TheRPGSite

I had originally posted this in the 'Questioning Chirine ba Kal" thread, but I'd like to get as many ideas as possible from people if they wouldn't mind...

I'd like to pose a question of my own, once again, and I'd be obliged to everyone who'd like to weigh in on it...

The GM for the 5e campaign that I recent left has asked me to return, as an 'associate GM' of sorts; he and his players would like to take the opportunity to visit Tekumel for a while, and play an RPG in Ye Olden Style. As it's been explained to me, the GM will continue to handle the 5e mechanics as needed for the game sessions, and I will be running the game session in my usual style and manner.

I think the best way to describe this would be 'D & D 5e for Tekumel', with the 5e mechanics and Phil's world setting.

I have no trouble running the game; what concerns me is presentation and accessibility. 5e, as i've seen it being played by this and other groups at the FLGS, offers me effectively nothing in the kind of elements that I like to see in my gaming. It's usually a gridded battle mat with wet-erase markers and pre-painted figures as a tactical display, with none of the sheer spectacle that I love to present in my games. Also, normally, I'd bring some of my copies of EPT to the table for people to look at and get a little introduction to the world-setting, but I've been put off by some of the reactions that I've gotten by people - specifically, sniggering over the artwork. My thought is to present the players with this excerpt from Book One of "To Serve The Petal Throne" as a take-away sheet for the players:

Since before the beginnings of recorded time, humankind had looked up into the night sky at the myriad points of light and wondered. Eventually, in the fullness of that time, the first steps were taken out into that starry night. Humankind went, in a single bound, from being alone on their homeworld to being part of a galaxy-spanning community of beings of diverse shapes and sizes. Some were friendly, some were hostile, and some plainly disinterested in the doings of humans and neutral to them.

Humankind spread across the stars, and established their own empire; the Lords of Humanspace assimilated many technologies and sciences, and eventually became masters of matter and energy. This mastery brought them in to alliances and conflicts, and in one particular case brought them a contract with another of the galaxy's races; they wanted to have an entire planet adapted for their use, and this the Lords of Humanspace could do.

One of five worlds orbiting a bright, hot star, the chosen planet was at the juncture of several important trade routes between the more densely-populated areas of space; the world was wanted as a trading center and a place where the rulers of the galaxy could rest from their labors.

It was of little matter that the world was already inhabited; the Lords of Humanspace did not consider such minor things as being worthy of their notice. Mighty weapons were deployed, even mightier engines of change and transformation were brought into play, and the new world became a place where humankind and their allies could call home. The inhabitants were allowed to survive; to survive, and nurse their hatred of the alien beings who had transformed their planet and confined them to the more remote regions of it.

The Lords of Humanspace, and their allies, for all their power and mastery were not the most highly endowed races in the universe. Others, older and more alien yet, held that position, and they too had their rivalries and conflicts. To these older races, the all-powerful Lords of Humanspace were as toys to a child.

There came a time when these older races had a mighty conflict, and employed powers unimaginable to Humankind. The newly-transformed world was cast out of space and time, and the trapped peoples of the new world looked up into a sky without stars.

The high civilization that the Lords of Humanspace had brought to the new world collapsed - here, suddenly; there, slowly. Humankind is, however, nothing if not adaptable and resilient; civilization began a long, slow climb back into the light and out of the utter darkness that had befallen it. New technologies of the mind, which became known as 'sorcery', replaced the lost technology of the Ancients – as the Lords of Humanspace had become known – and empires and kingdoms rose and fell as the centuries passed into dust.

Humans and their alien allies built and strove, and created new civilizations out of the ashes of the old. Heroes and villains abounded, and new legends were born out of the tales of their battles and quests. In every generation, new heroes and heroines were born, and their legends added to the mythology and history of their world. Gods and goddesses, some based on the memories of the old races that has cast the world into darkness and some created by the mnds of their worshippers, abounded and made their presence in the world known to their worshippers and their competitors.

Some traces of the old technology survived, and became highly sought-after and coveted treasures. Some of what was left of the old world was beneficial and useful; other devices could kill at a touch. All of the inhabitants of the world understood this, and the quest for these wonders was left to a new breed of 'adventurers', who took the most horrific risks in order to obtain the most generous of rewards.

And so it begins; tales of wonder, and of people not yet born, and of lands not yet known…
Come with us; our journey is just begun…

If you were players in this situation, what would you like to see to help you understand what you've gotten your selves into?

A simple paragraph telling me what your expectations of what the characters are supposed to be doing as a group and a second paragraph describing the immediately accessible portion of the setting in clear terms without flowery prose.

I think those paragraphs were a good start but then I would need to know:
Where am I from? Which is where the character thinks he or she is from, not the cosmology.
Why am I stepping out my front door onto the road that goes on forever? Which is what reasons to I have to go and do.
Who do I know?
What places and institutions do I know?

Quote from: HappyDaze;1005071A simple paragraph telling me what your expectations of what the characters are supposed to be doing as a group and a second paragraph describing the immediately accessible portion of the setting in clear terms without flowery prose.

Very cool! Thank you! Normally, I get asked for the flowery prose, so this is very helpful.

Quote from: WillInNewHaven;1005072I think those paragraphs were a good start but then I would need to know:
Where am I from? Which is where the character thinks he or she is from, not the cosmology.
Why am I stepping out my front door onto the road that goes on forever? Which is what reasons to I have to go and do.
Who do I know?
What places and institutions do I know?

Gotcha. The players are an established party of adventures in the GMs Blackmoor game who need jobs, and they've been invited to a paying gig. I like your suggestions - very useful and helpful!

Quote from: chirine ba kal;1005074Gotcha. The players are an established party of adventures in the GMs Blackmoor game who need jobs, and they've been invited to a paying gig. I like your suggestions - very useful and helpful!

Enjoy it. Oddly enough, I rarely run for characters who think of themselves as adventurers.

Hopefully this helps

Quote from: chirine ba kal;1005070I think the best way to describe this would be 'D & D 5e for Tekumel', with the 5e mechanics and Phil's world setting.

I don't see any real technical issues with this. Especially after the release of Adventures in Middle Earth (http://cubicle7.co.uk/our-games/adventures-in-middle-earth/) showed how D&D 5e can be bent and twisted to fit a setting with very different assumptions.

Quote from: chirine ba kal;1005070I have no trouble running the game; what concerns me is presentation and accessibility. 5e, as i've seen it being played by this and other groups at the FLGS, offers me effectively nothing in the kind of elements that I like to see in my gaming. It's usually a gridded battle mat with wet-erase markers and pre-painted figures as a tactical display, with none of the sheer spectacle that I love to present in my games.

D&D 5e can work like how you use EPT in this regard.

Quote from: chirine ba kal;1005070Also, normally, I'd bring some of my copies of EPT to the table for people to look at and get a little introduction to the world-setting, but I've been put off by some of the reactions that I've gotten by people - specifically, sniggering over the artwork. My thought is to present the players with this excerpt from Book One of "To Serve The Petal Throne" as a take-away sheet for the players:

It may work. I always thought it focused way to much on the science fiction aspects when the appeal is about the unique cultures and races of the setting. Granted it atmospheric to know it started as a "lost" colony of a star spanning human civilization but the last three paragraphs is where the meat is. If the preceeding paragraphs could be condensed into one or two paragraphs that would make it a lot tighter.

But like I said it may work and you have run Tekumel multiple times so know what important so if this is  what you need then use it. And certainly when it came to a Traveller campaign my handout wasn't that brief (http://www.batintheattic.com/downloads/Adventure_Handout.pdf).

5e Rules Comments

1) Initiative is 1d20+Dex and uses individual individual. Once rolled the order is set.

2) Every character gets as Major Action, a Movement, a Minor Action, a Reaction, and can do a short interaction with an object (pick it up, ready, etc). Major Actions are attacks and spells. Minor Actions and Reaction are used by special abilities which are clearly labeled. Minor actions occur during a character's turn. A reaction can be done anytime during the combat round on anybody's turn but can only be done once.

3) The basic four classes that work most like OD&D are Fighter:Champion, Wizard:Evoker, Rogue:Thief, and Cleric:Life Domain. The D&D 5e Basic rules focuses on those four classes.

4) Compared to OD&D, characters and monsters have more hit points. But also do more damage. In my experience the outcome of 5e combat is similar to happens when I referee OD&D combat. What the inflated hit points and damage does is allow more variety in what characters can do. However the basic four classes mentioned are the ones that operate the closest to their OD&D Counterparts.

5) Characters have skills, roll 15 or better for medium/average. Characters can use any skills except some are proficient in some which allows them to add their proficiency bonus.  The prof bonus starts out at +2 at 1st level. Skill add in the relevant attribute bonus. For example Stealth (Dex).

6) Attribute bonus go up by +1 for every 2 points in an Attribute. 10 is +0, 12 is +1, up to 18 which is +4.

That it in a nutshell, everything is a detail of a class or creature.

Again I will look at EPT and see if I can come up with anything to help 5e feel more Tekumel.

Well ... I like flowery prose, and my first RPG experience being EPT, back in the 70s, I'd love to go back.

But that's not the prose that would grab a character.  It's not really relevant to one.  Consider: Tekumel vanished from Humanspace a LONG time ago.  Reasonably, this wouldn't even be like devoting most of your intro to a modern-day espionage campaign to "In the Land Between the Rivers, Sarru-kin son of La-ibum of Akkad conquered a mighty empire, the first mankind would ever know ..." because Sargon the Great reigned only about 4500 years back.  I'd wager that a contemporary Tsolyani thinks no more about Humanspace than we do about the Paleolithic era.

Quote from: estar;10050803) The basic four classes that work most like OD&D are Fighter:Champion, Wizard:Evoker, Rogue:Thief, and Cleric:Life Domain. The D&D 5e Basic rules focuses on those four classes.

You could say you're running a "5e Basic" game, aimed at new players? Or core 5e without the optional feat & multiclass rules. No need for minis & square-counting in 5e either.

One thing to be aware of is 5e changes its feel very sharply at 5th level; a bunch of what would previously have been high level spells like Sending & Spirit Guardians are available at 5th. 1-4 plays much more old school, so I recommend sticking to those levels a good while.

What is EPT?

Quote from: chirine ba kal;1005073Very cool! Thank you! Normally, I get asked for the flowery prose, so this is very helpful.

Honestly, if I were to include flowery prose, I would cut your narrative down to (additions added in brackets):

Quote from: chirine ba kal;1005070 [This game takes place in the future, after human civilization (hereafter referred to as humanspace) expands to the stars]
The high civilization that the Lords of Humanspace had brought to the new world collapsed - here, suddenly; there, slowly. Humankind is, however, nothing if not adaptable and resilient; civilization began a long, slow climb back into the light and out of the utter darkness that had befallen it. New technologies of the mind, which became known as 'sorcery', replaced the lost technology of the Ancients – as the Lords of Humanspace had become known – and empires and kingdoms rose and fell as the centuries passed into dust.

Humans and their alien allies built and strove, and created new civilizations out of the ashes of the old.  Some traces of the [old civilization survived, as did some] old technology,  bec[oming] coveted treasures. Some was was beneficial and useful; other could kill at a touch. All of the inhabitants of the world understood this, and the quest for these wonders was left to a new breed of 'adventurers[.]'

And so it begins; tales of wonder, and of people not yet born, and of lands not yet known...
Come with us; our journey is just begun...

Even then, it might give the false impression that the main thrust of the game is trying to get back out to the stars.

Quote from: Psikerlord;1005097What is EPT?

Empire of the Petal Throne, AKA the Tekumel RPG.

Don't know anything about Tekumel or EPT except what I've read on this forum, but if you feel more comfortable doing it, 5E works just fine using side by side initiative instead of the default rules.  If you are used to that, it will probably run much faster that way.  (Using side by side for me cuts out anywhere from 40% to 60% of the combat time, and I'm experienced running both cyclic and side by side.)  The "rules GM" can use the simple variant in the 5E DMG, lift an early D&D version as is, or make up some other variant.  All that is required is a small amount of GM adjudication on when particular abilities end that were formally "end of your next turn."  

I've noticed that changing the initiative that way produces a much more old school feel in 5E.  The cyclic initiative itself isn't that bad, but the change in focus and some of the side effects and the generally slower combats is a subtle but ever present drag on the action.

Don't forget the simple things--if the money in Tekumel differs from that presented in the D&D player hand book, having a little cheat sheet for each player may be no bad thing--when I ran Cthulhu Invictus I put together a little sheet describing the exchanges of different Roman money--how many ases in a sesteritus, for example.  If the equipment list is going to be different, be sure to set that out too.  But then I like to have a little briefing folder available for each player--it has the character sheet, a map of anyplace that the character might be familiar with (but the player not, like the city lay out of Ancient Rome), anything like the money example described above, and a list of any really really important NPC's that the character would have heard of.  All this goes in a little paper binder together with some plastic page protectors for the character sheet, a couple of sheets of lined paper and some graph paper.

The player then gets to have this as a  nice little souvenir of the campaign, if they like such things.

Thank you, everyone, for your comments. I think I'm going to can the idea of any hand-outs. As I think this is going to be a one-off, I don't think they'll be needed. If I thought I could get out of this game gracefully, I would; I think I'm just too old and obsolete for the modern gaming scene at this point. While I can run Tekumel, and do the number-crunching for the three-four existing Tekumel RPGs for games, I am not 'getting' 5e to any extent. I think it's time to stay with the 'open table' model of gaming that I found very successful at the FLGS's Free RPG Day.

I should note that I have not played D & D to any real extant. I played something called 'Blackmoor' with Dave, something called 'Greyhawk' with Gary, and something called 'Tekumel' with Phil. I have about three hours of play time with Gronan's 'Rams Horn'. The three 5e game sessions over this past year were the only ones that I have ever played for any edition, and for me it's a completely alien style of play. I frankly didn't like what I was seeing, and the 5e rules lawyer player didn't do anything for me either.

The problem, for me, is that I've been by and large the public face of Tekumel for forty years, and it's biggest booster. I'm expected to run Tekumel by everybody I meet in gaming, without the people with the expectations having any real idea of what I do or how I do it. I do love running other things, like Barsoom or the Lord Meren mysteries, but I very rarely get asked about them; it's always Tekumel, and always RPGs.

So it goes, and thank you all once again for your very welcome help!

I think you Co-GM, as this friend wants to drive the 5e chassis while you co-pilot the guided tour, is the best way to handle this. It take advantage of your knowledge of the area while letting someone worry about managing the tour bus, if you will. You are fortunate, you seem to be sitting in a space that is the best of both worlds.

Now, this GM is going to have to alter 5e driving to taste because, well, as RAW 5e can be a bit of a tank compared to the Tekumel grittier setting aesthetics. The prolific widgets and resource regeneration rate could end up "trampling the flower beds," as it were. Mercifully, all this is none of your concern!

You've already got great advice on trimming down material. Very much keep an eye to Hollywood sales pitch aesthetics because yeah, as much as the young are curious about the past and profess patience, one is part and parcel of one's times -- and there is a lot competing for their attention in these times. So wear your tour bus hat and imagine giving a guided tour, it will keep you closer in frame of mind of what can be digestible in layman terms. Don't worry about a loving elaboration or two, that's where you bring the magic and passion -- and that's what they profess they want! -- but realize there is so much you can crash course in a personal-enrichment survey tour.

Quote from: chirine ba kal;1005152The problem, for me, is that I've been by and large the public face of Tekumel for forty years, and it's biggest booster. I'm expected to run Tekumel by everybody I meet in gaming, without the people with the expectations having any real idea of what I do or how I do it. I do love running other things, like Barsoom or the Lord Meren mysteries, but I very rarely get asked about them; it's always Tekumel, and always RPGs.

I think if the point to run Tekumel then run it how you want to run it with the rules the way you want. The point here is the setting not the rules. Just explain that to your co-referee and if he doesn't seem to like the idea then don't run the game.

The local game store that I run session at from time to time are chock full of Pathfinder, 5th edition, and every other current RPGs except for the ones I run like GURPS, Harnmaster, and OD&D. So what I "sell" them on is my refereeing experience, the spectacle of playing with the miniatures and Dwarven Forge, and the work I put into my Majestic Wilderlands. And these are gamers who will not play any of the three RPG I mentioned unless it me as the referee.

From everything I have seen you post, you do everything I do in regards with Tekumel. So just offer them the Tekumel experience. What I would do to get over the rule hurdle (for the players) is emphasize pretending that they there as the characters. You will handle any rules questions that come up. You may have to throw some softballs at first to get them used to thing but once they seem to have a grip on things it should be smooth afterwards.

Quote from: Opaopajr;1005158I think you Co-GM, as this friend wants to drive the 5e chassis while you co-pilot the guided tour, is the best way to handle this. It take advantage of your knowledge of the area while letting someone worry about managing the tour bus, if you will. You are fortunate, you seem to be sitting in a space that is the best of both worlds.

Now, this GM is going to have to alter 5e driving to taste because, well, as RAW 5e can be a bit of a tank compared to the Tekumel grittier setting aesthetics. The prolific widgets and resource regeneration rate could end up "trampling the flower beds," as it were. Mercifully, all this is none of your concern!

You've already got great advice on trimming down material. Very much keep an eye to Hollywood sales pitch aesthetics because yeah, as much as the young are curious about the past and profess patience, one is part and parcel of one's times -- and there is a lot competing for their attention in these times. So wear your tour bus hat and imagine giving a guided tour, it will keep you closer in frame of mind of what can be digestible in layman terms. Don't worry about a loving elaboration or two, that's where you bring the magic and passion -- and that's what they profess they want! -- but realize there is so much you can crash course in a personal-enrichment survey tour.

Thank you! I think you're right, and this is what the GM and his players have in mind. I think, after considering everyone's comments, that I'll just run the game the way I normally do, and hope for the best. I strongly doubt that this will turn into the kind of game that I enjoy running, but 'Montrose's Toast' and all that.

Quote from: estar;1005167I think if the point to run Tekumel then run it how you want to run it with the rules the way you want. The point here is the setting not the rules. Just explain that to your co-referee and if he doesn't seem to like the idea then don't run the game.

The local game store that I run session at from time to time are chock full of Pathfinder, 5th edition, and every other current RPGs except for the ones I run like GURPS, Harnmaster, and OD&D. So what I "sell" them on is my refereeing experience, the spectacle of playing with the miniatures and Dwarven Forge, and the work I put into my Majestic Wilderlands. And these are gamers who will not play any of the three RPG I mentioned unless it me as the referee.

From everything I have seen you post, you do everything I do in regards with Tekumel. So just offer them the Tekumel experience. What I would do to get over the rule hurdle (for the players) is emphasize pretending that they there as the characters. You will handle any rules questions that come up. You may have to throw some softballs at first to get them used to thing but once they seem to have a grip on things it should be smooth afterwards.

Agreed. I'll run this one - "Who dares, wins" - as if it was one of my usual 'public appearance' games and leave it at that. We'll see how it goes.

I agree with a lot of what others have said.

1. Do people like the PCs know all that stuff about what happened before the universe (or their pocket section of it) changed? If not than cut out most of those paragraphs since their PCs won't know any of it anyway. For example, I'd say it's more important for a player to know what a warrior or a wizard in the world thinks an Eye or a tube car is than for the player to know what technological devices from the time long, long ago really are.

2. Replace missing paragraphs with a short info dump (bullet points would work) that tells the player stuff like "What clan am I? Who is in charge of my clan? Who do I look to for guidance or instruction or orders? What is my clan known for? What is my role in that clan? Which clans are friendly to us and which are hostile?" Then run a similar info dump for "What god(s) do I particularly revere? Who do I look to for religious guidance or instruction? Which gods/cults are my god's/cult's friends and which are our enemies?" Also letting people know that "Hey there are no horses or horse like things to ride here. And people use this stuff called chlen-hide to make most armor and weapons. There's a treatment process and details and stuff, but your character considers this stuff to be the usual material that spoons and knives and swords and armor and stuff is usually made out of."

3. If it were me, I'd hate to try to run a setting without knowing (and liking) the system. I've known GMs who were cool with that, but I would not be one of them. I'd far rather use one of the various systems you are already familiar and/or like. If it were me, I'd most likely use the old EPT rules because they are simple, I own them, and I know that other people have used them in the setting or I'd use RQ-Tekumel because I like the RuneQuest system and I have those rules. Those are also the only two systems I've ever seen used as a player in Tekumel. I have Swords & Glory but it has far too many words for me to want to even attempt to run it and I vaguely recall disliking something about the system, but for the life of me I can't remember what.

Quote from: Bren;1005272I agree with a lot of what others have said.

1. Do people like the PCs know all that stuff about what happened before the universe (or their pocket section of it) changed? If not than cut out most of those paragraphs since their PCs won't know any of it anyway. For example, I'd say it's more important for a player to know what a warrior or a wizard in the world thinks an Eye or a tube car is than for the player to know what technological devices from the time long, long ago really are.

2. Replace missing paragraphs with a short info dump (bullet points would work) that tells the player stuff like "What clan am I? Who is in charge of my clan? Who do I look to for guidance or instruction or orders? What is my clan known for? What is my role in that clan? Which clans are friendly to us and which are hostile?" Then run a similar info dump for "What god(s) do I particularly revere? Who do I look to for religious guidance or instruction? Which gods/cults are my god's/cult's friends and which are our enemies?" Also letting people know that "Hey there are no horses or horse like things to ride here. And people use this stuff called chlen-hide to make most armor and weapons. There's a treatment process and details and stuff, but your character considers this stuff to be the usual material that spoons and knives and swords and armor and stuff is usually made out of."

3. If it were me, I'd hate to try to run a setting without knowing (and liking) the system. I've known GMs who were cool with that, but I would not be one of them. I'd far rather use one of the various systems you are already familiar and/or like. If it were me, I'd most likely use the old EPT rules because they are simple, I own them, and I know that other people have used them in the setting or I'd use RQ-Tekumel because I like the RuneQuest system and I have those rules. Those are also the only two systems I've ever seen used as a player in Tekumel. I have Swords & Glory but it has far too many words for me to want to even attempt to run it and I vaguely recall disliking something about the system, but for the life of me I can't remember what.

Great points, thank you!

1. No; but they've asked about it, like in all the games I've run over the years.

2. Agreed; I'm skipping the hand-out idea and just running the game cold-turkey like I normally do. I strongly doubt that it'll ever morph into a long-term campaign, so I want to - in effect, and I'm not trying to belittle your or anyone else's very good suggestions - 'cut my losses' and give the players a fun visit to the palace in the process. If they want to know more, they can ask.

3. Agreed; good advice, but it runs smack-dab into my limitation that I have no familiarity with any other RPG systems, including D & D's various permutations, besides EPT. I'm planning on running this thing like I always do, 'Free Kriegspiel' and hoping for the best.

Quote from: chirine ba kal;10052761. No; but they've asked about it, like in all the games I've run over the years.

You can't go too far wrong with giving the players some of what they asked for. :D

Quote2. Agreed; I'm skipping the hand-out idea and just running the game cold-turkey like I normally do.

I don't recall much of an introduction being given the first time I played EPT. The things that I recall that most stuck out as odd was no horsies, no metal/chlen hide, and the non-Western European style of armor and clothing. Doesn't take much to cover those bases.

QuoteI strongly doubt that it'll ever morph into a long-term campaign, so I want to - in effect, and I'm not trying to belittle your or anyone else's very good suggestions - 'cut my losses' and give the players a fun visit to the palace in the process.

It's hard to go wrong with a fun visit. Of course what counts as "fun" is pretty subjective. Seeing some of the colorful stuff you've made and painted sounds pretty fun to me. Getting to push around a colorful and weird looking miniature or two amidst colorful terrain and buildings while my PC stabs someone else in the face or zaps them with a spell sounds fun. Also fun (though less fun) for my PC to get stabbed or zapped. The first time I played RQ-Tekumel some creature plucked out my PC's eye. With suitably gruesome gestures and description. It was still fun.

Quote3. Agreed; good advice, but it runs smack-dab into my limitation that I have no familiarity with any other RPG systems, including D & D's various permutations, besides EPT. I'm planning on running this thing like I always do, 'Free Kriegspiel' and hoping for the best.

If what you always do is Free Kriegspiel than that is what you are familiar with. So run that. Also if you aren't familiar with any RPG except EPT then what works for me rules-wise is going to quite a bit different than what works for you...and vice versa. I can't imagine wanting to run something without some rules. Clearly your imagination is better than mine in at least that respect.

Quote from: Bren;1005284You can't go too far wrong with giving the players some of what they asked for. :D

I don't recall much of an introduction being given the first time I played EPT. The things that I recall that most stuck out as odd was no horsies, no metal/chlen hide, and the non-Western European style of armor and clothing. Doesn't take much to cover those bases.

It's hard to go wrong with a fun visit. Of course what counts as "fun" is pretty subjective. Seeing some of the colorful stuff you've made and painted sounds pretty fun to me. Getting to push around a colorful and weird looking miniature or two amidst colorful terrain and buildings while my PC stabs someone else in the face or zaps them with a spell sounds fun. Also fun (though less fun) for my PC to get stabbed or zapped. The first time I played RQ-Tekumel some creature plucked out my PC's eye. With suitably gruesome gestures and description. It was still fun.

If what you always do is Free Kriegspiel than that is what you are familiar with. So run that. Also if you aren't familiar with any RPG except EPT then what works for me rules-wise is going to quite a bit different than what works for you...and vice versa. I can't imagine wanting to run something without some rules. Clearly your imagination is better than mine in at least that respect.

Agreed. After all this time, it's gotten kinda predictable what players new to a setting will ask for, so I have that handy as a 'pre-canned answer'.

Also agreed.

Sounds good, really! :D

As Gronan can tell you from his own playing in my games - like the Barsoom one at the recent Free RPG Day - there are rules to the thing. They are fixed and immutable, and I can't deviate from them on a whim to suit my desires as a GM. However, as with some guys I used to game with, the players have to explore the world to find out what the rules might be. I have been told that I am very, very good at what I do and that may be true; you'd have to ask Gronan about it, as I'm simply too close to it... :)

Yes, I like a bit of nice epic prose but that got a bit wanky towards the end. If you don't mind me saying.

Quote from: Wanderer;1005299Yes, I like a bit of nice epic prose but that got a bit wanky towards the end. If you don't mind me saying.

Not at all. It was a bad idea to post it in the first place, I think; it's a page from my book about our adventures, and I thought that it would be a handy bit to cut-and-paste as an idea for a possible handout for the game. It's part of a much larger work of fiction / memoir, and I think you're right; it really only makes sense when seen in the larger context of that work. For gaming purposes, it's most likely a waste of time, which is why I'm not going to bother with any sort of hand-out at all. I'm just going to have to grit my teeth and get through the game session, that's all.

No no, it was a good idea, I don't want you to regret it. I think earlier posters were right that you neeed more explicit info , a briefer intro to the mood of the setting. I write this kind of stuff for PbP so I know how hard it is.

Quote from: Wanderer;1005310No no, it was a good idea, I don't want you to regret it. I think earlier posters were right that you neeed more explicit info , a briefer intro to the mood of the setting. I write this kind of stuff for PbP so I know how hard it is.

No problem. I agree with all the great comments I've gotten, but I simply don't want to write something that I'm pretty convinced would wind up being a waste of time for everyone. As far as I can tell, this will be a one-off game, with no real campaign possibilities in the future. We'll get through it; we've had worse.

He either fears his fate too much,
Or his reward is small,
Who does not dare to take the chance
To win or lose it all.

You taught me that.

Quote from: chirine ba kal;1005152The problem, for me, is that I've been by and large the public face of Tekumel for forty years, and it's biggest booster. I'm expected to run Tekumel by everybody I meet in gaming, without the people with the expectations having any real idea of what I do or how I do it. I do love running other things, like Barsoom or the Lord Meren mysteries, but I very rarely get asked about them; it's always Tekumel, and always RPGs.  

Me saying, "that must really suck, sorry man," probably doesn't help, but it's what I got. At least you are in good company, if the dead eyed glare Harrison Ford gives every time an interviewer brings up Han Solo, or all the 'I just wanted to sing Howling Wolf songs with my buddies' -like quotes attributed to Mick Jagger. At least you actually like Tekumel, even if you'd rather be doing something else.

Quote from: chirine ba kal;1005152I should note that I have not played D & D to any real extant. I played something called 'Blackmoor' with Dave, something called 'Greyhawk' with Gary, and something called 'Tekumel' with Phil. I have about three hours of play time with Gronan's 'Rams Horn'. The three 5e game sessions over this past year were the only ones that I have ever played for any edition, and for me it's a completely alien style of play. I frankly didn't like what I was seeing, and the 5e rules lawyer player didn't do anything for me either.

The problem, for me, is that I've been by and large the public face of Tekumel for forty years, and it's biggest booster. I'm expected to run Tekumel by everybody I meet in gaming, without the people with the expectations having any real idea of what I do or how I do it. I do love running other things, like Barsoom or the Lord Meren mysteries, but I very rarely get asked about them; it's always Tekumel, and always RPGs.

That's awesome!         "I Don't really play D&D, I play these other games that were around before D&D..."

Been on an Edgar Rice Burroughs Barsoom kick myself the last few years. Bought some 1/72 U.S. Cavalry last year so I could do up a full Cavalry Troop for use in Barsoom games, and was also working on making Tharks using wire and green stuff, however my miniatures modeling skills are somewhat lacking for the task at hand. Still though, will probably have the troopers painted before the end of the year as my painting bench is getting empty.

What would a Tekumel tour bus guide look like? :D What would be the Tourist Attraction Maps look like? :) This could be fun, like a safari!

Don't play Tekumel with AD&D 3+ players.

I would love to play in one of your Tekumel games, or anyone else's tekumel games for that matter. I don't give a hoot what rules system is in use as long as I can tell you what I want to do and have you tell me what dice I need to roll or what happens.  But I am one of those crazy "role-players", the ones who are looking for a game of action and adventure and if my character dies because I did something stupid, well so be it.

If the players insist on playing 5e D&D rules for their adventure on Tekumel let the co-GM handle the rules. Just run Tekumel the way you run Tekumel and let the dice fall where they may.

Quote from: chirine ba kal;1005293...you'd have to ask Gronan about it, as I'm simply too close to it... :)

But can I trust him. He still hasn't paid his beer bar tab. :p

Quote from: Bren;1005531But can I trust him.

I sure as hell wouldn't.

Quote from: Bren;1005531He still hasn't paid his beer bar tab. :p

Show up at GaryCon, ya hoser!

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1005535Show up at GaryCon, ya hoser!

Hmmm....March in Wisconsin. Perhaps.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1005322He either fears his fate too much,
Or his reward is small,
Who does not dare to take the chance
To win or lose it all.

You taught me that.

Yep. I'll get through this, and we'll see what happens afterwards.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;1005350Me saying, "that must really suck, sorry man," probably doesn't help, but it's what I got. At least you are in good company, if the dead eyed glare Harrison Ford gives every time an interviewer brings up Han Solo, or all the 'I just wanted to sing Howling Wolf songs with my buddies' -like quotes attributed to Mick Jagger. At least you actually like Tekumel, even if you'd rather be doing something else.

Understood, and thank you for your kind words! I lnow that you mean; I get asked the very same questions every time I get interviewed, and I've now got stock answers for all of them. It's boring as hell.

I do enjoy Tekumel, especially when it's set against it's ancestors like Barsoom and Ancient Egypt. The vast majority of gamers I've deal with over the years are not interests in any of that; they want to go down in the dungeon and get the XP, and that's it.

Quote from: GameDaddy;1005357That's awesome!         "I Don't really play D&D, I play these other games that were around before D&D..."

Been on an Edgar Rice Burroughs Barsoom kick myself the last few years. Bought some 1/72 U.S. Cavalry last year so I could do up a full Cavalry Troop for use in Barsoom games, and was also working on making Tharks using wire and green stuff, however my miniatures modeling skills are somewhat lacking for the task at hand. Still though, will probably have the troopers painted before the end of the year as my painting bench is getting empty.

Thank you! A lot of D & D people I meet have no idea who 'Gary' and 'Dave' might have been. let alone 'Phil'.

Seen the tharks from Bronze Age? Wooo hooo! :)

Quote from: Opaopajr;1005409What would a Tekumel tour bus guide look like? :D What would be the Tourist Attraction Maps look like? :) This could be fun, like a safari!

I did this for one of my games. Photos on my Photobucket page; I think in the 'Holiday Game' album.

Quote from: DavetheLost;1005425I would love to play in one of your Tekumel games, or anyone else's tekumel games for that matter. I don't give a hoot what rules system is in use as long as I can tell you what I want to do and have you tell me what dice I need to roll or what happens.  But I am one of those crazy "role-players", the ones who are looking for a game of action and adventure and if my character dies because I did something stupid, well so be it.

If the players insist on playing 5e D&D rules for their adventure on Tekumel let the co-GM handle the rules. Just run Tekumel the way you run Tekumel and let the dice fall where they may.

Good advice! That's the way I'm going to do this, and we'll see what happens; it's the way I've always played, and what I am reasonably good at.

As Estar and others have said you could strip down and tweak 5e for EPT without too much trouble. Surprised no one has done a 5e hack for EPT yet. I do know someone did a 3e hack so it is probably just a matter of time til someone sits down and does the work.

Quote from: Voros;1005756As Estar and others have said you could strip down and tweak 5e for EPT without too much trouble. Surprised no one has done a 5e hack for EPT yet. I do know someone did a 3e hack so it is probably just a matter of time til someone sits down and does the work.

I'd bet the Foundation has something to do with it;).

Quote from: Voros;1005756As Estar and others have said you could strip down and tweak 5e for EPT without too much trouble. Surprised no one has done a 5e hack for EPT yet. I do know someone did a 3e hack so it is probably just a matter of time til someone sits down and does the work.

Good idea, but way outside my skill set. I have, as noted, no time in the barrel with D & D or other RPGs, so I would not be the one to do this.

I figure you know all this already Chirine, but I would worry  less about the intro and more about how you start out the game. And with a setting as weird and not easily approachable as Tekumel, you should probably start out small. Have the PCs as people of some small village/town or somewhere similarly limited in scope, and tell them step-by-step about what their characters would know, would see, would understand of the world as you go along playing in it, and you slowly expand the size of the game.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1006413I figure you know all this already Chirine, but I would worry  less about the intro and more about how you start out the game. And with a setting as weird and not easily approachable as Tekumel, you should probably start out small. Have the PCs as people of some small village/town or somewhere similarly limited in scope, and tell them step-by-step about what their characters would know, would see, would understand of the world as you go along playing in it, and you slowly expand the size of the game.

Thank you for the very good advice! The situation in this case is that this is an already-existing campaign that I was invited to join, with a first-level version of my leaden alter-ego translated into 5e by the GM - a cleric, basically. The idea is that like the mixed bag of other players , he's just dropped in from another plane. He came equipped by the GM with a 'get home' device that, with limitations, allows him to get back to Tekumel. This was used by the party after their first game session, when they used it to get some very needed help to get most of the party back alive after they'd been killed. The dice rolls indicated that the device was not entirely accurate, so the GM had the players land in my real PC's timeline / plane; they had a nice visit to Lord Chirine's palace, and got healed and re-equipped. In subsequent adventures, in keeping with Dave Arneson and Phil Barker's habit of having PCs wander back and forth between their campaigns, the party has used a retuned device to get put back on their feet after the latest calamity that's befallen them. They have enjoyed their visits to Tekumel, they've told me. In effect, they are 'tourists', off to see the sights.

We are not really starting a 'Tekumel campaign', as near as I can tell from what the GM has said. I agree with your advice to "start small", which is what I have always done in my campaign as players come and go over the years; I've always done exactly what you suggest, as that's the way Phil did is as well; I think it's often forgotten that it took us some fifteen years of once- and twice-a-week game sessions to develop Tekumel into what it's perceived as today. Back in the day, we started as low-level people (at best!) and worked out way up as we learned all about the world that we were exploring in small bites.

In effect, some established and developed 5e player-characters are being dropped into my Tekumel campaign, which has been running for over a decade; I am not expecting issues with them 'getting' the world - they'll get it in small doses, just as per your excellent suggestions - but I am expecting that I will be the one having the issues as I haven't got a clue as to how 5e (or any other version of D & D, for that matter) works. The GM is gong to be handling all of the game mechanics, as I understand it; I think I'll bring some of my copies of EPT along to the game to make his conversion of stats and such a little easier. What I had been wondering about was what, if any, materials I should have available for the players to have a look at if they want to.

I dunno. I'm not looking forward to this, as I find the 5e setting with all it's stuff as weird and difficult to approach. It's entirely different from the way Dave, Gary, and Phil used to play, and I'm simply lost in it. The players and the GM are not, for me, the issue; 5e seems to be.

Any advice would be welcome, sir!!!

I'm no fan of 5e, but like any D&D edition, a DM can bang on it enough to make it achieve their goal.

As for co-GMing, that sounds weird, but I've seen it work where one GM does the fluff and the other handles the crunch.

As others have mentioned, your intro needs to focus on what the PCs are experiencing NOW. AKA, imagine being dumped through a magic portal into a Tekumel town. What they see, smell, experience, etc is FAR more vital than any history of the world.

I totally support player cheat sheets to understand the game world, but focus on what the player should be seeing in their mind and what the PCs will be dealing with socially and in that environment.

QuoteI have no trouble running the game; what concerns me is presentation and accessibility. 5e, as i've seen it being played by this and other groups at the FLGS, offers me effectively nothing in the kind of elements that I like to see in my gaming. It's usually a gridded battle mat with wet-erase markers and pre-painted figures as a tactical display, with none of the sheer spectacle that I love to present in my games. Also, normally, I'd bring some of my copies of EPT to the table for people to look at and get a little introduction to the world-setting, but I've been put off by some of the reactions that I've gotten by people - specifically, sniggering over the artwork. My thought is to present the players with this excerpt from Book One of "To Serve The Petal Throne" as a take-away sheet for the players:

Dont judge the game by your FLGS. Sounds pretty crummy and I wouldnt likely find much interest in playing 5e like that or with people like that.

From personal experience a grid and minis is very much not the norm for 5e. It can be played that way. but all indicators are the vast majority are not using grids or minis. What you may have seen, unlikely but who knows, is people playing the 5e D&D minis wargame from WizKids? But in any case if a prospective player is sniggering over the art then thats right off a "Dont Call us. Cause we aint calling you." moment.

Quote from: chirine ba kal;1006482I dunno. I'm not looking forward to this, as I find the 5e setting with all it's stuff as weird and difficult to approach. It's entirely different from the way Dave, Gary, and Phil used to play, and I'm simply lost in it. The players and the GM are not, for me, the issue; 5e seems to be.

Thank you Chirine for saying this.  I have been playing various versions of D&D, mostly the earlier ones, for a very long time and I find 5e quite alien as well. It is good to know I am not alone.

Well, it's not just 5e; I strongly suspect Chirine would find 3E, 3.5, 4E, and Pathfinder just as alien.

Once feats and skills came along the game changed drastically.  Being "all about the build" may not be universal, but it's very common.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1006593Well, it's not just 5e; I strongly suspect Chirine would find 3E, 3.5, 4E, and Pathfinder just as alien.

Once feats and skills came along the game changed drastically.  Being "all about the build" may not be universal, but it's very common.

Oh for god sake, it about how people play not the rules themselves.

Although not labeled as such the classes in EPT and OD&D have feat like mechanics in the form of spells and class abilities. I just read through the spell casters in EPT and felt like I was reading about 5e warlocks and battlemaster with picking from list A, B, or C class option. The fact it was labeled as spells doesn't change that what I was doing was the same thing in terms of mechanic.

For example in my current OD&D campaign, I have two players (out of four) who like to build optimal characters. I known them for 15 years and always been like this regardless of the game or RPG we played. It not the only thing about them when we game but it there.

With my current campaign they are playing OD&D for the first time. Given the near lack of character customization the thing they turn too is magic items. What combination of magic item or enchanting magic items (when they get high enough level) will allow them to do the cool things they have in mind.

While I have magic shops in my campaign they are still high priced luxury items. So what they can get is limited until they saved enough from adventuring and of course assuming they survived.

Then you got stuff like being able to train hippogriffs (or tarns) so forth and so on.

None of this any different from back in the day in the late 70s and early 80s when I was using AD&D. Every type of good and bad roleplayer was present then as well as today. And what worked then to handle the same type of players still works today.

For me that means emphasizing the fact the players are there as their characters. Insisting on first person roleplaying, and speaking directly at them as the NPCs. Doing what I can to break them from treating their miniature or characters as a game piece and focusing pretending what it is like to be there in my setting and having adventures.

For me there is zero difference in how I manage a Majestic Wilderlands campaign when it comes to using OD&D, GURPS, or D&D 5e. The difference show up in what dice I ask the players to roll, and how long things take to resolve (particularly combat). Regardless of system players are doing the same things (mostly adventuring) for the same reasons (glory, power, and wealth).

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1006593Well, it's not just 5e; I strongly suspect Chirine would find 3E, 3.5, 4E, and Pathfinder just as alien.

Once feats and skills came along the game changed drastically.  Being "all about the build" may not be universal, but it's very common.

It's not about Chirine, even I find 4e and 5e alien (5e less so), and 3+ overwrought for minimum gain:D!

Quote from: estar;1006599Oh for god sake, it about how people play not the rules themselves.

Sorry, but even I can't agree here:).

QuoteAlthough not labeled as such the classes in EPT and OD&D have feat like mechanics in the form of spells and class abilities. I just read through the spell casters in EPT and felt like I was reading about 5e warlocks and battlemaster with picking from list A, B, or C class option. The fact it was labeled as spells doesn't change that what I was doing was the same thing in terms of mechanic.

It might be the same mechanically, but mechanics aren't objective, and even how you call those mechanics does influence the in-character reality a whole lot.
In other words, "gain +20% to your combat skill" isn't objective. "Gain 20%to your combat skill because of a Vimuhla's Rage spell" and "gain 20% to your combat skill because you're in a favourable defensible position on the castle's stairs while the defenders are coming upwards" might have the same mechanical effect, but claiming they're the same thing is obviously wrong;).

And OD&D has nothing even vaguely close to the feat chains and skill sets of later editions.  Especially in the environment Chirine and I played mostly under, where we didn't even see the rules.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1006612And OD&D has nothing even vaguely close to the feat chains and skill sets of later editions.  Especially in the environment Chirine and I played mostly under, where we didn't even see the rules.

If you mean OD&D core only sure. But when it comes to comparing EPT or the some classes in the supplements, to what in the 5e Basic rules. I am not buying it. If you throw in the full gamut of what in the core books instead using just what in the Basic rules. Then yes you are on point. However D&D 5e is designed to be flexible in its complexity. Hence if there is a problem with feat chains and skill sets with D&D 5e it is the fault of the referee who choose to incorporate that in his campaign.

You have it in your sig that Rules can't fix stupid and cure assholes. Well the rules can't fix a referee bound and determined to include the kitchen sink in his campaign when the option exist to do otherwise.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1006612And OD&D has nothing even vaguely close to the feat chains and skill sets of later editions.  Especially in the environment Chirine and I played mostly under, where we didn't even see the rules.

...

Well, it's not just 5e; I strongly suspect Chirine would find 3E, 3.5, 4E, and Pathfinder just as alien.

Once feats and skills came along the game changed drastically.  Being "all about the build" may not be universal, but it's very common.

It is, but one does not have to play 5e that way. The 5' square battle grid, feats, multiclassing, picking skills except at starting level, long rest heals, weird new races and classes, just about everything that is fundamentally different than the old game is optional (some specifics, like high AC = better AC is different, but I feel not a fundamental difference). The more I study oD&D, the more I realize that the playstyle is fundamentally different, but much of the mechanics are arbitrarily different. Certainly 5e (with all of the options dials turned towards OSR-style play) is a step far far in the right direction for someone like Chrine (of course, saying 'it works once you sift through this huge book' is probably the least helpful thing ever, I know).

Anyways, I hope Chirine finds a way to make this work for his comfort level. I can't imagine I'd do any better than this GM he's working with, or I'd volunteer, being a stone's throw away.

Quote from: chirine ba kal;1005667I did this for one of my games. Photos on my Photobucket page; I think in the 'Holiday Game' album.

Nope, no Las Vegas showgirl feathery headdress in those holiday albums. :( I am now sad. At least maybe you have a microphone dolled up to look like a sacrificial dagger somewhere? :confused:

Quote from: AsenRG;1006610Sorry, but even I can't agree here:).

You don't have to apologize I am well aware that my view on the relationship of rules, the referee, and campaign is on the fringes of what the hobby thinks.

Quote from: AsenRG;1006610It might be the same mechanically, but mechanics aren't objective, and even how you call those mechanics does influence the in-character reality a whole lot.

I am not sure what you mean here. My general rule if RAW conflict with the setting, I rule on the basis of the setting. My Majestic Wilderlands assume that melee combat generally work as they do in our own history. So if I get a result wildly inconsistent with that, I am going to rule otherwise. And if the players call me on it, I will be happy to have a discussion about it. I may be wrong.

Quote from: AsenRG;1006610In other words, "gain +20% to your combat skill" isn't objective. "Gain 20%to your combat skill because of a Vimuhla's Rage spell" and "gain 20% to your combat skill because you're in a favourable defensible position on the castle's stairs while the defenders are coming upwards" might have the same mechanical effect, but claiming they're the same thing is obviously wrong;).

You swing at an opponent. If you assume on the basis of the setting that combat should work like our own history then circumstance that will produce an advantage or disadvantage in real life should do the same in the game. In OD&D I may grant a +4 to hit, in D&D 5e, I may grant advantage to the roll. In GURPS I would give a +2 modifier instead (bell curve modifier are generally less). Striking from above could be a situation where I would do this.

If you allow Vimuhla's Rage then I assume you done your homework and decided that was part of your setting. A better example is Second Wind. There no corresponding ability like this in OD&D or GURPS (well not if you playing a realistic campaign).  For me it not a big deal. It not written as something magical. Instead it represents the fighter taking a brief moment in time to "catch his breath". This is represented by recovering 1d10+level hit points, Given the abstraction of hit points in the first place, this is reasonable to me. It works in D&D 5e because hit points are generally inflated along with the number of attacks and the damage they do.

In OD&D, I am not going to do this. The interplay of hit points,  to hit modifiers, and armor class, doesn't make this a good fit in my view. It not needed and doesn't add anything.

GURPS has it own extensive rules on when and where you can help somebody with first aid along with fatigue rules. And works as well as I expect for a game that models combat in 1 second rounds.

Something I don't have in my 5e campaigns in the Majestic Wilderlands is the Barbarian. The whole Rage things to me is a bad fit for what I am trying to do. Along with the fact to me barbarian is a culture which has little to do with being a class. If I was running a Swords & Sorcery pulp campaign my opinion would be different because the setting is different.

What I do allow in my 5e campaign is a Berserker (http://www.batintheattic.com/downloads/MW%205e%20Berserker.pdf) which is very similar mechanically. However a Berserker is a holy warrior of the god Thor, called to find the monsters of the world. His "rage" ability stems from the divine power that Thor infuses his warriors with. If you have my Majestic Wilderlands supplement I have a version for OD&D as well that is considerably simpler mechanically.

My viewpoint is from running campaigns with the same damn setting across multiple rules system. I don't attach the importance that most do to the rules. To me it easy.

1) Figure out your setting
2) Pick a set of rules
3) Review rules, if something doesn't fit the setting then change it.
4) Play
5) Fix what didn't work in terms of how well it represented your setting.
Repeat steps 4 and 5 until you get something you are happy with.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;1006635It is, but one does not have to play 5e that way. The 5' square battle grid, feats, multiclassing, picking skills except at starting level, long rest heals, weird new races and classes, just about everything that is fundamentally different than the old game is optional (some specifics, like high AC = better AC is different, but I feel not a fundamental difference). The more I study oD&D, the more I realize that the playstyle is fundamentally different, but much of the mechanics are arbitrarily different. Certainly 5e (with all of the options dials turned towards OSR-style play) is a step far far in the right direction for someone like Chrine (of course, saying 'it works once you sift through this huge book' is probably the least helpful thing ever, I know).

Anyways, I hope Chirine finds a way to make this work for his comfort level. I can't imagine I'd do any better than this GM he's working with, or I'd volunteer, being a stone's throw away.

If I have to go through the huge corpus of 5e rules and switch all the options toward OSR play, why should I not just play an OSR game? Or even one of the old games that are currently available in reprint or still on my shelves as original copies?  That seems a much simpler way to get the kind of game I want.  5e just has no appeal to me.

Characters added for minimum post length

Quote from: DavetheLost;1006676If I have to go through the huge corpus of 5e rules and switch all the options toward OSR play, why should I not just play an OSR game? Or even one of the old games that are currently available in reprint or still on my shelves as original copies?  That seems a much simpler way to get the kind of game I want.  5e just has no appeal to me.

Then don't play it. I have no vested interest in selling any edition to anyone happy with the one they have. 5e is not the edition I would make, were all the decisions up to me. It does do a lot of the things I want in a system, and I appreciate that it is an attempt to bridge the divides amongst the D&D-loving diaspora. If you have a system (be it an a D&D edition, OSR game, or homebrew) that works for you, keep playing it.

From the context of this thread, it seems like Chirine doesn't have the option of doing what he truly would like to do, so I'm commenting on making the situation better within the context of the options he has provided.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;1006635Anyways, I hope Chirine finds a way to make this work for his comfort level. I can't imagine I'd do any better than this GM he's working with, or I'd volunteer, being a stone's throw away.

Thank you for your kind words! If you wanted to be my wingman, I'll be at The Source Comic and Games this Sunday, noon to six p.m.; I am hoping that this things goes well for the players - I don't want to cause them (or the GM, for that matter) problems! Gaming is supposed to be fun, and I'l like to give that to them all...

Quote from: Willie the Duck;1006693From the context of this thread, it seems like Chirine doesn't have the option of doing what he truly would like to do, so I'm commenting on making the situation better within the context of the options he has provided.

I'd agree with this. I am pretty limited in what I can and can't do in the FLGS; what I do is probably better suited for a series of convention games, where I can set things up as needed for the individual games - I run big, and frankly over-the-top, and I can't do that in this particular context. It'll all be 'theater of the mind', I suspect.

And once again, I'd like to thank everyone for all their comments and advice - it's been very helpful and enlightening!!! :)

Quote from: Opaopajr;1006636Nope, no Las Vegas showgirl feathery headdress in those holiday albums. :( I am now sad. At least maybe you have a microphone dolled up to look like a sacrificial dagger somewhere? :confused:

I was thinking the Sro (our dragons) with howdahs would suit, but I do have exactly the figures that you're looking for. This is one of them; the rest are much more 'Las Vegas' in style:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]1916[/ATTACH]

Quote from: chirine ba kal;1006715Thank you for your kind words! If you wanted to be my wingman, I'll be at The Source Comic and Games this Sunday, noon to six p.m.; I am hoping that this things goes well for the players - I don't want to cause them (or the GM, for that matter) problems! Gaming is supposed to be fun, and I'l like to give that to them all...

I will probably be helping my dad finish winterizing his house this Sunday, but I might just stop by to shake hands. Or god forbid watch for a bit--EPT is one of those things like oD&D where I've gone back to read and study, but have had nominal playtime with.

If you lived closer to me Chirine I would come and help serve as your translator of gaming rules. It would be worth learning 5e to get to experience one of your Tekumel games.  I do wish you luck with it.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1006612And OD&D has nothing even vaguely close to the feat chains and skill sets of later editions.  Especially in the environment Chirine and I played mostly under, where we didn't even see the rules.

5e doesnt have feat chains overall aside from the armour progression from light needed to gain medium to medium needed to gain heavy armour access. They should have named them something else like specializations, quirks or something other than feats as it continually drags the game down as people think its 3e's feat tree hell all over again. And feats in 5e are totally optional.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;1006762I will probably be helping my dad finish winterizing his house this Sunday, but I might just stop by to shake hands. Or god forbid watch for a bit--EPT is one of those things like oD&D where I've gone back to read and study, but have had nominal playtime with.

Understood; I'm doing the same this to our house on Saturday. If you can drop by, I'd love to meet! :)

Quote from: DavetheLost;1006768If you lived closer to me Chirine I would come and help serve as your translator of gaming rules. It would be worth learning 5e to get to experience one of your Tekumel games.  I do wish you luck with it.

Undestood; hopefully. the new rack will help with this...

Quote from: Omega;10067745e doesnt have feat chains overall aside from the armour progression from light needed to gain medium to medium needed to gain heavy armour access. They should have named them something else like specializations, quirks or something other than feats as it continually drags the game down as people think its 3e's feat tree hell all over again. And feats in 5e are totally optional.

Please forgive my ignorance, but what's a 'feat chain'?

Quote from: chirine ba kal;1007011Please forgive my ignorance, but what's a 'feat chain'?

To recap a feat works like a chose your own class ability (like being able to cast 1 3rd level spell at 5th level in OD&D). Starting with D&D 3.0 every class would periodically get a slot for which they pick a feat. It allows players to customize their character's abilities.

Some feats can be only taken by certain classes. In OD&D the closest thing is that Clerics and Magic User can memorize spells but clerics can only pick from the cleric spell list and magic user from the magic user spell list. There are some spells found on both list.

Some feats can only be taken if you have previously taken another feat.

For example there is a feat called Power Attack. if your character takes you have the option of adding +X to damage but suffer -X on the to hit roll. For example Boog the Half Orc uses Power Attack to get +2 to the damage but is now -2 to hit his opponent.

There is another Feat called Cleave where if my character drops an opponent to zero or less hit points he gets an immediate extra attack. He can do this once per combat round. However to take this feat I need to have a Strength 13 and taken the Power Attack mentioned above.

There is a further feat called Great Cleave, that works like Cleave except I can uses ANY time I drop an opponent to zero hit points or less. So if I am a 10th level fighter in combat with a bunch of 1 hit dice goblins. It is likely I can down them all in a single round with the use of Great Cleave.

Power Attack->Cleave->Great Cleave form what is called a feat chain.

Again Feats work like the abilities you find on a D&D class except they are design for customization. And while it sounds like overkill, the monsters have been beefed up accordingly. And it works for a while until the number of books in the product lines made it impossible for Wizards to keep track of all the different interactions. So there were ridiculous combinations possible including an infamous one involving a kobold PC being able to get infinite hit points. Or more accurately any number of hit points until he wanted to stop.

In D&D 5e it has been toned down. Feats in D&D 5e are more standalone and act more as flavor than as must have. And they can be ignored by taking the +2 attribute increase instead.

Quote from: chirine ba kal;1007009Understood; I'm doing the same this to our house on Saturday. If you can drop by, I'd love to meet! :)

Same here.

Quote from: chirine ba kal;1007011Please forgive my ignorance, but what's a 'feat chain'?

Feats are basically 'character features' (mechanical bits). It can be similar to an elves' ability to notice secret doors or a fighter's ability to be immune to fear at level 8. But your character doesn't get a specific feat(-ure) for being a specific race or a specific class and level. Instead, you get an open feat allotment at specific times, and fill it with any feat you qualify for and choose. Certain feats have prerequisites, which can be another feat. For instance, in 3e. to take the Great Cleave feat, you need to first take the Cleave feat. That's a short feat chain. WotC seems to have abandoned the idea of feat chains, while keeping the base concept of a modular character feature that you can select with an allotment.

Quote from: estar;1007014To recap a feat works like a chose your own class ability (like being able to cast 1 3rd level spell at 5th level in OD&D). Starting with D&D 3.0 every class would periodically get a slot for which they pick a feat. It allows players to customize their character's abilities.

Some feats can be only taken by certain classes. In OD&D the closest thing is that Clerics and Magic User can memorize spells but clerics can only pick from the cleric spell list and magic user from the magic user spell list. There are some spells found on both list.

Some feats can only be taken if you have previously taken another feat.

For example there is a feat called Power Attack. if your character takes you have the option of adding +X to damage but suffer -X on the to hit roll. For example Boog the Half Orc uses Power Attack to get +2 to the damage but is now -2 to hit his opponent.

There is another Feat called Cleave where if my character drops an opponent to zero or less hit points he gets an immediate extra attack. He can do this once per combat round. However to take this feat I need to have a Strength 13 and taken the Power Attack mentioned above.

There is a further feat called Great Cleave, that works like Cleave except I can uses ANY time I drop an opponent to zero hit points or less. So if I am a 10th level fighter in combat with a bunch of 1 hit dice goblins. It is likely I can down them all in a single round with the use of Great Cleave.

Power Attack->Cleave->Great Cleave form what is called a feat chain.

Again Feats work like the abilities you find on a D&D class except they are design for customization. And while it sounds like overkill, the monsters have been beefed up accordingly. And it works for a while until the number of books in the product lines made it impossible for Wizards to keep track of all the different interactions. So there were ridiculous combinations possible including an infamous one involving a kobold PC being able to get infinite hit points. Or more accurately any number of hit points until he wanted to stop.

In D&D 5e it has been toned down. Feats in D&D 5e are more standalone and act more as flavor than as must have. And they can be ignored by taking the +2 attribute increase instead.

Ah! Thank you!

Quote from: Willie the Duck;1007015Same here.



Feats are basically 'character features' (mechanical bits). It can be similar to an elves' ability to notice secret doors or a fighter's ability to be immune to fear at level 8. But your character doesn't get a specific feat(-ure) for being a specific race or a specific class and level. Instead, you get an open feat allotment at specific times, and fill it with any feat you qualify for and choose. Certain feats have prerequisites, which can be another feat. For instance, in 3e. to take the Great Cleave feat, you need to first take the Cleave feat. That's a short feat chain. WotC seems to have abandoned the idea of feat chains, while keeping the base concept of a modular character feature that you can select with an allotment.

Very cool, and we'll see what happens. :)

And thank you as well for the explanation.

Quote from: chirine ba kal;1007011Please forgive my ignorance, but what's a 'feat chain'?

Where you need X to get Y to get Z. A wizard wanting to wear heavy armour for example would normally have to pick up the light armour feat, then the medium, and then the heavy. He cant skip steps without some other feature like being a mountain dwarf who get proficiency in light and medium armour so a mountain dwarf wizard could skip the first two links in the chain and go straight to picking up the heavy armour feat.

Quote from: Omega;1007040Where you need X to get Y to get Z. A wizard wanting to wear heavy armour for example would normally have to pick up the light armour feat, then the medium, and then the heavy. He cant skip steps without some other feature like being a mountain dwarf who get proficiency in light and medium armour so a mountain dwarf wizard could skip the first two links in the chain and go straight to picking up the heavy armour feat.

Oh, gotcha. Thanks!

Thank you all for explaining feat chains. I know what feats are from my very brief brush with 3.x and d20 CoC but none of the mysteries of chains etc.

Quote from: chirine ba kal;1007025Very cool, and we'll see what happens. :)

And thank you as well for the explanation.

Well, I was unable to come down and visit/join/help/shake hands, but perhaps the next event. How did it go?

Quote from: Willie the Duck;1007400Well, I was unable to come down and visit/join/help/shake hands, but perhaps the next event. How did it go?

Understood, and thank you for the kind thoughts!

It actually went very well, I thought, and this was confirmed by several of the players. I just jumped in at the deep end and played the session like I always do, and it seemed to go very well. The players did have to make some perception and intelligence rolls, but this went fine as I just had them roll d20 for these. %d for other rolls as situations came up, and this also seemed to work fine. The players were very good, and thought before they did; the situation favored thinking tactically - they were being hired as mercenaries to impress some diplomats (i. e., scare the crap out of the visiting dignitaries) in the hope of preventing a war from breaking out. This they did, at least so far (we have a big feast to get through) and the people who might have been a problem weren't - they were just to impressed / terrified by the party, who are all first to third level in Blackmoor but who rate as Mighty Demons And Sorcerors hereabouts. There is a Druid who can shape-change, a High Elf, a Drow, and two Tieflings; everybody who saw them were utterly convinced that they were in the presence of Powerful Beings From Beyond Time And Space, and we didn't disabuse anyone of that notion.

The next game session will be on Sunday, December 3rd, at The Source and I'll be running the big feast then. I will be drawing up the floor plans for the feasting hall - I already have it all mapped out for the model I'm building - and will be bringing more figures; people seemed to like the idea of seeing the old place on the table, and meeting some of the folks that they met today. It was also, for the players, the first time that they'd seen 'open sandbox' / 'free Kriegspiel' being done on the table in an RPG, and it all seemed to go over well with them. I will admit that I was just s happy that the 'rules lawyer' from the previous session wasn't there; it was one of my big worries going into this session that I'd have to deal with him. The players did use the 5e rules and information to concoct their well-done plan, using their PCs' abilities and skills to accomplish their objectives.

Me, I'm just happy that it all went well; I'd been very worried about this ever since I agreed to do it, but it all went well.

And thank you, everyone who added to this thread, for all your help!!! I was going into this with no confidence whatsoever, and all of you gave me the hep and advice that I needed to make this happen. :)

Well that warms my heart.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;1007501Well that warms my heart.

I'm pleased that you're pleased! I had been very worried about this game; I've been having a pretty miserable time of it in gaming over the past few years, and this was the 'make-or-break' session. I think the next session will go a lot better, and a lot easier.

Quote from: chirine ba kal;1007867I'm pleased that you're pleased! I had been very worried about this game; I've been having a pretty miserable time of it in gaming over the past few years, and this was the 'make-or-break' session. I think the next session will go a lot better, and a lot easier.

And we're pleased that your session went well enough to keep you enthused.

Quote from: chirine ba kal;1007867I'm pleased that you're pleased!

And I'm pleased that you're pleased that he's pleased! :)

Beyond the mechanical stuff, how did the players do with the EPT setting oddities (names, customs, etc) that showed up in the session?

Very happy to hear that it went well for you, Uncle.

Quote from: chirine ba kal;1007439Understood, and thank you for the kind thoughts!

It actually went very well, I thought, and this was confirmed by several of the players. I just jumped in at the deep end and played the session like I always do, and it seemed to go very well. The players did have to make some perception and intelligence rolls, but this went fine as I just had them roll d20 for these. %d for other rolls as situations came up, and this also seemed to work fine. The players were very good, and thought before they did; the situation favored thinking tactically - they were being hired as mercenaries to impress some diplomats (i. e., scare the crap out of the visiting dignitaries) in the hope of preventing a war from breaking out. This they did, at least so far (we have a big feast to get through) and the people who might have been a problem weren't - they were just to impressed / terrified by the party, who are all first to third level in Blackmoor but who rate as Mighty Demons And Sorcerors hereabouts. There is a Druid who can shape-change, a High Elf, a Drow, and two Tieflings; everybody who saw them were utterly convinced that they were in the presence of Powerful Beings From Beyond Time And Space, and we didn't disabuse anyone of that notion.

The next game session will be on Sunday, December 3rd, at The Source and I'll be running the big feast then. I will be drawing up the floor plans for the feasting hall - I already have it all mapped out for the model I'm building - and will be bringing more figures; people seemed to like the idea of seeing the old place on the table, and meeting some of the folks that they met today. It was also, for the players, the first time that they'd seen 'open sandbox' / 'free Kriegspiel' being done on the table in an RPG, and it all seemed to go over well with them. I will admit that I was just s happy that the 'rules lawyer' from the previous session wasn't there; it was one of my big worries going into this session that I'd have to deal with him. The players did use the 5e rules and information to concoct their well-done plan, using their PCs' abilities and skills to accomplish their objectives.

Me, I'm just happy that it all went well; I'd been very worried about this ever since I agreed to do it, but it all went well.

And thank you, everyone who added to this thread, for all your help!!! I was going into this with no confidence whatsoever, and all of you gave me the hep and advice that I needed to make this happen. :)

Glad it went well, Uncle!

Quote from: Spinachcat;1007918And I'm pleased that you're pleased that he's pleased! :)

Beyond the mechanical stuff, how did the players do with the EPT setting oddities (names, customs, etc) that showed up in the session?

Well, from what I could tell they didn't have any trouble with them; the rolled with it, and had a good time. I did have some copies of EPT on the table, and these got consulted from time to time to fill in some details, but mostly they just went with the flow.

Quote from: chirine ba kal;1007986Well, from what I could tell they didn't have any trouble with them; the rolled with it, and had a good time. I did have some copies of EPT on the table, and these got consulted from time to time to fill in some details, but mostly they just went with the flow.

And did they keep looking at their character sheets for clues to how to solve the problems, or asking if they could roll persuasion checks to convince the guards, or whatever else we might have feared?

Quote from: Willie the Duck;1007993And did they keep looking at their character sheets for clues to how to solve the problems, or asking if they could roll persuasion checks to convince the guards, or whatever else we might have feared?

No, I am delighted to report. THey used their character sheets as inspiration, working out how to use their skills and talents as ways to solve the problems they faced. I was quite pleased, actually; not a bit of number-crunching in sight, as near as I could tell. The sheets were springboards, not straitjackets.

Quote from: chirine ba kal;1007999No, I am delighted to report. THey used their character sheets as inspiration, working out how to use their skills and talents as ways to solve the problems they faced. I was quite pleased, actually; not a bit of number-crunching in sight, as near as I could tell. The sheets were springboards, not straitjackets.

:D

I keep saying that rumors of a vast gulf between gamers of yore and of today are greatly exaggerated. It is nice to see evidence thereof.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;1008060I keep saying that rumors of a vast gulf between gamers of yore and of today are greatly exaggerated. It is nice to see evidence thereof.

People seem to react well when they are in familiar situations.
If things can be presented in ways that are not too strange, there is a higher comfort level for players.
=

Quote from: Willie the Duck;1008060:D

I keep saying that rumors of a vast gulf between gamers of yore and of today are greatly exaggerated. It is nice to see evidence thereof.

Agreed. What I've seen over the years, when I run games, is that players really seem to enjoy the way I run games; they handle the stats, and I run the action. It seems to work for them, and they like the freedom to act. Mayhem usually ensues, of course. :)

Quote from: Greentongue;1008061People seem to react well when they are in familiar situations.
If things can be presented in ways that are not too strange, there is a higher comfort level for players.
=

I don't know about the 'familiar situations' aspect of it, but I've found that running Tekumel is my usual style seems to ease people into the situations and setting pretty well with very minimal amounts of exposition needed. Maybe it's the way I drop them into the action, where they have to run with things as they find them - I dunno, as I'm too close to the thing to be able to tell...

Quote from: DavetheLost;1007232Thank you all for explaining feat chains. I know what feats are from my very brief brush with 3.x and d20 CoC but none of the mysteries of chains etc.

Feat Chains were one of the worst features of 3e D&D.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1008480Feat Chains were one of the worst features of 3e D&D.

I'm still trying to get my head around why wearing 'heavy armor' is a 'feat'. You buy it, you wear it, and you either can use it well or you get dead. To me, a 'feat' is Luke Skywalker swinging across a bottomless chasm on a bit of dental floss while hanging on to the Princess. Wearing armor is hours of drill and practice, and getting your butt kicked around the tiltyard by somebody better then you. Probably rhetorical question - do people still play that way, any more?

Quote from: chirine ba kal;1008508I'm still trying to get my head around why wearing 'heavy armor' is a 'feat'. You buy it, you wear it, and you either can use it well or you get dead. To me, a 'feat' is Luke Skywalker swinging across a bottomless chasm on a bit of dental floss while hanging on to the Princess. Wearing armor is hours of drill and practice, and getting your butt kicked around the tiltyard by somebody better then you. Probably rhetorical question - do people still play that way, any more?

It's the "use it well" part that's the feat, representing putting in the hours of drill and practice:). Swinging across the chasm would be something like Jumping, under those rules, though there's a feat that can give you bonuses to the skill roll.

And I agree with Pundit on that account. The whole edition that used the "feat chains" was a badly designed game to begin with, the feat chains weren't even among the worst issues;).

What you describe with getting to learn to use heavy armour or other skills by, you know, actually drilling the skill, is how Pendragon, Traveller and Runequest work, at least in my experience:D!

Quote from: chirine ba kal;1008508I'm still trying to get my head around why wearing 'heavy armor' is a 'feat'. You buy it, you wear it, and you either can use it well or you get dead. To me, a 'feat' is Luke Skywalker swinging across a bottomless chasm on a bit of dental floss while hanging on to the Princess. Wearing armor is hours of drill and practice, and getting your butt kicked around the tiltyard by somebody better then you. Probably rhetorical question - do people still play that way, any more?

The later editions of D&D incorporated "skill points," which supposedly represented slowly learning things, and "feats" which represented who the hell knows what.  Some sort of "goodie," I guess.  And somebody apparently decided that rather than saying "Magic users can't wear armor" they had this whole economy of how some "feats" and "skills" cost more if they were somehow "inappropriate" to your class.  And instead of saying "at this level you are experienced enough to wear plate armor well," they said "you have to buy the Heavy Armor feat which becomes available at this level."

And they still kept the damn level system.

Or so it seems to me.  The games just became muddled masses of rules, trying to be a level based system and a skill based system at the same time.

Quote from: chirine ba kal;1008508I'm still trying to get my head around why wearing 'heavy armor' is a 'feat'. You buy it, you wear it, and you either can use it well or you get dead. To me, a 'feat' is Luke Skywalker swinging across a bottomless chasm on a bit of dental floss while hanging on to the Princess. Wearing armor is hours of drill and practice, and getting your butt kicked around the tiltyard by somebody better then you. Probably rhetorical question - do people still play that way, any more?

In 5e think of it as "training" because in several cases thats what a 5e feat really is. Youve trained to be able to wear heavy armour and not suffer the problems. In 5e anyone can wear any armor (as long as it fits of course.) But if you dont have proficiency then you are at disadvantage on skill and ability checks and cant cast spells.

As a DM I tend to require the players to have been RPing their characters dithering around with whatever feat they are aiming for beforehand. Though so far most have opted for the stat points rather than gain a feat. They are optional and Im in two campaigns where they arent being used as level up options. But are potentially availible as training from NPCs. IF you can find one.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1008514The later editions of D&D incorporated "skill points," which supposedly represented slowly learning things, and "feats" which represented who the hell knows what.  Some sort of "goodie," I guess.  And somebody apparently decided that rather than saying "Magic users can't wear armor" they had this whole economy of how some "feats" and "skills" cost more if they were somehow "inappropriate" to your class.  And instead of saying "at this level you are experienced enough to wear plate armor well," they said "you have to buy the Heavy Armor feat which becomes available at this level."

And they still kept the damn level system.

Or so it seems to me.  The games just became muddled masses of rules, trying to be a level based system and a skill based system at the same time.

2e is where it really started. Before that there were more reasonable things like what youd get in AD&D or Oriental Adventures. But 2e really wanted to be a point and skill based system. To me it came across as a bit, ahem, pointless. But others seemed to like it. 3e ramped that up. It works better than 2e in a way. But at the same time felt lacking.

I like 5es approach overall other than calling the feats, er, feats. They work more like advanced skills and training.

Quote from: AsenRG;1008512It's the "use it well" part that's the feat, representing putting in the hours of drill and practice:). Swinging across the chasm would be something like Jumping, under those rules, though there's a feat that can give you bonuses to the skill roll.

And I agree with Pundit on that account. The whole edition that used the "feat chains" was a badly designed game to begin with, the feat chains weren't even among the worst issues;).

What you describe with getting to learn to use heavy armour or other skills by, you know, actually drilling the skill, is how Pendragon, Traveller and Runequest work, at least in my experience:D!

Oh, all right; this all makes sense.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1008514The later editions of D&D incorporated "skill points," which supposedly represented slowly learning things, and "feats" which represented who the hell knows what.  Some sort of "goodie," I guess.  And somebody apparently decided that rather than saying "Magic users can't wear armor" they had this whole economy of how some "feats" and "skills" cost more if they were somehow "inappropriate" to your class.  And instead of saying "at this level you are experienced enough to wear plate armor well," they said "you have to buy the Heavy Armor feat which becomes available at this level."

And they still kept the damn level system.

Or so it seems to me.  The games just became muddled masses of rules, trying to be a level based system and a skill based system at the same time.

Oh. Doesn't EPT have a skill- and level- system? I thought I remembered that Phil handled it pretty well, but it could just be my aged memory...

Quote from: Omega;1008522In 5e think of it as "training" because in several cases thats what a 5e feat really is. Youve trained to be able to wear heavy armour and not suffer the problems. In 5e anyone can wear any armor (as long as it fits of course.) But if you dont have proficiency then you are at disadvantage on skill and ability checks and cant cast spells.

As a DM I tend to require the players to have been RPing their characters dithering around with whatever feat they are aiming for beforehand. Though so far most have opted for the stat points rather than gain a feat. They are optional and Im in two campaigns where they arent being used as level up options. But are potentially availible as training from NPCs. IF you can find one.

Ah! Gotcha! This sounds just like the way I do it. Makes sense to me.

Quote from: Omega;10085232e is where it really started. Before that there were more reasonable things like what youd get in AD&D or Oriental Adventures. But 2e really wanted to be a point and skill based system. To me it came across as a bit, ahem, pointless. But others seemed to like it. 3e ramped that up. It works better than 2e in a way. But at the same time felt lacking.

I like 5es approach overall other than calling the feats, er, feats. They work more like advanced skills and training.

Oh. Oh, my. I can see what I missed out on, over the years...

I like class/level based games. I like skill based games. Trying to mix the two usually doesn't work out so well.
I also have come to prefer simpler, lighter rules. If the players and I can't roll some dice and agree on what happens without consulting six tables and charts scattered across three volumes of rules why are we playing a game together?

Who is your character? What are you trying to do? How are doing it? Answer these three questions and success or failure is usually pretty clear.

Quote from: chirine ba kal;1008526Oh. Doesn't EPT have a skill- and level- system? I thought I remembered that Phil handled it pretty well, but it could just be my aged memory...

Original EPT had some skills, yes.  But they were more background; you didn't roll a character, decide to be a fighter, and then have to buy (and keep buying) skills ranging from weapon use to whatever.

I don't remember Sore and Gory.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1008547Original EPT had some skills, yes.  But they were more background; you didn't roll a character, decide to be a fighter, and then have to buy (and keep buying) skills ranging from weapon use to whatever.

I don't remember Sore and Gory.

Adventures in Tekumel went skills only. If you wanted to cast spells you studied it during the school phase of chargen.

Nothing wrong with a skill based system; where D&D lept over the selachimorph was trying to use a skill system and a level system at the same time.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1008514The later editions of D&D incorporated "skill points," which supposedly represented slowly learning things, and "feats" which represented who the hell knows what.  Some sort of "goodie," I guess.  And somebody apparently decided that rather than saying "Magic users can't wear armor" they had this whole economy of how some "feats" and "skills" cost more if they were somehow "inappropriate" to your class.  And instead of saying "at this level you are experienced enough to wear plate armor well," they said "you have to buy the Heavy Armor feat which becomes available at this level."

And they still kept the damn level system.

Or so it seems to me.  The games just became muddled masses of rules, trying to be a level based system and a skill based system at the same time.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1008627Nothing wrong with a skill based system; where D&D lept over the selachimorph was trying to use a skill system and a level system at the same time.

I totally agree it wasn't a good solution. Admittedly, it might have worked, if it had gone completely skill-based and kept levels. Fates Worse Than Death RPG works exactly like that and it's fun, and Warhammer 1e was similar.
But keeping combat and magic as class-based, while adding a skill system that interacted with that, and then a feats system that interacted with both. Putting it mildly, that wasn't the best option.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1008627Nothing wrong with a skill based system; where D&D lept over the selachimorph was trying to use a skill system and a level system at the same time.

A level is just a package of abilities. An ability can be a skill or an increase in a skill.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1008514Or so it seems to me.  The games just became muddled masses of rules, trying to be a level based system and a skill based system at the same time.

It became a muddled mess because they released more two dozens source books of classes and feats and people expected them to just all work together. The core book only D&D 3.0 was elegant in its own way.

Was it perfect? No, high level combat of 9th level or beyond got bogged down at the number of things a character can do and or status effects spiraled way out of hand. D&D 5e solved that by toning down the choices and limited the ongoing status effect to one at a time per character.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1008514The games just became muddled masses of rules, trying to be a level based system and a skill based system at the same time.

And a card game. Having a given feat on your character sheet seems like having a given card in your hand in some version of a specialty card game.

When they referred to bonuses "stacking" rather than being "cumulative," the end was nigh.

Quote from: Bren;1008796And a card game. Having a given feat on your character sheet seems like having a given card in your hand in some version of a specialty card game.

Are you even surprised, given who owns WotC:D?

Quote from: AsenRG;1008810Are you even surprised, given who owns WotC:D?

I don't think the parent company is responsible. It's possible I'm incorrect in that thought, but WotC was a successful collectible card game company when it bought TSR, and with it D&D, in April 1997. It was a successful collectible card game company when it started work on what became 3E. And it was a successful collectible card game company when Hasbro decided to buy and eventually, in September 1999, succeeded in buying WotC. The successful collectible card game company part is a large part, quite possibly the main reason, why Hasbro decided to buy WotC. Card game company was in WotC's DNA so I don't think we need to attribute those sorts of mechanics appearing in the first WotC version of D&D in 2000 to decisions made by the parent company.