Quote from: StormBringer;225749Ok, well, reducing any game to just the numbers makes it incredibly boring.  There is a reason games are not just 'roll a die, get higher than your opponent'.

By the numbers, a high level kobold may not be much different than a demon.  Except, there are expectations that go along with the labels 'demon' and 'kobold'.  These may very well be different from table to table, but the expectations on their behaviour is what makes it a role-playing game.

As I explained, those things are actually unconnected. It's very easy to see this by playing a game like HeroQuest or Risus. In these games you have no refuge but your imagination.

I don't get the point about behaviour. Surely that's a function of how it's played.

Quote from: estar;225585When you take your formally general purpose RPG and focus on a single sub genre. Some fans are going to get irritated and look for alternatives.

Except it's the start play as non-heroes that's the subgenre. I think it's definitely a good option, but definitely not the default.

Seanchai

Quote from: RandallS;225584Various types of humans were listed in the Monsters sections of early editions of D&D. Plain old "non-leveled" men had 1d6 hit points in OD&D, the same as any first level character. They could wear armor and use weapons just like first level characters, but had a 5% less chance to hit. I'm most familiar with OD&D men at the moment (as I'm working on Microlite74), but as I recall, 0-level humans in B/X D&D was also 1 hit dice. In AD&D, it was less, but still could be as high as 4 hit points (as I recall) -- the same as the maximum hit point for a first level magic-user and only one-half the maximum hit points for a first level fighter.

If they do have that many hit points, I'll concede more ground. But I could have sworn the common man had 1 hit point. I'll try to remember to look at the books later tonight.  

Quote from: RandallS;225584RPG rules are supposed to be my servant, not my boss.

But I'd bet you took previous editions of D&D and made them your own. I mean, it's not as some AD&D's rules ever saw any use...

Seanchai

Quote from: Seanchai;226049Except it's the start play as non-heroes that's the subgenre. I think it's definitely a good option, but definitely not the default.

Every different style of play is a subgenre of the fantasy roleplaying genre -- it does not matter how popular or unpopular the style is. For example, playing with battlemats and minis and playing with abstract combat are both subgenres. They were both subgenres back when the rules favored abstract combat and they are still both subgenres today when the rules favor battlemats and minis.

QuoteBut I'd bet you took previous editions of D&D and made them your own. I mean, it's not as some AD&D's rules ever saw any use...

Of course, I did. However, we are talking about a few pages of house rules for AD&D. Doing my campaigns in 3E would have required about twice as many pages. To get 4E to work the way I need it to for my campaigns would require completely rewriting most of the core game systems -- and that's far too much work.

Quote from: RandallS;226064Every different style of play is a subgenre of the fantasy roleplaying genre -- it does not matter how popular or unpopular the style is.

Then I don't see how D&D was ever general purpose.

But, really, I disagree. Because I think the majority of people play D&D the same way - thus that's the main D&D genre. In other for there to be subgenres, you have to have a main genre.

Quote from: RandallS;226064However, we are talking about a few pages of house rules for AD&D. Doing my campaigns in 3E would have required about twice as many pages. To get 4E to work the way I need it to for my campaigns would require completely rewriting most of the core game systems -- and that's far too much work.

Fair enough. But the point is you had the same relationship then as now: You want something the rules wasn't providing, so you changed the rules. If having to changes the rules now makes you subservient to the rules, then you were subservient to them then.

Seanchai

Quote from: droog;225965As I explained, those things are actually unconnected. It's very easy to see this by playing a game like HeroQuest or Risus. In these games you have no refuge but your imagination.

I don't get the point about behaviour. Surely that's a function of how it's played.

Hmmm...  What is the common ground HeroQuest and Risus share with D&D?  Risus doesn't make use of numbers as extensively, so how shall we make a comparison?  Risus rejects most of the 'game' part of a role-playing game, to the point of merely directing a story with the dice deciding the direction at a plot point.

HeroQuest, and even Advanced HeroQuest, appear to eschew the 'role-playing' half of role-playing games.  They are not much beyond a more complicated version of Clue.  Of course, the common response is that one can always role-play, but that is hardly the point.  Aside from the rather fiddly looking combat, how does that compare to D&D?

The two games you mentioned seem to have little to do with intermixing role-playing and rules-playing.  They both lack in one aspect or the other so as to prevent the crosstalk between mechanics and description.

Quote from: StormBringer;226216The two games you mentioned seem to have little to do with intermixing role-playing and rules-playing.  They both lack in one aspect or the other so as to prevent the crosstalk between mechanics and description.

I was actually talking about HeroQuest by Issaries Inc. It's similar to Risus.

The point is that in those two games it's very obvious that the numbers are essentially arbitrary. Extrapolating, we can see that all you really need is a flexible framework. The basic ingredient is imagination.

The original point to which I was responding was that it makes no sense for numbers on challenges simply to be inflated. My response is that this is effectively what you are doing anyway. Seeing as how, according to people who actually have the book etc, you can in D&D4e have mightier kobolds (which are going to play differently by definition) OR demons, I can't see what the fuss is. A more horrible Slime? What's wrong with that? Can't you imagine the possibility?

Oh more horrible slime! I slip upon thee!

Quote from: droog;226258I was actually talking about HeroQuest by Issaries Inc. It's similar to Risus.

The point is that in those two games it's very obvious that the numbers are essentially arbitrary. Extrapolating, we can see that all you really need is a flexible framework. The basic ingredient is imagination.

Why is it important that the numbers be arbitrary?  I mean, numbers in and of themselves can be seen as arbitrary.  If all you need is a flexible framework, then you are writing a collaborative story, not playing a game.  There is a vast difference between what Risus intends to do, and what D&D intends to do.  It can be reasonably argued whether or not either of them achieves their goal, but I can't imagine a coherent argument that they are both aiming for the same goal.

QuoteThe original point to which I was responding was that it makes no sense for numbers on challenges simply to be inflated. My response is that this is effectively what you are doing anyway. Seeing as how, according to people who actually have the book etc, you can in D&D4e have mightier kobolds (which are going to play differently by definition) OR demons, I can't see what the fuss is. A more horrible Slime? What's wrong with that? Can't you imagine the possibility?

I can see plenty of reasons for challenge ratings to increase.  Primarily for the purpose of advancing in a class and level based system.  I wouldn't predict a lot of popularity for an MMORPG where the players don't advance in levels and skills.

More importantly, the numbers help define what is and what isn't likely at any given time.  While a fortress may very well be defended by DC 35 traps, those are not permanently insurmountable.  Without the numbers in place, every trap or challenge becomes the same check against some more or less static character stat.  Of course, following the advice to slide the DCs based on character level is no better.  I don't think the needs of the story are so overwhelming that the party should be facing a level appropriate challenge no matter what.

If the needs of the story are so paramount, it would probably be best to just write the story, and leave the rules behind.  Granted, it can spice things up a bit, if there are a few random events, but that hardly needs any kind of codification.  A rather simple table should take care of those needs.

Quote from: RPGPundit;225326A party of 1st level characters walking into a dungeon will encounter 1st level slippery dungeon moss; and a party of 30th level characters walking into a dungeon will encounter 30th level slippery dungeon moss; for no reason that makes sense within the setting.

How would you describe such a thing if a band of 1st level heroes bumped into a band of 27th level heroes and both had to get across said patch of moss? Would the moss fluctuate under the feet of anyone it deemed powerful? Same cave. Same patch of moss.

Honest question.

Is this how the rules really are? Or is it internet hearsay? I have the books, but I haven't been inspired to read them past the first day I had them.

-=Grim=-

Quote from: StormBringer;226283There is a vast difference between what Risus intends to do, and what D&D intends to do.  It can be reasonably argued whether or not either of them achieves their goal, but I can't imagine a coherent argument that they are both aiming for the same goal.

There are two things happening. One is the imaginative content. That can certainly be influenced by the system, but it is actually independent of it.

The second thing is the dice (resolution) game. That may be enjoyable of itself or it may be designed to slip into the background. It influences the fiction but is not the whole of it.

QuoteMore importantly, the numbers help define what is and what isn't likely at any given time.  While a fortress may very well be defended by DC 35 traps, those are not permanently insurmountable.  Without the numbers in place, every trap or challenge becomes the same check against some more or less static character stat.  Of course, following the advice to slide the DCs based on character level is no better.  I don't think the needs of the story are so overwhelming that the party should be facing a level appropriate challenge no matter what.

If the needs of the story are so paramount, it would probably be best to just write the story, and leave the rules behind.  Granted, it can spice things up a bit, if there are a few random events, but that hardly needs any kind of codification.  A rather simple table should take care of those needs.

It's my understanding that one can set those levels in the new D&D or use monsters of higher level when one wants to increase the challenge. That says nothing about shifting the DCs on an already-detailed castle. It's an aide to setting those DCs in the first place. Ultimately, in this sort of game, the GM sets them where the hell he feels like it.

It's pretty obvious to me how the mechanic is meant to be used. I can't understand this stuff about 'story'. Generally speaking, in any standard RPG, the challenges keep pace, roughly, with chr development. When has it ever been different? And what's it got to do with 'story'? It's got far more to do with the standard cycle of XP and challenge.

Quote from: droog;226480It's pretty obvious to me how the mechanic is meant to be used. I can't understand this stuff about 'story'. Generally speaking, in any standard RPG, the challenges keep pace, roughly, with chr development. When has it ever been different? And what's it got to do with 'story'? It's got far more to do with the standard cycle of XP and challenge.

Importantly, the challenges increase because the higher level characters are seeking out more difficult tasks.  It's not that the trap scales with their level because that is an appropriate challenge for the characters.  It's that the characters are more able to survive a trap of that level when they run across it.

Quote from: GrimJesta;226476How would you describe such a thing if a band of 1st level heroes bumped into a band of 27th level heroes and both had to get across said patch of moss? Would the moss fluctuate under the feet of anyone it deemed powerful? Same cave. Same patch of moss.
 
Honest question.
 
Is this how the rules really are? Or is it internet hearsay? I have the books, but I haven't been inspired to read them past the first day I had them.
 
-=Grim=-

That's why we're talking about slippery slime -- because it's the example that James Wyatt used (and new member worrapol cited).
 
My take on it is that cave slime is instanced... Wyatt says that the GM sets the DC level (singular) of the slime based on the level of the characters (plural).

Quote from: Malleus Arianorum;226566My take on it is that cave slime is instanced... Wyatt says that the GM sets the DC level (singular) of the slime based on the level of the characters (plural).

Okay, that makes more sense. So it'd still be the same DC for everyone in the room, not some magically altering number based on whomever is crossing it at that moment. If it's set to 20 for the 1st level dudes, it'd be 20 for the 19th level dudes? I can swallow that easier, like a hooker on her second day. Mmm, skanks.

What's the DC for avoiding herpes anyway?

-=Grim=-

Quote from: GrimJesta;226596Okay, that makes more sense. So it'd still be the same DC for everyone in the room, not some magically altering number based on whomever is crossing it at that moment. If it's set to 20 for the 1st level dudes, it'd be 20 for the 19th level dudes? I can swallow that easier, like a hooker on her second day. Mmm, skanks.

What's the DC for avoiding herpes anyway?

-=Grim=-

DC35,000,000

At any rate, the real implication was that the particular cave slime didn't have a DC for crossing it until the characters encountered it, then it was a DC that was appropriately challenging.  In the barest terms, that means it would be DC15 or so at 5th level, but DC 40 at 25th level (just to throw some numbers out there).

In other words, it was a sliding scale dependent on when the characters encountered it.  Implying that the same cave slime would have a different DC if the characters were to go back at a later level.  The cave slime isn't part of the physical world the in which the characters adventure, it's a challenge based on the needs of the story at the moment.

Some prefer this, others don't.  There is a kernel of good adventure design in there, but taken to the logical extremee implied by the article, you end up with a more or less generic ~50% of success at any level for any 'challenge'.  Similarly, it makes the description rather pointless.  It can be DC 40 cave slime, troll droppings, loose rock or tangle vines.  Additionally, it makes consistency harder to establish.  Certainly, there can be varying degrees of cave slime frictionlessness, but for the most part, keeping that to a certain number then adding other penalties makes for a consistent experience for the players.  Cave slime covered in troll droppings, for example, should be harder to cross that either of them alone.  If you simply put a 'difficult terrain DC40' in some area, the players won't know if it is easy to cross after gaining 10 levels, like DC15 cave slime, or if it was impossible to cross earlier, but may be reasonable to try now, like DC25 troll droppings.

Rather than

P1: "Should we try to cross it?  It was a pain in the ass when we were in the Caves of Desolation"
P2: "Yeah, that was a long time/ten levels ago.  We can make it easy."
DM: "You notice there are also extensive troll droppings on the rocks, making them appear more treacherous."
P2: "Yikes!  This might be trickier than I thought, troll droppings will up the DC by quite a bit"

You get:

P1: "Should we try to cross it?  It was a pain in the ass when we were in the Caves of Desolation"
P2: "I dunno, what's the DC?"
or
P2: "Yeah, we got about a 50% chance, same as the Caves of Desolation 10 levels ago"

In the first case, a consistent DC doesn't prevent meta-game discussion or planning, and in fact, isn't really intended to.  But it can keep it more to the background, as the players would probably know the DC of cave slime at least, if not troll droppings.  They wouldn't need to check with the DM for a DC necessarily, and should be able to estimate the odds of making it across safely and base decisions on that.

In the second case, the only way to really navigate the hazard is by meta-game planning.  It can be masked, of course, but in the end, they players have a good idea that the DM will be setting level appropriate challeges before them.  So, no matter what kind of hazard they face, they will have somewhere in the 45-55% range to overcome it, no matter what level they are.  "Always fighting orcs" as someone put it.

It has the veneer of making the narrative more important, but even that is undercut by having roughly the same chance of suceeding at any level.  If you have even odds to kick down a simple wooden door at 1st level, and even odds to kick down the adamantium bound soulsteel magical demon-gate at 30th level, what has really been accomplished, aside from increasing the numbers?