If you strip out the crap stuff from the game, all you're left with is the setting material - which you can get from multiple other sources. It's a bit hilarious that if you have a risk averse gaming group, you're basically going to be grinding the whole time, while if you have people willing to make trade-offs, you're kinda playing something else with a nod to rpgs.

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;940112GURPS makes playing Conan feel like you are playing GURPS still, rather than playing Conan.

Um, I suppose, though playing GURPS Conan has been the only time I ever felt like playing Conan at all, so...
Actually the type of play involved (in GURPS Conan) _is_ one that I like, which is to think about what the real-world stats for something really powerful, strong, skilled, super-heroic etc. would be, and then to game the rest of the universe realistically, to see what that's like. Including the likelihood that you still need to face real risks and consequences, not just have crap work because of story expectations.

What I've read about Modiphius 2d20, FATE, etc all sounds like something I'd hate and prefer were called something other than an RPG.

Quote from: Skarg;940768.

What I've read about Modiphius 2d20, FATE, etc all sounds like something I'd hate and prefer were called something other than an RPG.

Well that's a load off my mind then.

Just think, all that time I've spent worrying whether or not you think an rpg I play should be called something else.

If you're going for hardcore mundane (in the sense of grounded and non cinematic, not dull or ordinary) Conan, GURPS seems like a good choice.

Quote from: Nexus;940770If you're going for hardcore mundane (in the sense of grounded and non cinematic, not dull or ordinary) Conan, GURPS seems like a good choice.

Mechanically I think The Dark Eye 5e might work out just fine, but you'd have to import all of the setting materials from elsewhere and rebuild the culture packages to fit Conan.

Of course, we are criticizing a system for a game that isn't published yet.

Nothing I have seen about the Modiphius Conan (YET) looks good to me, but maybe the published books will be more palatable.

Quote from: Spinachcat;940783Of course, we are criticizing a system for a game that isn't published yet.

Nothing I have seen about the Modiphius Conan (YET) looks good to me, but maybe the published books will be more palatable.

The criticism is mostly for the game system--2d20--that Modiphius only makes minor tweaks to adapt to everything they put out. I haven't looked at the Conan stuff, but I do own (and have tried twice to play) their MC3 game, so I feel I can be critical of 2d20.

Quote from: Spinachcat;940783Of course, we are criticizing a system for a game that isn't published yet.

Yes, we have.  It's what's powering Mutant Chronicles 3e.  Unless they're rewriting the entire system since the quickstart, which is based off the MC3 game...  I think we have criticized the right system.

Quote from: CRKrueger;940725Asen actually makes a decent point.  You look in Howard's stories, it's NOT Full.Lovecraft.  Yes, there's the Outer Void and Gulfs Unknown to Man filled with Demons and Things Unimaginable.  But there's also the more immediate conflict of gods.  Crom might not care, but Mitra and Set kinda do, and they don't like each other much.

Mythras has Luck points, not Fate points.

That is actually in Lovecrafts stuff too. The old gods are active AND arent co-operating much. But they are now somewhat more subtle and long term in their plots and plans. Generational corruption. Dagon with Innsmouth as one example, or Yog-Sothoth and Dunwitch, Shub-Nigguraths modern cults and so on. All are indifferent to the human race. But even worms can be put to use.

Much the same in Conan. Except these beings are more hands on and out in the open with their followers. Even Crom. Since he actively gives men courage and strength at birth and then leaves them to their own devices sink or swim. But thats still taking a very hands on approach. Its just that it tends to be often a case of "Here. Have some stuff. Use it well cause thats it." and others are "The first hits free..."

So, without using Doom points, what kind of actions is the GM allowed to perform?

Quote from: 3rik;940865So, without using Doom points, what kind of actions is the GM allowed to perform?

At a guess. Probably not much since these sort of "economy" storytelling games have a tendency to shuffle the hard hitting stuff into the GM store for purchase. Otherwise whats the point in having this economy system if the GM can still hammer the PCs without it?

Quote from: 3rik;940865So, without using Doom points, what kind of actions is the GM allowed to perform?

Without doom points, a GM will be able to have his NPC's perform normal, proactive actions (ie, move and attack), but not defend themselves. But only after the players are done with theirs, courtesy of the popcorn initiative. By removing the buy-in economy, it stands to reason that player characters won't be able to defend themselves either by buying defensive actions, nor buy dice to counter difficulties. The GM can't activate spells or special powers of NPCs and monsters, and he can't arbitrarily decide to break a player character's leg (something that has a set cost of 4 baddie points according to MC3). Things like accidents, traps, earthquakes, Newton's laws and the like would be stuff that only happen in fairytales told around a campfire.
A simple initiative-system can relatively easily be cobbled in if you so desire. Changing the turn-structure into something that makes a modicum of sense is also doable. If you're really industrious you can make a power point or pr/day-system for special powers, and retool the way difficulty-challenges work to play a 2d20-game without the badpoints-pool.
But it would be less work to just play something else instead.

Quote from: AaronBrown99;940769Well that's a load off my mind then.

Just think, all that time I've spent worrying whether or not you think an rpg I play should be called something else.

The point being, that especially after David Johansen explained the basic combat system to me on Spike's MC rant thread, it seems to me that it's just a very different game type and having a descriptive word for it might convert arguments about how terrible an RPG it is, to simply saying it's another type of game. Narrative and story game apply, but the abstract fate/momentum/shared-success/doom/"dark synergy" system isn't necessarily just narrative per se - is there already a conventional term for that other than OOC/metagame/GMnerf?

Quote from: Skarg;940886- is there already a conventional term for that other than OOC/metagame/GMnerf?

Yes.  It's called RPG.

You guys wanting more qualifiers for what you guys think is RPG is a YOU problem it has nothing to do with RPG.

Quote from: Sommerjon;940898Yes.  It's called RPG.

You guys wanting more qualifiers for what you guys think is RPG is a YOU problem it has nothing to do with RPG.

You really love being wrong dont you?