Page 1 of 4
Good Games?
Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 1:33 pm
by ghost whistler
Since you lot seem critical of most every rpg system ever, what aren't shitty systems and what can we learn from them? Anything?
Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 3:27 pm
by ghost whistler
31 people without an opinion?
Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 3:58 pm
by icyshadowlord
Let people give their opinion at their own leisure.
Fishing for responses isn't exactly seen as being very polite.
Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 4:01 pm
by Zaranthan
The den doesn't block web crawlers, all those hits could've been Google scanning the page.
Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 4:15 pm
by SlyJohnny
There's been a thread on this topic before, hasn't there?
I mean I can't be assed to search for it, but I vaguely remember.
Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 4:15 pm
by ghost whistler
SlyJohnny wrote:There's been a thread on this topic before, hasn't there?
I mean I can't be assed to search for it, but I vaguely remember.
I've no idea. If someone can link it i'll take a look.
Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 4:17 pm
by deaddmwalking
There's been a lot of discussion of good games and elements of good games on the den over the years. I've learned a lot by reading through the threads.
But it's not exactly reasonable to demand that people provide you a dissertation on why some games are 'good' and what makes them 'good'.
What the Den has been pretty adept at is defining the objectives of a game and considering whether it succeeded or failed in that regard. A game could still be bad even if it achieves its objectives, but good and bad are definitely subjective.
In general, people on this board are fairly pro-3.x. The main reason is that it has a reasonably robust resolution mechanic that empowers players. The Den, in general, is pretty intolerant of vague mechanics that allow the GM to choose any option they want, regardless of the input or success/failure of the players.
Of course, there are a lot of people on the Den, and there is no such thing as complete agreement.
Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 4:46 pm
by ghost whistler
I never play DnD, least of all 3rd ed. What is so great about that system?
Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 4:48 pm
by erik
This topic/thread has come up more than a couple times before- not surprising given how old was bored is. Unfortunately, I can't be assed to look it up right now since I'm using my phone and on a short lunch break. I think the most recent was titled "what do you play" or something like that.
Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 4:53 pm
by Pixels
SlyJohnny wrote:There's been a thread on this topic before, hasn't there?
I mean I can't be assed to search for it, but I vaguely remember.
This?
Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 4:58 pm
by Josh_Kablack
icyshadowlord wrote:Fishing for responses isn't exactly seen as being very polite.
When the fuck has the Den ever given half a shit about politeness, you barrelsucker?
My honest opinion is that ghost_whistler is a grade-a-gobslotch; the sort of willful ignoramus whose impertinence earned him a slot on my ignore list a long time ago. That he can't be fucked to use search or browse old threads is expected, and his continued references to the rest of the 'den with veiled hostility such as "you people" at times when he pretends to want honest feedback barely ever crosses my moron-o-meter.
Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 5:01 pm
by SlyJohnny
That's the one I was thinking of.
Pixels, you are the hero this board needs, but not the one it actually deserves.
Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 6:10 pm
by icyshadowlord
@Josh
Yeah, polite might have been the wrong word. I would have gone with intellectual, but that seemed a bit out of place too.
Edit: I also haven't run into this guy before. Then again, I haven't been around for a good while either way.
Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 6:21 pm
by OgreBattle
icyshadowlord wrote:
Yeah, polite might have been the wrong word. I would have gone with intellectual, but that seemed a bit out of place too.
We all hate people not on this forum more than we hate each other.
Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 6:23 pm
by erik
Yeah, I have ghost on ignore but cannot remember why. I'll leave him in the box and just click to read though since I trust past-erik's judgment.
Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 7:57 pm
by Grek
Almost certainly for the L5R LCG thread, in which ghost whistler:
Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 8:02 pm
by Grek
As far as actual good rulesets go, I've been extensively enjoying the Spheres of Power system for Pathfinder. Pathfinder is like a minefield of shitty rules, but SoP is a refreshing ray of sunlight shining down on the cow patties.
Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2016 2:32 am
by spongeknight
From what I recall The Extraordinary Adventures of Baron Munchausen- commonly called Munchausen for short- is the best designed rules-light system. It's literally just a prompt for telling a story with mechanical interaction from the other players. If you want a narrative RPG, that's your bag.
Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2016 3:22 am
by brized
deaddmwalking wrote:In general, people on this board are fairly pro-3.x. The main reason is that it has a reasonably robust resolution mechanic that empowers players. The Den, in general, is pretty intolerant of vague mechanics that allow the GM to choose any option they want, regardless of the input or success/failure of the players.
Aaaand ghost whistler goes on ignore.
Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2016 6:52 am
by phlapjackage
Is deaddmwalking going to continue his holy crusade? Or was silva the only worthwhile opponent for him? I can't wait to find out!
Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2016 9:37 am
by ghost whistler
What about the Fate system? Is that any good?
Can dice pool systems work?
Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2016 9:41 am
by ghost whistler
brized wrote:deaddmwalking wrote:In general, people on this board are fairly pro-3.x. The main reason is that it has a reasonably robust resolution mechanic that empowers players. The Den, in general, is pretty intolerant of vague mechanics that allow the GM to choose any option they want, regardless of the input or success/failure of the players.
Aaaand ghost whistler goes on ignore.
Well that's your loss.
You've misunderstood my point: i don't dislike DnD at all, i just never play it because i don't run it and neither does anyone else. I've never played 3e and so I don't know how it works.
No need to assume the worst.
Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2016 1:19 pm
by deaddmwalking
Brized was pointing out that I already explained 'what was so great about that system'. Specifically, I said 'it has a reasonably robust mechanic that empowers players'.
But your question seems like an invitation to a worthless time sink of a debate. While not everyone on this board is pro-3.x, the majority are. If you want to learn about why these posters find it 'so great', you could try it, or at least review the rules. They're mostly available for free online via the System Resource Document (SRD).
What about the Fate System? Did you try it? Did you like it?
Dice pool systems can work. Dice pools allow characters to stay on the same number range, but the probabilities can become very difficult to calculate. For example, if you say that every 5+ is a success on a d6, we know you have a 33.3% chance of succeeding if you have 1 die. But what about 6 dice? What if you need 3 successes? They are in some ways more difficult for a designer, and they can also be somewhat difficult at the table - especially if the number of dice in a pool becomes excessive.
D&D doesn't use Dice Pool systems.
Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2016 1:32 pm
by ghost whistler
deaddmwalking wrote:Brized was pointing out that I already explained 'what was so great about that system'. Specifically, I said 'it has a reasonably robust mechanic that empowers players'.
But your question seems like an invitation to a worthless time sink of a debate. While not everyone on this board is pro-3.x, the majority are. If you want to learn about why these posters find it 'so great', you could try it, or at least review the rules. They're mostly available for free online via the System Resource Document (SRD).
What about the Fate System? Did you try it? Did you like it?
Dice pool systems can work. Dice pools allow characters to stay on the same number range, but the probabilities can become very difficult to calculate. For example, if you say that every 5+ is a success on a d6, we know you have a 33.3% chance of succeeding if you have 1 die. But what about 6 dice? What if you need 3 successes? They are in some ways more difficult for a designer, and they can also be somewhat difficult at the table - especially if the number of dice in a pool becomes excessive.
D&D doesn't use Dice Pool systems.
I have never tried Fate. Is it any good with or without the weird dice?
If other people like 3e they can tell me, that's the whole point of this thread. I'm not sure what you are trying to achieve telling me this discussion is a waste of time.
Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2016 2:01 pm
by deaddmwalking
I'm telling you this discussion is a waste of time because you haven't explained why you're asking. If I like talking about 3.x, perhaps I can write you a book, but will you even read it? Are you considering playing 3.x? Are you looking for design elements for a game that you're building?
If you don't explain what you hope to gain from a discussion of the benefits then the only type of discussion we'll be able to have is 'I sure do like it, yep'.
At that point, we might as well be talking about chocolate. I like chocolate too. It tastes good to me. Most of my friends like chocolate, so it's easy to share. You haven't tried chocolate? I bet you would like it if you did - it tastes good. Are you willing to try chocolate? No? Well, trust me, it's really good.