Quote from: rytrasmi on December 18, 2021, 12:17:51 PM

Quote from: jhkim on December 17, 2021, 11:26:07 PM

If someone's goal is to be properly called of "world traveller", then spending two years in India does that better.

If someone just wants to have fun, though, weekending at the resort in Cabo sounds awesome to me.

This obsession with "fun" is short sighted. People who put fun above all want instant gratification. A longer campaign is not full to the brim with fun.

I disagree. If you'd said something like a "fast pace" or "action packed", required by one-shots and shorter games because they just don't have time to do otherwise, you could be right. But by definition, the actual FUN of long-term campaigns is hugely more satisfying because you're creating something vastly more intensive as an experience.

Quote from: Mishihari on December 18, 2021, 10:48:24 PM

Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on December 18, 2021, 10:15:21 PM

Quote from: rytrasmi on December 18, 2021, 09:50:54 PMJenga though. Seriously that would be tedious.

It would be a tension system. Where a big event happens after a collapse. Not used exactly like a dice roll. It was a horror game so the tower collapsing is when the killer chops your head off.

Are you guys seriously not familiar with Dread?  I'm not sure how that's possible for folks who frequent RPG boards.

Given that Dread is a storygame and not an RPG, it's not surprising in the least.

Quote from: Aglondir on December 19, 2021, 01:03:07 AM

I passed on the SotDL. The setting seemed too dark, and the rules looked too heavy. While I'm not in the rules-lite camp, I don't want to go any heaver than Savage Worlds. But I did like the way SotDL handled modifiers (pool of D6s, select best.)

Any other selling points? Can you get around the darkness of the setting, or is that built-in?

I'm curious about the modularity as well.... maybe this needs its own thread.

I want my games to be just games and not feel like I'm attending an improv theater class in drama school. Maybe an increasing number of players are failed actors? In the past, you never heard of such people again, but today they are all over youtube.
I'd like to point out, however, that we did a lot of one-shots and short campaigns even back in the "good ol' days" of the 1980s.

Quote from: RPGPundit on December 19, 2021, 03:25:57 AM

Quote from: Mishihari on December 18, 2021, 10:48:24 PM

Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on December 18, 2021, 10:15:21 PM

Quote from: rytrasmi on December 18, 2021, 09:50:54 PMJenga though. Seriously that would be tedious.

It would be a tension system. Where a big event happens after a collapse. Not used exactly like a dice roll. It was a horror game so the tower collapsing is when the killer chops your head off.

Are you guys seriously not familiar with Dread?  I'm not sure how that's possible for folks who frequent RPG boards.

Given that Dread is a storygame and not an RPG, it's not surprising in the least.

It's been talked about on a lot of RPG boards, especially ENWorld,where I used to hang out before it went to hell.

And why do you call it a story game - serious question?  I've always considered the main difference between a story game and an RPG is that an RPG plays through a task resolution mechanic, whereas a story game lumps a whole bunch of tasks into a single resolution, sometimes even an entire encounter.  The jenga draw resolves only a single task, albeit in an unorthodox way.

Quote from: Rhymer88 on December 19, 2021, 04:06:52 AM
I want my games to be just games and not feel like I'm attending an improv theater class in drama school. Maybe an increasing number of players are failed actors? In the past, you never heard of such people again, but today they are all over youtube.
I'd like to point out, however, that we did a lot of one-shots and short campaigns even back in the "good ol' days" of the 1980s.

I'm going to disagree with that.  Even in the old days most of the games I was in could have been described as half game, half improv.  The "theater" part is home to most of the roleplaying and a lot of the fun in the game.  Without it, I might as well be playing a wargame.

Quote from: Rhymer88 on December 19, 2021, 04:06:52 AM
I want my games to be just games and not feel like I'm attending an improv theater class in drama school. Maybe an increasing number of players are failed actors? In the past, you never heard of such people again, but today they are all over youtube.
I'd like to point out, however, that we did a lot of one-shots and short campaigns even back in the "good ol' days" of the 1980s.

Can confirm. Am failed actor. One addendum: I'm the GM... so I guess I'm a failed director too 🥲😅

"Can confirm. Am failed actor. One addendum: I'm the GM... so I guess I'm a failed director too."

Hahaha, I like your reply.

Quote from: Aglondir on December 19, 2021, 01:03:07 AM

Quote from: HappyDaze on December 18, 2021, 05:14:02 PM
I prefer Shadow of the Demon Lord over pretty much any version of D&D. It should be noted that the game is set up for eleven-adventure campaigns (one adventure for each of levels 0-10), and that each adventure should last 1-3 sessions. Typically, the campaign should be complete in < 1 year...so if you're doing Pundit's "right way" with SotDL, you're doing it wrong! 

I passed on the SotDL. The setting seemed too dark, and the rules looked too heavy. While I'm not in the rules-lite camp, I don't want to go any heaver than Savage Worlds. But I did like the way SotDL handled modifiers (pool of D6s, select best.)

Any other selling points? Can you get around the darkness of the setting, or is that built-in?

It's a dark fantasy setting with a baseline of twisted faeries and horrific monsters, but you can adjust that dial quite a bit. The "Demon Lord's Shadow" (i.e., what doom the world is moving toward) is noted as being entirely optional.

Quote from: Hzilong on December 18, 2021, 08:52:47 PM
Cool, thanks. Since it is on sale right now, I was thinking of picking it up. Keeping this on the topic of the thread, I have to agree that something seems to be missing/ have gone awry with the direction of 5e. Maybe I'm just a grognard (even though I only started playing in the 3.5/pathfinder era), but 5e publications feel so much less characterful in any meaningful way. It might just be general system fatigue and the fact that we've hit the point in the dev cycle where mechanics and splat bloat are starting to accelerate.

It's the reason why I've been looking to branch out from 5e. Luckily, it looks like my preferred system, Savage Worlds, hasn't gone balls deep on politics yet. Too bad the people I play with prefer the unified d20 systems.

FWIW, SoTDL is pretty chock full of mechanics & splat bloat, so be warned.  The original core book is okay; I found it a bit more fiddly than I prefer for rules light games and it does get more complex as characters level up and pursue different career paths.  The author churns stuff out so you can't say it's not well-supported, but you can get into an endless cycle if you're a completist.  Not super fond of some of the creator's virtue signalling, but I didn't really see that much in the game itself.  And hey, if you want to play a clockwork, there's that.  I would put it as superior to Zweihander in the grimdark setting and the suggested campaign framework of 10-11 adventures was a selling point for me.  We never actually played it yet; but I've cribbed material from it for my Old School D&D games.

Quote from: RPGPundit on December 19, 2021, 03:18:55 AMIf someone has played tennis six times in their entire life, any sensible person would realize that this person does not have as developed an understanding of the experience and knowledge of tennis playing as someone who has played it every week for ten years.

But its imaginary tennis. A person who plays imaginary tennis with some people for 10 years might find those 10 years of experience worthless when entertaining a different group of people who play imaginary tennis a different way, even if they have only played six times. And instead of saying there are different strokes for different folks to insist that their flavor imaginary tennis is just the best, and if you dislike it, it must be because there is something wrong with you.
Its one thing if its a boardgame with hardcoded rules, but its another if its mostly freeform and the OSR crowd suggests using rules as a suggestion if at all.

But long running campaigns have different advantages/disadvantages over short ones.

Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on December 17, 2021, 05:37:05 PM
It really doesn't. I don't care if that bully from 6th grade home economics really did intend to disfigure your face, bringing him up again a decade later just makes you obsessed. .

A better analogy would have been saying when debating the merits of Marxism, anyone that keeps bringing up the failures of communist countries that they are 'obsessing'.

But that still doesn't work.. The reference is still relevant. Noting the failures of people who think that they know better is always relevant.

WotC is doing what it thinks is best for RPGs. They literally think that they know better, and are altering the game accordingly 'to make it more Diverse, Inclusive, and Equal'.

As we have seen in the past with the storygames movement - who thought that they 'can do it better' because they convinced themselves that GNS theory was the answer, and it failed. Because the larger hobby rejected their 'new man' storygame that was meant to give them the play experience that they really wanted out of their incoherent RPG's, but they just didn't know any better...

And now we have a new movement using CRT theory that has decided to 'save' RPG's in a different way, but one that interestingly still revolves around what kind of 'stories' are told at the gaming table... The goal is the same; to deliver to the hobby their 'new man' way of gaming.

In the long run I believe that the larger hobby will reject the WotC 'new man' RPG, just like the last time a bunch of pseudo-intellectuals thought that they knew 'a better way'.

Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on December 17, 2021, 05:37:05 PM
And their posable action collectors kits, not paintable modeling action figures!
Those filthy comic book readers are demanding the same level of clout as us: chad graphic novel thinkers! .

And you miss my point entirely in trying to score a rhetorical point of your own.

RPG's are not just playing 'Pretend': In that they have codified rules and expected modes of play.

People can have fun, and enjoy playing the game wrong. But it is like ignoring the die rolls in a game of monopoly and just putting yourself on the property you want because it is more fun. The players may be having an absolute blast 'playing' Monopoly this way. Still doesn't change the fact that they are playing the game wrong.

Quote from: RPGPundit on December 19, 2021, 03:18:55 AM
Wrong.  Something absolutely 100% objective and concrete is being discussed: playing a campaign of two years or longer versus never playing more than a half-dozen sessions of the same game.

This is the sticking point.

The fact that WotC is catering to the SJW six-session 'gamer'.

They are mistaking a subset of vocal D&D twitter "players" as being representative of the larger D&D RPG fanbase. Which they are not.

I think that WotC has been drawing the wrong conclusions from their survey's and twitter reactions for quite a while now. And it will come back to bite them in the long run.

Quote from: Jaeger on December 19, 2021, 05:15:54 PMA better analogy would have been saying when debating the merits of Marxism, anyone that keeps bringing up the failures of communist countries that they are 'obsessing'.

This keeps on getting more up its own ass. The next time a storygame deposes a country, bring it up. Otherwise this reminds me of Moviebob saying that the console wars was his version of vietnam.
Storygamers have a good time being stuck up storygamers and saying anybody that didn't play their way has brain damage. And OSR'ers have a good time being stuck up OSR'ers and saying anybody that didn't play their way is like following a genocidal philosophy.

The truth is most peoples taste is shit. WOTCs marketting strategy is on focusing on most people. Ergo shit product. And its the most popular one ever. And now they are throwing in some SJW shit once market reach has been established.

But your not focusing on WOTC, and instead your focusing on the bully from 6th ed and saying he is a totes genocidal marxist.

Edit: In my terms: I love animation and I think the Lion King remake is an aberration. Awful, AWFUL garbage on every level. But If you don't have a soul, It makes sense to release it as a product if you just want to make money. Don't put your faith in the mass market consumer, they will only dissapoint.

Quote from: Jaeger on December 19, 2021, 05:15:54 PMIn that they have codified rules and expected modes of play.

But this isn't monopoly. Its an inherently flexible game system, and the OSR crowd in general has been supporting the 'minimalistic rules as suggestion' model. They tend to just get upset if those rules favor the player and not the GM. I favor a GM model as well, but Im not so stuck up as to say its the 'right' way to play.

Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on December 19, 2021, 05:54:37 PM
But your not focusing on WOTC, and instead your focusing on the bully from 6th ed and saying he is a totes genocidal marxist.

The only one that keeps mentioning bullies is you. Also, analogies are not meant to be taken literally...

I simply referenced the last time in the RPG hobby someone thought they new best, and how it turned out.

The Storygamers bullied no one. They just promoted an incorrect model of play that has ultimately proved a commercial failure.

Which has a direct correlation to what WotC is doing now.

WotC's underlying reasoning is different, but their goal is the same: To make a 'better' gaming experience.

And I believe that it will also fail for very similar reasons.

Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on December 19, 2021, 05:54:37 PM
But this isn't monopoly. Its an inherently flexible game system,...

Nobody here is questioning anyone's fun.

But the amount of fun someone is having has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that even silly elf-games can be played wrong.

Even heavily house ruled RPG's still share codified rules and expected modes of play.

This is not that hard of a concept to grasp.

Quote from: Jaeger on December 19, 2021, 07:45:18 PMThe Storygamers bullied no one. They just promoted an incorrect model of play that has ultimately proved a commercial failure.

To streamline my opinions: I think your belief that 5e was successful because it came with design elements that appealed to the old-guard is misplaced and self-serving. Its design focus was on nostalgia and 'Feeling' like D&D over any coherent mechanical focus. Because if you examined its mechanics it has more 4e DNA in it then there is 1-2e.

The general rule is that things only appeal to masses by being dumbed down and crap. I find 5e sloppy, dumbed down and crap, and I see its success as evidence of that strategy paying off.

The Star Trek reboots made more money then the originals. Trekkies thought 'Oh I guess this means there is a rising interest in Star Trek, maybe this will cause more classic star trek', when the reality was that there was interest in the nostalgic idea of star trek as a candy wrapper over the same old shit. And it caused more streamlined rebooted same old shit.

I don't think this will cause a loss in sales because the demographic that wants to pretend to roll some dice while having the barebones of a system while they pall around and have the gm flub the results for the best story is significantly larger then people that want a properly curated experience.

The mass of grey goo that wants a "whatever" experience is much larger then the OSR, storygame, or any other community. And WOTC is marketting to them, which as a general rule makes more money. The grey mass also doesn't want to be lectured, but are also less likely to make a fuss, so expect some mild resistance to SJW trash but not a ton.