Minor game stuff from around the web for commentary...

[mean_liar]

My personal preference was always just upping the power on non-casters with prestige classes. Campaigns were structured to go with base classes (and base class options/alternates) for levels 1-5, a custom prestige class from 6-15, and a capstone custom prestige class from 16-20... though my campaigns ended at best at 15. It was easier than fucking with spellcasting.

Offhand, a few ideas would be that maximum spell level of an equivalent straight caster is the maximum level of the multiclass, with spells per day as per the standard DnD multiclass (other than 0th level spells): a 1st level caster gets 1 spell (+stats) at max level and 3 0th level spells, so a Fighter 9/Wizard 1 gets 1 spell (+stats) at max level of a 10th level Wizard (max 5th)... but then you'd get into issues where spellcasters would probably jump out of spellcasting after getting, say, 8 levels or so because no spellcaster ever runs through their complement of spells at mid+ levels. All they'd want to do is cast from the top-end of their spell lists perhaps 10-12 times a day, and that's for sure a problem because coming up with a reason for them to use low level spells would invariably power them over their current power level, and that's also a problem.

Perhaps some kind of hybrid where max spell level is capped, or there's a way for martial classes to swift cast non-swift spells... or martial-qualifying prestige classes that hand out accelerated spellcasting.

I'm sure this topic has been discussed on this board before but I have no idea where.

[animea90]

John Wick autofellates as a general rule, but that quote is a bit out of context.

In a roleplaying game, game balance does not matter.

What matters is spotlight. Making sure each player feels their character had a significant role in the story. They had their moment in the spotlight. Or, they helped someone else have their significant moment in the spotlight.

He's saying that game balance doesn't matter, but then goes on in the very next sentence to say that it does if your primary metric of balance is his idea of the "best" metric: spotlight.

What he's saying - poorly - is that spotlight matters, but numbers don't. Now, that's dumb, because beating the shit out of things is awesome and central to the vast majority of popular heroic fantasy and therefore you do want in-combat balance and numbers suddenly become important because combat is a bigass spotlight and it needs to be shared. I'd say that what he appears to really be saying is that he doesn't like combat.

You can really see that in the games he creates, where combat is a throwaway minigame largely devoid of meaningful choice other than the number of dice you throw. Blood and Honor is about samurai tragedy and duels in that game are resolved by tossing a shitload of dice at each other. His idea of COOL COMBAT is to include a bunch of mechanically inefficient/suboptimal swordsmanship schools to eat up your XP that are less useful than having a story-derived reputation as "badass swordsman", so it's no wonder that he thinks combat is dumb.

Players aren't always good at determining their true damage and true combat effectiveness. Its possible to make a weak character feel stronger.

Classic example: Pathfinder rogues. Many people swear up and down they have great damage because they get to roll fistfulls of dice each attack thanks to sneak attacks.

If you run the numbers, the damage is awful though.

[Longes]

3e multiclassing and prestige classes are awesome; the multiclassing could've been better (spellcasting fuckery, really)

I see this a lot; and I can't say I disagree with the sentiment.
The question I have is: how do you fix it within a 3.x-type paradigm?
I'm sure this has been talked to death; and I'm not interested in the rehashing the whole thing - the bumper sticker answer will suffice.
I've toyed with the idea of working in something resembling how ToB handles Initiator Level. Yes/no?

I personally like the way Pathfinder handles it:
-Classes have features and bonuses from level 1 up to level 20. In the perfect world they also don't have any dead levels.
-There is a big but finite number of classes, to cover various power sources and combinations: from pure warriors and wizards, to various gishes.
-Classes have a number of archetypes, that allow you to fine-tune the class to your liking, but can't be mixed. This prevents authors from accidentally writing stupidly powerful bullshit.

In this model multiclassing should not exist, because Fighter/Wizard is already a thing - we call it Magus.

[Lago PARANOIA]

There isn't a way to fix it. 3E multiclassing is one of those things that sound fucking awesome (trillions and trillions of ways to play a D&D character!) and even works okay for about 5-6 levels. But it's inherently broken.

If you absolutely had to work in the 3E paradigm, probably the best scheme I've seen is Pathfinder's. Archetypes + Classplosions will give you the parts people liked about open multiclassing. Then you can quietly depreciate prestige classes and more-or-less accept people taking the occasional one-level dip. If you're feeling really ambitious you can staple a modified version of 4E D&D's themes, paragon pathing, and epic destinies on top of that.

[deaddmwalking]

Short answer based on ass-pull only.

At 6th level, allow everyone to 'gestalt' into a prestige class. Thus, they continue to gain all their normal class abilities on schedule (such as bonus feats for Fighters or Sneak Attack for Rogue). This ensures that they can choose a Prestige Class that doesn't replicate their existing functions and lets them broaden their power scope.

If spells day/level are increasing because of the base class then casters don't even need a 'full caster' prestige class - again, it would duplicate an effect they're already receiving so it won't benefit them at all. If you have too many issues with cleric/wizard combinations, you could restrict the 'gestalt' option to the lower-tier classes.

[Longes]

Paranoia is being rebooted

[Chamomile]

There's no need to update Paranoia to worrying about "terrorists." For starters, terrorist paranoia is already a joke to significant chunks of the population, so no, you are not standing up to the power the way you would have been if you released this product ten years ago. Second, commies and mutants serve as perfectly effective stand-ins for any kind of bogeyman used to control a population through fear of the enemy. The fact that they aren't actually a relevant enemy anymore is actually a feature, it allows them to serve as stand-ins for Eastasia or Eurasia or whichever enemy Big Brother wants us to be afraid of this week.

[Longes]

There's no need to update Paranoia to worrying about "terrorists." For starters, terrorist paranoia is already a joke to significant chunks of the population, so no, you are not standing up to the power the way you would have been if you released this product ten years ago. Second, commies and mutants serve as perfectly effective stand-ins for any kind of bogeyman used to control a population through fear of the enemy. The fact that they aren't actually a relevant enemy anymore is actually a feature, it allows them to serve as stand-ins for Eastasia or Eurasia or whichever enemy Big Brother wants us to be afraid of this week.

I think the bigger problem is that modern RPGs are not in the same state the RPGs were in the 80s. Paranoia was a parody of random fuck-you in chargen, killer-MCing and hidden fuck-you homerules. This is not as relevant now as it was back then. What are they going to parody? 4E? OSR clones? 20th anniversary reboots?

[Username17]

The cold war ended in 1991. People who weren't even born when the Soviet Union collapsed are old enough to drink and have graduated from college. "Commies" doesn't fucking mean anything to people in the age demographic to start playing RPGs. I mean, I remember cold war red bating hysteria, but that is because I'm old. People ten years younger than me don't remember it. And there are people starting RPG groups at their high schools right now who are twenty years younger than me.

If you want to pitch Paranoia to anyone who was born after the election of Bill Clinton, you need to throw around things that the media has actually been freaking out about in their living memories. Which means not "commies," "nips," "krauts," or "the Spanish." It has to be immigrants or terrorists, or preferably both.

Paranoia is a very 80s game and it satirizes 80s fears. The original game is thirty fucking years old, and there are different panics being thrown around. Communists, satanists, and heavy metal music just aren't the things that people use to whip up moral panic anymore. The children have to be protected from an entirely new set of imaginary threats, which means that if you want to market the game to the youth of today, you need to make fun of different things.

-Username17

[hyzmarca]

Islam, a religion founded by the Prophet Muhammad Ali. Its adherents, called Muslims, float like butterflies and sting like bees. They are the greatest threat to Alpha Complex, so says Friend Computer.

[rasmuswagner]

If you want to pitch Paranoia to anyone who was born after the election of Bill Clinton, you need to throw around things that the media has actually been freaking out about in their living memories. Which means not "commies," "nips," "krauts," or "the Spanish." It has to be immigrants or terrorists, or preferably both.

Paranoia is a very 80s game and it satirizes 80s fears.

Terrorists and Immigrants sounds good. There's no statute of limitations on Illegal Immigration, and the rules are subject to change. As in, "please document your great-grandfathers place of residence from 1810-1814. Please include credit card statements."

Terrorists are less funny than communists, though.

The Computer obviously has to go. I would suggest the corporation instead, and the ever-present Policies that benefit us all. Most of us actually trust the computer now, and the face of arbitrary authority is the glassy-eyed human drone quoting policy (or committee decisions), or, even worse, the genuinely sympathetic human being, who is too afraid of Policy to actually help you.

[Sakuya Izayoi]

Computers are still scary, but scary in a different way than the fictional computer of 30 years ago like AM and Skynet. Nowadays, computers gauge employee efficiency in a ruthless manner, approve people for adjustable rate mortgages without the collateral to back them, and handle logistics for international entities like Amazon. The evil computer of 2014's future is very real, but it kills with kindness. Free guns for the wrong people, mishaps while driving your car for you, and firing half of the nation when you figure out that crops shouldn't be watered with Gatorade.

[Dogbert]

This is not as relevant now as it was back then. What are they going to parody? 4E? OSR clones? 20th anniversary reboots?

More like d&d 5E.

You don't need to delve too deep in the web to see how all neckbeards are coming out from under their rocks to claim "victory" and "righteous vindication."

Remember, the Bad Old Days are back, so bringing Paranoia back is just appropriate.

[Dogbert]

Speaking of Paranoia, I need three examples of parodic, institutionalized GM dickery iconic to Paranoia. Anyone?

[Chamomile]

You have some really weird misconceptions about people my age, Frank. Yes, we were technically born after the collapse of the Soviet Union, but it's not like we were born into some bizarre YA dystopia where the gimmick is that all culture produced before your birth is carefully cleansed from your life to prevent contamination by previous generations or something. Soviet Paranoia does not speak to us the way it does the teenagers/college kids of 1984, but here's the rub: Neither does terrorist paranoia. If you wanted to make a Paranoia game that spoke to the current high school/college generation, you'd set up a hated enemy (commies, terrorists, whatever, the specific label seriously doesn't matter, people will still grok the idea) that the government is constantly telling you to be terrified of and then make it an open secret amongst the actual populace that the threat posed by this enemy is mostly or completely non-existent. But you're still required to play along with the government's never-ending cavalcade of media panics, tying every single problem back to these terrorists, even though only a minority of the population believes them for even half a second.

As I mentioned before, terrorist paranoia being taken seriously would've been a great pitch in 2004, but 2004 is over. Terrorist threat would've been a great thing to include in Paranoia XP, and honestly they basically did, because the difference between a communist fifth column and terrorist saboteurs pretty much doesn't exist and you don't have to make your point with a sledgehammer. The Crucible critiqued the Red Scare without once mentioning anything outside of the Salem Witch Trials, and while it is true that this was a necessary precaution to avoid being victimized by the Red Scare, it's not like it failed as a criticism. Turns out that if you've seen one witch hunt, you've pretty much seen 'em all, and the same goes for phantom threat paranoia.

The only people who take terrorist paranoia seriously are Republicans, who are mostly older and have relatively little interaction with people who will actually be playing a new edition of Paranoia. People jumping onto the bandwagon of terrorism being a joke threat now when the argument is pretty much over and pretending they're irreverent revolutionaries pushing the envelope is just annoying.

[name_here]

Speaking of Paranoia, I need three examples of parodic, institutionalized GM dickery iconic to Paranoia. Anyone?

Change the rules at their discretion, kill the characters of anyone who complains for knowing information above their clearance, and give people grenades with classified blast radii and orders to field-test them.

[Stubbazubba]

People jumping onto the bandwagon of terrorism being a joke threat now when the argument is pretty much over and pretending they're irreverent revolutionaries pushing the envelope is just annoying.

QFT. No one in the rising gaming demographic is seriously concerned about terrorism. The paranoia you want to parody for that demographic is the fear of corporations. Particularly as they collude with the national security apparatus to give rise to the corporate-police state.

[Dogbert]

Change the rules at their discretion, kill the characters of anyone who complains for knowing information above their clearance, and give people grenades with classified blast radii and orders to field-test them.

Thanks!

[OgreBattle]

and give people grenades with classified blast radii and orders to field-test them.

How about a grenade that hits everyone behind cover, but is harmless to those in the blast.

[Guyr Adamantine]

A grenade that blows the very moment you remove the pin.

[Longes]

Speaking of Paranoia, I need three examples of parodic, institutionalized GM dickery iconic to Paranoia. Anyone?

Here's Kikoskia and friends playing Paranoia. Admittedly, Kiko is a reasonable GM outside of Paranoia, and everyone seems to know what to expect from the game. Still, shit like this happens:
-A piano is falling at you
-I use my telekinesis to stop it!
-You are pressed into the ground and die

[Chamomile]

No one in the rising gaming demographic is seriously concerned about terrorism. The paranoia you want to parody for that demographic is the fear of corporations. Particularly as they collude with the national security apparatus to give rise to the corporate-police state.

I don't think you understand the role Soviet paranoia plays in Paranoia. It's a fake threat used by the government to keep people in line. What you're suggesting is that in modern Paranoia, the government should use fear of it becoming a police state to distract people from the fact that it's becoming a police state. Which...Actually sounds like exactly the kind of inanity Friend Computer would get up to, but I don't think that was your intention.

On the role of Friend Computer in Alpha Complex: I think shifting Friend Computer to being less the glorious leader itself and more the personification of the omnipresent surveillance supporting the bureaucracy is a good idea. The Ultraviolet cabals were always the ones really in charge of the Complex because they could reprogram the Computer, but officially making Friend Computer subservient to them is a good move for modern Paranoia. A single all-powerful dictator isn't really the fear anymore, but rather a vast and sociopathic bureaucracy that cannot be effectively fought without pulling all of society inside out. Every dead Ultraviolet is just a power vacuum to be replaced by someone who, due to the incentives of the system they work in, must ultimately end up behaving in essentially exactly the same way as their predecessor. To do enough damage to that system to cause real change would be to do enough damage to cause a total collapse of society, and there just isn't nearly enough people willing to fight the power to do that. Everyone knows that the Ultraviolets are corrupt and basically evil, and a large subsection of people even understand the systemic reasons for it on a basic level, but forming some kind of revolution carries a high risk of being part of a movement that fizzles and then you're executed for nothing and plus it requires getting off the couch and doing something when you could just liquidate your savings for more happy pills to drown your sorrows instead.

[Longes]

Not from the web, from the AD&D's "The Complete Bard's Handbook"

Gypsy ways are strange to others and poorly understood by most. They do not recognize the existence of private property. (KEEEEEEENDER!)

Only a fellow Gypsy truly understands the Gypsy way of life. Others wrongly classify Gypsies as thieves, beggars, carnival people, nomads, or any number of other erroneous names. If a label must be used, the most accurate is "free-men."
...
Weapon Proficiencies: Gypsy-bards must take either dagger or knife, and their first sword (if any is ever taken) must be either the khopesh or scimitar
...
Both male and female Gypsy-bards love to wear gaudy jewelry.
...
Special Hindrances: A Gypsy-bard's climb walls ability works best when climbing trees. They are not skilled at climbing cliffs, building walls, or cave walls; they suffer a 25% penalty when scaling these surfaces.

【•】_【•】

[hyzmarca]

but it's not like we were born into some bizarre YA dystopia where the gimmick is that all culture produced before your birth is carefully cleansed from your life to prevent contamination by previous generations or something.

Is this actual series?

*steals YA novel idea*

[fectin]

A surprisingly thoughtful piece from the infamous Benoist:
https://www.facebook.com/notes/10152734249038421/


The thread which pointed me to that post also contained this, which I present without further comment:

Wick is one of those people who think drow are "problematic" and Benoist once told me he felt ok about not fact-checking what he says when he attacks people because the truth always comes out on the internet.

This means neither of them can ever say anything meaningful ever.