TheRPGSite

Im dropping out of gaming for a couple of month from MY group. Ive capitalised MY as I do genuinely feel its my group.

Im leaving it in the hands of some good friends (10+years of gaming) and they plan on running Paranoia - great, Cyberpunk 2.0.2.0. - great, Nobilis - eh?

Ive got the game, Ive got Amber so I know what the whole diceless lark is about.

Im just wondering if anyone has actually read the book, or attempted to run it or play it. Just curious as to whether this game might actually ruin the group permanently before I return :-)

I've read the book, done character gen, and played.  It's a great read.  I own the book and it's beautiful. It's too ethereal to use.  Everything is too up in the air, and there isn't even really a solid narrative type to the whole thing.  No default game, if you know what I mean.  D&D has the dungeon crawl, Vampire has endless political backbiting, Shadowrun has endless runs with endless backstabbing Johnsons and Nobilis has.. well I haven't been able to figure it out yet.  Had a lot of fun making up the realms with my fellow players though.

I've read it.  Its a stupid system which the author attempts to mask with absurd amounts of byzantine paragraphs of flowery but utterly vapid writing.

RPGPundit

Why should it ruin the group?

I've read it and am working on something for it. The language is a tad precious at times and I don't really like the layout of the book.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: counterspin;292845Everything is too up in the air, and there isn't even really a solid narrative type to the whole thing.  No default game, if you know what I mean.  D&D has the dungeon crawl, Vampire has endless political backbiting, Shadowrun has endless runs with endless backstabbing Johnsons and Nobilis has.. well I haven't been able to figure it out yet.

In that sense, Nobilis has defending the Domains: the archetypal "core story" in the game is the Breakthrough, with the PCs being alerted to investigate something malicious from beyond the boundaries of reality assaulting the aspects of the universe entrusted into the characters' care. Think Whispering Vault or Sapphire & Steel. Seriously, that's one complaint which never made any sense to me, since Nobility comes with distinct duties and responsibilities, and the PCs have been granted their powers for a purpose, not just so that they could lead a fantasy life of idle luxury. It's as though people never read Chapter 6, "What Do Nobilis Do?"

(Also, you can have the dungeon crawls by venturing into hostile Chancels or Excrucian strongholds or the depths of alien worlds, and political backbiting is a natural part of the supposedly genteel "game of flowers" of rivalry among Nobles, and dealing with Cammoran middlemen can easily end up with you stabbed in the back with an Abhorrent Weapon since the greedy bastards have connections.)

Anyway, I currently run it twice a month just like I do with the Finnish sword-and-sorcery RPG Praedor, and we are in the middle of my third campaign ever, "Entropy Will Get You In the End." I've also GMed an occasional one-shot and shorter story for miscellaneous folks: actually, "Entropy" was originally meant to be one of those too, but we then decided to expand the set-up and keep it going.

I have read it and run it, 2 short campaigns (12 sessions each, more or less). I definitely think is a good and interesting game, but I also can see how the prose can make it difficult for many persons.

The core story and what you can do is really well explained through the book. And no, Lawbag, I don't think the game is ruining anything. :) Either they will like it or they won't.

Grimgent : Those are all great, but when I've tried to play it never actually works.  I'm not sure why.  I like pretty much every aspect of the game, but post creation it never clicks.

I read it cover to cover, then went back and tried to re-read the system rules, then read a bunch of threads on rpgnet in which Borgstrom and crew sounded very helpful.

Despite all this preparation my one attempt to run the game fell flat.  Part of the problem was me, part of it was the game group, but part of the problem was also the game.  I feel like Nobilis tries to hard to be great and not enough effort is spent on being good.  Maybe that makes no sense, but that's how I feel.

On the other hand, my buddy Stuart has been in a failry successful campaign of it that he describes as a rocking good time.  But he'd probably be the first to admit that he likes his games more highbrow than I do.

Will it ruin your group?  Probably not, but it might be remembered as one of those off-kilter games you struggle through for a session or two before giving up on.

Quote from: RPGPundit;292850I've read it.  Its a stupid system which the author attempts to mask with absurd amounts of byzantine paragraphs of flowery but utterly vapid writing.

RPGPundit

Ive read every word of your vitrol and agree with it. Hats off for having read it cover to cover.

From what Ive read it came across as a godly version of In Nomine, but without limits or restrictions.

Sorry, but any game that names the GM as Hollyhock God deserves all the wedgies the world has to give.

Quote from: Lawbag;292970From what Ive read it came across as a godly version of In Nomine, but without limits or restrictions.

That's absurd, you know. A Nobilis character without limits or restrictions is going to be disadvantaged in comparison with just about everyone else: you practically need those Handicaps in order to regain miracle points during play. And speaking of MPs, having only five of those per attribute, by default, doesn't exactly let anyone pull off level 6+ miracles on a regular basis. (And that's only the mechanical side of things. Setting-wise, the society of the Nobilis imposes limits all of its own, not least because of Lord Entropy's legislation.)

Read it and did a play by post with it. It's one of my favorites.

Seanchai

Quote from: counterspin;292946Grimgent : Those are all great, but when I've tried to play it never actually works.  I'm not sure why.  I like pretty much every aspect of the game, but post creation it never clicks.

Hmm. In practice, the Domains and the Bonds of the PCs should act as built-in story hooks, no matter how passive the players themselves might be; and of course, nothing stops the GM from simply sending in an Excrucian with an Abhorrent Weapon, or from having the Imperator send the Familia out on a traditional fetch quest if everything else just grinds down to a halt... Not to mention that almost any even slightly ambitious endeavour of a more personal sort may bring them into conflict with other Nobles. What sort of characters did you have in your game and what did they actually do with their time?

I understand these mixed reviews, nobilis is glaringly not for everyone.
Its an extremely different way of thinking alone, much less a very different RPG once youve gotten around the mind stretching concept.

But thats exactly what makes it appeal to that minority of gamers who want fewer restrictions, to suspend belief for awhile and be loosed from the restraints of reality.

Ill requote someone i heard on a forum, 'Every game shouldn't be like Nobilis, but there should always be a Nobilis' or something like that.

I read it--or attempted to.  Found it impenetrable in parts, and the writing flowery to the point of incomprehension at times.  

But I believe there's several AP threads at Big Purple that talk about Nob games.

For diceless, I'll stick with Amber.

The writing is needlessly unclear. The system on the other hand, is simple and has no big problems; but you have to find the mechanical bits through a long and arduous process.
I think the main issue with the game is the lack of meaningful restrictions on the use of powers. Not in the sense of miracle points (which are a serviceable limiter for how often you use your powers) but in the myriad ways that an aspect can be interpreted, producing a game which seems to exist to make people argue about what they can do with their aspects. Needless to say, we did not get a functioning game out of it.
I think the game gives you some things to do with your characters well enough: protect your chancel, fight Excrucians, etc. My group just wanted to kill Lord Entropy right off, though; not sure what that means (I wanted him dead too).

Quote from: The Worid;322006The writing is needlessly unclear. The system on the other hand, is simple and has no big problems; but you have to find the mechanical bits through a long and arduous process.

Very true. Rebecca Borgstrom is appallingly bad at arranging and explaining rules. The Weapons of the Gods campaign I was in was a somewhat painful process for precisely this reason.

QuoteI think the main issue with the game is the lack of meaningful restrictions on the use of powers. Not in the sense of miracle points (which are a serviceable limiter for how often you use your powers) but in the myriad ways that an aspect can be interpreted, producing a game which seems to exist to make people argue about what they can do with their aspects. Needless to say, we did not get a functioning game out of it.

This is also familiar from Weapons of the Gods; much time was spent trying to figure out what you could and couldn't do with the various martial arts and occult techniques.

QuoteI think the game gives you some things to do with your characters well enough: protect your chancel, fight Excrucians, etc. My group just wanted to kill Lord Entropy right off, though; not sure what that means (I wanted him dead too).

Lord Entropy doesn't sit right with me either, I think for two reasons:

- He's in the way. He rules the "real" world - as in Earth as it exists without the interference of the Gods - and doesn't like people spooking the locals. At least the entity the PCs directly serve is a creature designed collaboratively by the party itself, so the players can at least feel a sense of ownership over their boss - even if their overlord forbids them to do something, that's only happening because the players specifically chose not to design an overlord who lets them get away with crap. Lord Entropy, on the other hand, is imposed on the setting by Borgstrom and seems to exist for no other purpose other than to prevent PCs from kicking over the mundane world and dancing in the wreckage. And frankly, if I'm running a game where the PCs are basically Gods I couldn't give a toss whether they wreck the mundane world or warp it into something unrecognisable, and would be mildly disappointed if they didn't.

- The idiotic "Gods aren't allowed to love" rule. What the hell? Is this something he only enforces in the mundane world - in which case it seems supremely irrelevant since all the Gods have their very own treehouse dimensions that they can spend most of their time in - or is it something he enforces everywhere? If the latter, why the blue blazing fuck does everyone let him get away with it? The rule seems to exists purely to provoke angst, and players who want angst are perfectly capable of, say, having angelic PCs fall in love with demons or whatever by themselves without Lord Entropy saying "No, you're not even allowed to date people within your own faction".

Quote from: Warthur;322008The idiotic "Gods aren't allowed to love" rule.

The Windflower Law doesn't apply to gods: none of the Code Fidelitatis does. But then again, the PCs aren't gods, unlike Entropy.

As for why it's part of the setting, from the design perspective that's simple enough: as a law which everyone breaks sooner or later, it's intended to foster conflict, no matter who the characters are. "Thou Shalt Not Love Another" is an unreasonable demand made by the tyrant on the throne of the world. So what are you going to do about it?

Quote from: GrimGent;322009The Windflower Law doesn't apply to gods: none of the Code Fidelitatis does. But then again, the PCs aren't gods, unlike Entropy.

Demigods, Nobles, whatever. I don't especially care for the terminology Nobilis uses; I'm also not thrilled with the fact that it lives in denial of being a game where the PCs basically get to be gods. But there you go.

That said, this does raise another point about the Code: where the FUCK does Entropy get off telling other people's Nobles what to do? Why do they stand for it? What could they possibly hope to gain by letting him stake off an area of creation as being Masquerade territory? Why do they let him enforce it inside the chancels?

Quote from: Warthur;322012That said, this does raise another point about the Code: where the FUCK does Entropy get off telling other people's Nobles what to do? Why do they stand for it?

The Imperators support Entropy's regime partly because he's the prophesied messiah who may yet redeem himself in the final battle, and partly because, well, he is exceedingly good at what he does. You have a better arrangement in mind? Convince both Heaven and Hell that they should trust your cunning plan more than Entropy's expertise.

Also, in the history of the setting, the reason why the Code Fidelitatis was originally imposed on the Noble society is that they did nearly wreck the world. When the Council of Four took over Earth a thousand years ago, Nobles at the time were fighting each other openly for power and glory, neglecting the true purpose why they exist in the first place. Entropy eventually put an end to that by cutting them away from mortal rulership and setting up the Cammorans as the go-betweens for the mundane and supernatural worlds. That was the beginning of the Code, and as they say, this is why we can't have nice things.

Nobilis is an interesting setting and premise wedded to an extremely uninteresting and flavourless diceless system. I never had any problem deciphering it or the rules, I just found the resolution mechanic to be boring.

LB,
  For me, Nobilis was a mixed bag. the writing was a little cryptic for me. I got most of it, but it seemed like too much work for me. Maybe that was because I was in a crunch, I joined a game late and had like 1 day to read the book.
  The setting felt like a minefield to me. It really got in the way of chargen. Someone else mentions this, but I want to reinforce this. Starting characters don't have a very well defined purpose. If your GM is not proactive, you could end up with 3 players playing 3 different games. The setup for a political game is pretty well done. The setup for a war against the Excrucians is solid. And there seems to enough details, etc. to just do a sandbox of the world of Nobilis. So, if the GM is not proactive or isn't communicating the game he is playing well enough, you could end up with a lame character pretty easily.

  The rules are pretty good. There needs to be some expectation setting established by the GM, but once that is out of the way, it seemed pretty effective. I think that this rule set in the hands of a bag GM, would make a bad situation even worse though. But in a group where most everyone is on the same page, it would be a lot of fun. I got to play two sessions of it and it was better than I expected after the bad writing and weird probing to find out what the game was about.
  I wouldn't recommend it to every player, but if someone like Exalted, but didn't like the crunch, this might be the perfect game. When I read it, I kept thinking this is the Exalted Borgstrom wanted from the very beginning...

Quote from: dindenver;322034Starting characters don't have a very well defined purpose.

Well, except for the basic duties of a Noble: serve the Imperator, guard the Estate, and assist the Familia. But it's true that there's nothing even remotely like classes or races, no ready-made splats of any sort, in Nobilis. Instead, the players are supposed to bring their own concepts to the table and personally put together the kind of characters that they wish to play. Granted, that can lead to clashing expectations unless everyone involved discusses the planned set-up and playstyle in advance, but then that's true with any game, and by default the chargen process is something that the entire group handles together anyway. After all, it's the players who create the godlike being which the PCs serve and the pocket reality where they rule, not the GM.

Quote from: GrimGent;322013Also, in the history of the setting, the reason why the Code Fidelitatis was originally imposed on the Noble society is that they did nearly wreck the world. When the Council of Four took over Earth a thousand years ago, Nobles at the time were fighting each other openly for power and glory, neglecting the true purpose why they exist in the first place. Entropy eventually put an end to that by cutting them away from mortal rulership and setting up the Cammorans as the go-betweens for the mundane and supernatural worlds. That was the beginning of the Code, and as they say, this is why we can't have nice things.

It sounds like Borgstrom wanted PCs to behave in a very particular way, and came up with the Code and its history after the fact to justify it.

Also, fuck NPCs who are the Chosen Ones who are meant to fix the setting. If you're playing anything nearly as hyperpowered as Nobilis then any one of the PCs could fit the bill perfectly fine.

Quote from: Warthur;322051Also, fuck NPCs who are the Chosen Ones who are meant to fix the setting. If you're playing anything nearly as hyperpowered as Nobilis then any one of the PCs could fit the bill perfectly fine.

Oh, Entropy isn't going to fix the setting. He can't, really, since anything he touches will be corrupted beyond hope of healing, and the whole purpose of his existence seems to be to end the world when the proper time comes. But if the prophecy is to be believed, he will be the lynch-pin in the salvation of the universe at the end of the Great War.

Of course, not everyone believes in the prophecy. But again, if you are going to move against Entropy, you'll have to deal with those who do. It's quite possible to overthrow his reign, but it won't be easy. Where would the challenge be if it was?

QuoteWell, except for the basic duties of a Noble: serve the Imperator, guard the Estate, and assist the Familia. But it's true that there's nothing even remotely like classes or races, no ready-made splats of any sort, in Nobilis. Instead, the players are supposed to bring their own concepts to the table and personally put together the kind of characters that they wish to play. Granted, that can lead to clashing expectations unless everyone involved discusses the planned set-up and playstyle in advance, but then that's true with any game, and by default the chargen process is something that the entire group handles together anyway. After all, it's the players who create the godlike being which the PCs serve and the pocket reality where they rule, not the GM.

GG,
  Well, I wasn't looking for classes. But I mean if the campaign is about battling the Excrucians, you will make a different character than if the campaign is about the politics of rival Chancels, no? I mean, I guess it doesn't have to be, but in my mind, it was something that made it hard. Especially because the HHG kept saying that the game would be about whatever we wanted (which of course is useless for making a coherent group of characters).
  I'd play it again, but I wouldn't recommend it to every single player I know. Mostly because it seems like it is geared for a very specific play style.

I ran it a wee bit. I liked it.

Seanchai

Has anyone worked out why the GM is called the Hollyhock God?
Has it anything to do with the original 1st Edition cover?

Quote from: Lawbag;322066Has anyone worked out why the GM is called the Hollyhock God?

That's actually explained in the four-page summary chapter. The hollyhock is the symbol of ambition and vanity in the language of the flowers, and so it suits someone who aspires to rule the game world.

Quote from: dindenver;322060But I mean if the campaign is about battling the Excrucians, you will make a different character than if the campaign is about the politics of rival Chancels, no?

Perhaps so, but in all likelihood you'll end up going against Excrucians in any case, since sooner or later you can expect them to assault the concepts entrusted to your care. That's the most probable reason why your character was ever granted Nobility: he's there to stop the attempted Excruciation of his Estates, in case the enemy manages to invade past the front line held by the Imperators. All Nobles serve as the last line of defence against the extinction of existence itself. That's the one responsibility which they must never forget. Noblesse oblige.

Thanks GG.
  I have never had it explained to me like that before. And I was not able to pick that up in the text (again, I was rushed).
  The way the powers worked fascinated me. I wish I could have played in that campaign more so I could pick up some of the intricacies of the mechanics...

Quote from: GrimGent;322059Oh, Entropy isn't going to fix the setting. He can't, really, since anything he touches will be corrupted beyond hope of healing, and the whole purpose of his existence seems to be to end the world when the proper time comes. But if the prophecy is to be believed, he will be the lynch-pin in the salvation of the universe at the end of the Great War.

Of course, not everyone believes in the prophecy. But again, if you are going to move against Entropy, you'll have to deal with those who do. It's quite possible to overthrow his reign, but it won't be easy. Where would the challenge be if it was?

You're talking a lot about the IC view of things but my major problem remains in the OOC view of things - to wit, that Lord Entropy is a blunt instrument NPC written into the setting to enforce a particular pattern of behaviour on the part of PCs. That's extraordinarily clumsy and ham-fisted of Borgstrom; it's the sort of thing utter newbie GMs do when they want to railroad the players.

Quote from: Warthur;322103You're talking a lot about the IC view of things but my major problem remains in the OOC view of things - to wit, that Lord Entropy is a blunt instrument NPC written into the setting to enforce a particular pattern of behaviour on the part of PCs.

As said, it all comes down to built-in conflict. In that respect, Entropy's presence is no different from the fact that the PCs by their very existence are going to be targeted by the Excrucians no matter which Estates the players choose for themselves, or that mechanically any person or possession that they care about is treated solely as a weapon that can and will be used against them. By making the tyranny so prevalent and the demands on the Nobles so unreasonable, Borgstrom was pushing the PCs to react against being forced into conformity, in a clash between duty and external pressure versus nature and internal motivation. The universe isn't fair, but you always get a choice on how to deal with that, and the consequences of your actions drive the game.

Entropy's legislation does help to justify why the modern-day setting at least superficially resembles our own Earth despite all the supernatural interference (and before the Code Fidelitatis the world really wasn't much like the history books claim), but he's also far from invincible, especially if the players find a way to remove his support structure of Imperial backing and global conspiracy. Overthrowing his rule is even listed as one of the sample "personal projects" which might interest the PCs. Of course, then the characters would have to prove that whatever solution they propose instead is superior to Old Bloody's methods, or the Imperators will remove them.

It's a challenge worthy of demigods. And as Borgstrom said years ago, "I hereby go on record saying that it's okay for Nobilis to develop enough oomph to beat up Lord Entropy, Lucifer, Harumaph, or Cneph. Caveat: I recommend this more for the conclusion of a campaign than for a random encounter."