranges on darkvision in 5e are still fairly generous. But yeah alot of folk forget that its got a range.

Quote from: Ruprecht on July 13, 2024, 02:36:56 PM

Quote from: Omega on July 12, 2024, 07:16:12 PMThe first D&D novel Quag Keep had amongst the PCs a Lizardman...

Off topic, but I always wondered if there was a connection between Andre Alice Norton's Lizardman and Phoebus (Player: Jeff R. Leason) the Lizardman in the Rogues Gallery. I know Norton played in a game or two with Gary before writing the book.

Theres been discussion. But we will likely never know now what the process was. Why a pseudo dragon and a wereboar?

Quote from: HappyDaze on July 13, 2024, 10:52:05 AM

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on July 12, 2024, 02:20:32 PMThe problem I can predict with the freakshow approach is that it messes with the logic of how adventurers determine "is it a monster or not?" If the PCs look like monsters, then how do they keep track of what monsters are okay to kill? Do they wait to be attacked? Do monsters have red circles around them to indicate they're hostile?

So, "Looks Different = OK to Kill It" is a desireable state of play?

Right, because elfs, dwarfs, halflings look just like humans...

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on July 13, 2024, 04:57:05 PMNowadays I find the concept of dungeon crawling, killing, looting, all for xp to be rather bizarre, but what else are you gonna do?

There are a lot of games out there that don't push that model of play at all. D&D can even be played differently from that, but it's certainly not the ideal game to do it with unless you have nothing else.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on July 13, 2024, 11:58:13 PM

Quote from: HappyDaze on July 13, 2024, 10:52:05 AM

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on July 12, 2024, 02:20:32 PMThe problem I can predict with the freakshow approach is that it messes with the logic of how adventurers determine "is it a monster or not?" If the PCs look like monsters, then how do they keep track of what monsters are okay to kill? Do they wait to be attacked? Do monsters have red circles around them to indicate they're hostile?

So, "Looks Different = OK to Kill It" is a desireable state of play?

Right, because elfs, dwarfs, halflings look just like humans...

Relatively speaking, they most certainly do.

Quote from: HappyDaze on July 14, 2024, 01:54:52 AM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on July 13, 2024, 11:58:13 PM

Quote from: HappyDaze on July 13, 2024, 10:52:05 AM

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on July 12, 2024, 02:20:32 PMThe problem I can predict with the freakshow approach is that it messes with the logic of how adventurers determine "is it a monster or not?" If the PCs look like monsters, then how do they keep track of what monsters are okay to kill? Do they wait to be attacked? Do monsters have red circles around them to indicate they're hostile?

So, "Looks Different = OK to Kill It" is a desireable state of play?

Right, because elfs, dwarfs, halflings look just like humans...

Relatively speaking, they most certainly do.

Can you be any more disingenuous?

Quote from: GeekyBugle on July 14, 2024, 02:20:26 AM

Quote from: HappyDaze on July 14, 2024, 01:54:52 AM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on July 13, 2024, 11:58:13 PM

Quote from: HappyDaze on July 13, 2024, 10:52:05 AM

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on July 12, 2024, 02:20:32 PMThe problem I can predict with the freakshow approach is that it messes with the logic of how adventurers determine "is it a monster or not?" If the PCs look like monsters, then how do they keep track of what monsters are okay to kill? Do they wait to be attacked? Do monsters have red circles around them to indicate they're hostile?

So, "Looks Different = OK to Kill It" is a desireable state of play?

Right, because elfs, dwarfs, halflings look just like humans...

Relatively speaking, they most certainly do.

Can you be any more disingenuous?

Please explain your question. There is nothing disingenuous in recognizing that elves/dwarves/halflings look much closer to humans than ogres/trolls/orcs/gnolls do, and that's without even mentioning that the game typically classified one as "demi-humans" while the other were classified as "humanoids" (the devision typically being just a shorthand for an "us" and "them" divisor).

Quote from: GeekyBugle on July 14, 2024, 02:20:26 AM

Quote from: HappyDaze on July 14, 2024, 01:54:52 AM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on July 13, 2024, 11:58:13 PM

Quote from: HappyDaze on July 13, 2024, 10:52:05 AM

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on July 12, 2024, 02:20:32 PMThe problem I can predict with the freakshow approach is that it messes with the logic of how adventurers determine "is it a monster or not?" If the PCs look like monsters, then how do they keep track of what monsters are okay to kill? Do they wait to be attacked? Do monsters have red circles around them to indicate they're hostile?

So, "Looks Different = OK to Kill It" is a desireable state of play?

Right, because elfs, dwarfs, halflings look just like humans...

Relatively speaking, they most certainly do.

Can you be any more disingenuous?

Just ignore him.  He has never contributed a single piece of useful commentary to this site.  His posts are always contrarian or defending other woke garbage.

Quote from: Eirikrautha on July 14, 2024, 10:44:39 AM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on July 14, 2024, 02:20:26 AM

Quote from: HappyDaze on July 14, 2024, 01:54:52 AM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on July 13, 2024, 11:58:13 PM

Quote from: HappyDaze on July 13, 2024, 10:52:05 AM

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on July 12, 2024, 02:20:32 PMThe problem I can predict with the freakshow approach is that it messes with the logic of how adventurers determine "is it a monster or not?" If the PCs look like monsters, then how do they keep track of what monsters are okay to kill? Do they wait to be attacked? Do monsters have red circles around them to indicate they're hostile?

So, "Looks Different = OK to Kill It" is a desireable state of play?

Right, because elfs, dwarfs, halflings look just like humans...

Relatively speaking, they most certainly do.

Can you be any more disingenuous?

Just ignore him.  He has never contributed a single piece of useful commentary to this site.  His posts are always contrarian or defending other woke garbage.

I'm very much on topic here. You just can't help but attack posters when you can't offer anything better, can you?

Quote from: Lurker on July 13, 2024, 07:59:42 PM

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on July 13, 2024, 04:57:05 PM

Quote from: HappyDaze on July 13, 2024, 11:44:08 AM

Quote from: Osman Gazi on July 13, 2024, 11:05:54 AM

Quote from: HappyDaze on July 13, 2024, 10:52:05 AM

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on July 12, 2024, 02:20:32 PMThe problem I can predict with the freakshow approach is that it messes with the logic of how adventurers determine "is it a monster or not?" If the PCs look like monsters, then how do they keep track of what monsters are okay to kill? Do they wait to be attacked? Do monsters have red circles around them to indicate they're hostile?

So, "Looks Different = OK to Kill It" is a desireable state of play?

I'd say it was definitely the way us Junior-and-Senior-High kids played it in the late 70s/early 80s.  All Orcs & Goblins evil, kill 'em all.

Was that desirable?  Don't know.  It was fun.  But as I age, I tend to think having all members of a sapient race as "evil" or "good" simplistic.  It can be fun, sure ("not that there's anything wrong with that"), but depending on how believable (in the context of a game with magic, dragons, and other supernatural creatures) you want the game to be, it may not be the best.

For my group, FASA broke that habit with Shadowrun and Earthdawn in late 80s/early 90s. Those games seemed far more interesting to us than D&D and, while we've played D&D since, we never played it the same way again.

Nowadays I find the concept of dungeon crawling, killing, looting, all for xp to be rather bizarre, but what else are you gonna do? As much as I'd love to play an X-Files inspired game, my only realistic option is Delta Green and that has Cthulhu mythos baggage that I'm not interested in.

I play Delta Green/CoC with my girls, about 1 out of 4 adventures (the other 3 being Traveller). However, I pulled out the hard core Cthulhu parts and run it with a more X-File / Evil (the TV Show) / Dracula / Nefarious / Screwtape influences. The big evils are cultists of (insert ancient Biblical/Mesopotamian/Egyptian/other myth evil god) and not of the Cthulhu mythos. Demensional Shamblers are demons, etc. Even things that are Cthluhu are easy to morph into African or South American myth (Nearlothoep becomes a multi-cultural evil god of flies and etc). Well I am starting to use some King in Yellow flavor, but that doesn't count ;-)

I got rid of the 'unnatural skill' and added various religious / magical skills from medieval and later views of magic and miracles (and dark corrupting magical arts too) for the magic occult unnatural elements of the game. I even have an NPC (the group hasn't really gotten into using so far) that is a religious preacher skilled with miracles exorcism etc.

For the rules I LOVE CoC and DG. I mush them together (CoC Luck, Credit Rating, half & 5th skill etc, DG look on if you have a skill above X you get info no matter what - I do still have them roll a check to see how long it takes or if they get bonus info etc - projecting san loss onto bonds, character development between sessions) Plus the sanity rules for both are great.

So with that, I'd encourage you to pull the trigger on DG / CoC and run with it as X-Files etc and not keep it btb Cthluhu mind bending baggage.

I'd be better off finding a game that already does what I want or make one myself

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on July 13, 2024, 04:57:05 PMNowadays I find the concept of dungeon crawling, killing, looting, all for xp to be rather bizarre, but what else are you gonna do? As much as I'd love to play an X-Files inspired game, my only realistic option is Delta Green and that has Cthulhu mythos baggage that I'm not interested in.

I'm usually the first person to say that D&D is designed to be a relatively simplistic dungeon crawler, and that's what it does best, but it's honestly not that difficult to do something else with it. Even my OSR games are only about 20% dungeon crawling, and at least half the encounters get concluded without the use of deadly force. IME the biggest problem you run into with taking D&D out of the dungeon gameplay loop is that since the HP and spells/abilities-per-day numbers are based on an assumed amount of daily violence, you risk making the game a lot easier. Not everyone cares, but if you do, I think Free League's LOTR game and the Tales of Argosa have the solution in just pinning everything to a per-adventure rather than per-day refill.

I still wouldn't pick D&D for a dedicated investigative game, but with the 100s of RPGs out there, there's got to be something that does what you want.

Quote from: ForgottenF on July 14, 2024, 05:57:50 PM

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on July 13, 2024, 04:57:05 PMNowadays I find the concept of dungeon crawling, killing, looting, all for xp to be rather bizarre, but what else are you gonna do? As much as I'd love to play an X-Files inspired game, my only realistic option is Delta Green and that has Cthulhu mythos baggage that I'm not interested in.

I'm usually the first person to say that D&D is designed to be a relatively simplistic dungeon crawler, and that's what it does best, but it's honestly not that difficult to do something else with it. Even my OSR games are only about 20% dungeon crawling, and at least half the encounters get concluded without the use of deadly force. IME the biggest problem you run into with taking D&D out of the dungeon gameplay loop is that since the HP and spells/abilities-per-day numbers are based on an assumed amount of daily violence, you risk making the game a lot easier. Not everyone cares, but if you do, I think Free League's LOTR game and the Tales of Argosa have the solution in just pinning everything to a per-adventure rather than per-day refill.

I still wouldn't pick D&D for a dedicated investigative game, but with the 100s of RPGs out there, there's got to be something that does what you want.

The problem isn't finding a game. There's several others like Bureau 13, Chill, Dark•Matter, Conspiracy X, Tabloid!, I Psi, Night's Black Agents, etc. The problem is finding people interested in playing and getting everyone on the same page.

The easiest way to do it is to make some simple free rules myself and make up the setting myself with a primer that explains things as quickly and simply as possible, then take player input.

Quote from: ForgottenF on July 14, 2024, 05:57:50 PMI'm usually the first person to say that D&D is designed to be a relatively simplistic dungeon crawler, and that's what it does best, but it's honestly not that difficult to do something else with it.

At some point wotc seems to have lost track of the idea of dungeoncrawling. I will not be surprised if they drop the random dungeon gen tables from Fake 5e.