High Fantasy


  • Pitcrew

    @Arkandel Children of the Light forever!



  • @Ominous The big advantage to WoT is the same advantage of LotR: a wonderfully detailed and awesome world to play in.

    The big downside to WoT is the same downside to LotR: All that detailed world-building was done to cater to a small group of characters who pretty much do every awesome thing possible, so there's nothing really for the players to do that could recapture that epic tale feeling you had when reading the series.

    The only real option is to create an alt-universe, IMO


  • Coder

    @Runescryer

    I dunno, Shadows Of Mordor was pretty cool. It would've probably been pretty cool without the How-I-Got-My-Powers McGuffin too, but as it came out around the Saint's Row 4 days maybe not as popular.

    Have you looked into the The One Ring RPG system? It takes cues from almost all other Middle Earth games in that your character can more or less be depressed to death. Better than a morality system, that's for sure.



  • @Thenomain said in High Fantasy:

    @Runescryer

    I dunno, Shadows Of Mordor was pretty cool. It would've probably been pretty cool without the How-I-Got-My-Powers McGuffin too, but as it came out around the Saint's Row 4 days maybe not as popular.

    Have you looked into the The One Ring RPG system? It takes cues from almost all other Middle Earth games in that your character can more or less be depressed to death. Better than a morality system, that's for sure.

    Haven't checked out The One Ring yet, but I have a ton of material for MERP/Rolemaster from back in the day.

    And it's not impossible to have a good game take place in a setting like WoT/LotR, it's just very difficult because of the constructed timelines and the fact that you have these characters that are/will kick all sorts of epic butt in their adventure, so you just can't plop PC into the setting without forethought or adjustment. The PC's have to understand and accept that they're not the ones that will ultimately save the world, but they can save their own corner of the world/galaxy/whatever. It's a lesson from Star Wars gaming; yes, you're not going to be the one that blows up the Death Star, fights Darth Vader, or kills the Emperor, but you can still make an impact in your sector and go up against stakes and enemies that matter there. So, in a way, this all ties into the 'Low Stakes' thread here in terms of 'Comparative Stakes'.


  • Coder

    @Runescryer

    The most badass things the characters in LotR did were sacrifice and gathering help. The sacrifices were all notable, but they were notable to character development above other effects.

    The issue here is can you get people to play character focused challenges. There is a place for it that I’d like to play, for sure.



  • @Thenomain said in High Fantasy:

    @Runescryer

    The most badass things the characters in LotR did were sacrifice and gathering help. The sacrifices were all notable, but they were notable to character development above other effects.

    Very true.

    The issue here is can you get people to play character focused challenges. There is a place for it that I’d like to play, for sure.

    I think that there are players who can do that. They're in the minority of players, but they do exist. There's also games/settings like 'Blue Rose' where inter-character relationships are more of the focus than 'kill monster, loot, repeat'.

    One of the old RPG System mechanics that I would love to bring back is the old DC Heroes 'Subplot' concept. When you created a character, you also wrote down a number of subplots for that character, including a sort of sketch outline of how each subplot can be resolved eventually. Every time your subplot gets advanced as part of the gaming session, in addition to fighting the threat, you got an extra XP reward. When your subplot was resolved, you wrote up a new subplot to take its place. I thought it was a great way to encourage character development and challenges unique to each character.


  • Coder

    @Runescryer

    I guess being in the minority, I want to build or play a game I would enjoy, not one with the widest appeal. If they are the same thing, then cool. If not, so what?


  • Pitcrew

    @Thenomain said in High Fantasy:

    @Runescryer

    I guess being in the minority, I want to build or play a game I would enjoy, not one with the widest appeal. If they are the same thing, then cool. If not, so what?

    I wish you'd make a streamlined readymade MUX chargen, sheet, roller system for 7th Sea

    I mean, one that isn't for OTT or 8 years old


  • Coder

    @deadculture said in High Fantasy:

    @Thenomain said in High Fantasy:

    @Runescryer

    I guess being in the minority, I want to build or play a game I would enjoy, not one with the widest appeal. If they are the same thing, then cool. If not, so what?

    I wish you'd make a streamlined readymade MUX chargen, sheet, roller system for 7th Sea

    I mean, one that isn't for OTT or 8 years old

    Which 7th Sea? The one with the bizarre game system but sensible rolling mechanic, or the one with the hippy game system but bizarre rolling mechanic?


  • Pitcrew

    @Thenomain said in High Fantasy:

    @deadculture said in High Fantasy:

    @Thenomain said in High Fantasy:

    @Runescryer

    I guess being in the minority, I want to build or play a game I would enjoy, not one with the widest appeal. If they are the same thing, then cool. If not, so what?

    I wish you'd make a streamlined readymade MUX chargen, sheet, roller system for 7th Sea

    I mean, one that isn't for OTT or 8 years old

    Which 7th Sea? The one with the bizarre game system but sensible rolling mechanic, or the one with the hippy game system but bizarre rolling mechanic?

    First edition. So, the former?



  • @Thenomain said in High Fantasy:

    @Runescryer

    I guess being in the minority, I want to build or play a game I would enjoy, not one with the widest appeal. If they are the same thing, then cool. If not, so what?

    I agree 100% with that. We (mostly) don't do this hobby of Role Playing (in all of it's forms) for money or prestige; we do it because it's fun for us. If there's no fun, why bother? Now, there's as many definitions of fun as there are people, granted, but if you find others who are having fun alongside you, that makes it all the better.


  • Coder

    @deadculture said in High Fantasy:

    @Thenomain said in High Fantasy:

    Which 7th Sea? The one with the bizarre game system but sensible rolling mechanic, or the one with the hippy game system but bizarre rolling mechanic?

    First edition. So, the former?

    Play Arx and squint really, really hard? (Mind you, I find some of their stat design decisions baffling enough that I'd much rather play 7th Sea with every splat tacked on. Stealth as a combat stat? Really? Everybody's a critic, amirite.)

    --

    @Runescryer said in High Fantasy:

    @Thenomain said in High Fantasy:

    @Runescryer

    I guess being in the minority, I want to build or play a game I would enjoy, not one with the widest appeal. If they are the same thing, then cool. If not, so what?

    I agree 100% with that. We (mostly) don't do this hobby of Role Playing (in all of it's forms) for money or prestige; we do it because it's fun for us. If there's no fun, why bother? Now, there's as many definitions of fun as there are people, granted, but if you find others who are having fun alongside you, that makes it all the better.

    Well, let's be honest; a game without other people enjoying it with us is not very fun. I have been involved in enough of those projects that I would, myself, rather a game that appeals to more people even if it means compromising some of my own wants, because I know the pay-off can be absolutely worth it.


  • Pitcrew

    @Thenomain said in High Fantasy:

    @deadculture said in High Fantasy:

    @Thenomain said in High Fantasy:

    Which 7th Sea? The one with the bizarre game system but sensible rolling mechanic, or the one with the hippy game system but bizarre rolling mechanic?

    First edition. So, the former?

    Play Arx and squint really, really hard? (Mind you, I find some of their stat design decisions baffling enough that I'd much rather play 7th Sea with every splat tacked on. Stealth as a combat stat? Really? Everybody's a critic, amirite.)

    --

    @Runescryer said in High Fantasy:

    @Thenomain said in High Fantasy:

    @Runescryer

    I guess being in the minority, I want to build or play a game I would enjoy, not one with the widest appeal. If they are the same thing, then cool. If not, so what?

    I agree 100% with that. We (mostly) don't do this hobby of Role Playing (in all of it's forms) for money or prestige; we do it because it's fun for us. If there's no fun, why bother? Now, there's as many definitions of fun as there are people, granted, but if you find others who are having fun alongside you, that makes it all the better.

    Well, let's be honest; a game without other people enjoying it with us is not very fun. I have been involved in enough of those projects that I would, myself, rather a game that appeals to more people even if it means compromising some of my own wants, because I know the pay-off can be absolutely worth it.

    Arx is not my cup of long island iced tea.

    7S just needs some changes to the auxiliary systems like Patron, etc.



  • @Thenomain said in High Fantasy:

    @Runescryer said in High Fantasy:

    @Thenomain said in High Fantasy:

    @Runescryer

    I guess being in the minority, I want to build or play a game I would enjoy, not one with the widest appeal. If they are the same thing, then cool. If not, so what?

    I agree 100% with that. We (mostly) don't do this hobby of Role Playing (in all of it's forms) for money or prestige; we do it because it's fun for us. If there's no fun, why bother? Now, there's as many definitions of fun as there are people, granted, but if you find others who are having fun alongside you, that makes it all the better.

    Well, let's be honest; a game without other people enjoying it with us is not very fun. I have been involved in enough of those projects that I would, myself, rather a game that appeals to more people even if it means compromising some of my own wants, because I know the pay-off can be absolutely worth it.

    Having a game with too many players because you've compromised too much can also be a bad thing. Just saying :)

    It's finding the Goldielocks Zone: ideally everything is just right.


  • Coder

    @Runescryer said in High Fantasy:

    Having a game with too many players because you've compromised too much can also be a bad thing. Just saying :)

    I think it's the "compromised too much" part, but as I was one of the triumvirate that started Dark Metal, I can honestly say that there is no such thing as compromising too much if you know that you're basically making it purely for fun. It was only when staff started taking CrackMUX too seriously (that is: seriously at all) that it started falling apart. They betrayed what made the game what it was, and with it destroyed the game.

    ... But I know what you mean. Popularity can become a curse.


  • Admin

    @Runescryer said in High Fantasy:

    @Ominous The big advantage to WoT is the same advantage of LotR: a wonderfully detailed and awesome world to play in.

    The big downside to WoT is the same downside to LotR: All that detailed world-building was done to cater to a small group of characters who pretty much do every awesome thing possible, so there's nothing really for the players to do that could recapture that epic tale feeling you had when reading the series.

    The only real option is to create an alt-universe, IMO

    There are ways - and there have been games which took advantage of them - to get around the issue. The easy way is to set it in a different era; go back fifty years and go at it. Unless you want Tarmon Gaidon to happen within the MU*'s timeline you don't even have to worry about the prophecies, since they will eventually come true anyway, or you can have them be about something else.

    On A Moment in Tyme we did something similar at some point - we thought plot was getting a bit stale so we created a What If? alternate timeline where Lews Therin Telamon wrestled control and took over Rand's mind at an early point, which basically meant we tossed the events in the books out and just did our own thing. @Seraphim73 might be better able to tell if that was successful or not since my perspective was from driving this, but I recall people having fun.

    IMHO any game based on original material needs to unshackle itself from the exact events and characters as soon as possible. The focus needs to be on the PCs, not what the canonical protagonists are going to do; they can still be used for the cool factor now and then ("OMG I'M IN A ROOM WITH LUKE SKYWALKER OMG") but if it's overdone then that, too, becomes trite and loses its coolness factor.

    As for WoT, it has a great magic system where both male and female characters have super amazing yet different things they can do, a complex and detailed magic system, built-in politics and a bunch of interesting NPC enemies you can have to spice things up with some paranoia as well as brute force.



  • @Runescryer said in High Fantasy:

    @Thenomain said in High Fantasy:

    @Runescryer said in High Fantasy:

    @Thenomain said in High Fantasy:

    @Runescryer

    I guess being in the minority, I want to build or play a game I would enjoy, not one with the widest appeal. If they are the same thing, then cool. If not, so what?

    I agree 100% with that. We (mostly) don't do this hobby of Role Playing (in all of it's forms) for money or prestige; we do it because it's fun for us. If there's no fun, why bother? Now, there's as many definitions of fun as there are people, granted, but if you find others who are having fun alongside you, that makes it all the better.

    Well, let's be honest; a game without other people enjoying it with us is not very fun. I have been involved in enough of those projects that I would, myself, rather a game that appeals to more people even if it means compromising some of my own wants, because I know the pay-off can be absolutely worth it.

    Having a game with too many players because you've compromised too much can also be a bad thing. Just saying :)

    It's finding the Goldielocks Zone: ideally everything is just right.

    The biggest example of that imo is being unwilling to enforce standards that would keep the game you want, and that starts a slide into directions that alienates the player base you are trying to appeal to. This is something that will happen naturally unless staff are willing to be firm, because people will see elements of a game they enjoy, play it, but violently disagree with an element that is prohibited, and just do it anyway. For staff, it's not fun to be the bad guy and shut people down, even if what they are shutting down will make the environment dramatically worse and make a ton of players leave. This means problematic behavior might just go unchecked way too long.

    Allowing elements that are extremely incompatible with one another can work in the short term to balloon numbers but it will create an increasingly fragile edifice that will eventually collapse as players have a slow build of resentment that will eventually boil over.



  • @Sunny said in High Fantasy:

    @WTFE

    Thank you. It was as entertaining (ah ha ha ha) as I thought it would be to read. So very pretentious.

    From I Hate Fun:

    It’s shit. It’s all shit. It doesn’t enrich my life in any way, but it does turn my brain off, quickly, conveniently, easily, cheaply. No effort. What it all does is separate myself from living life and reduces it to passing time. It distracts me and detaches me from the only thing I have – life - and therefore it is no good. Instead of doing, and being, all too often I am seeking sensory stimulation. Artificial feelings, stimulated most effectively through passively consuming things that other people have done.

    The very idea of wanting to be entertained is an exercise in self-nullification.

    Well, I mean I think a lot of creative people feel that way to some degree at one point or anoth-

    I can’t socialize. I won’t. It’s embarrassing enough to know that I waste substantial periods of my life seeking and accepting entertainment, being mentally comatose instead of being active and involved in my own life. How am I supposed to be exposed to other people behaving this way and have a shred of respect for them? I want to just shake them. “We are real people, we are together! We don’t have to be alone, dead in mind, vacant in spirit! We should do, we should create! Support each other in our times of weakness and make our mark in the world, for we are Human!”

    -Oooooooooook nevermind, what a dork.

    pretty soon a hobby that was custom-made for the studious and imaginative and thorough now belongs to an entirely different caste, while those of us that the hobby was created for are left on the fringes, told that we’re just not compatible with today’s gaming, and sometimes, even today’s life in general.

    Fuck that. Fuck that. This hobby is ours. These other types can come and play and we’ll welcome them with open arms and show them the way if they ask, but to dictate fast-food mentality in my imaginative tools… that means war.

    "GET THESE GADDAMN FILTHY FUCKING CASUALS OUTTA HERE!!!!!!"

    Jesus Christ, this guy. I kind of wish I had time to read this entire thing but on the other hand I am already throwing up in my mouth a little bit.



  • @Apos said in High Fantasy:

    @Runescryer said in High Fantasy:

    @Thenomain said in High Fantasy:

    @Runescryer said in High Fantasy:

    @Thenomain said in High Fantasy:

    @Runescryer

    I guess being in the minority, I want to build or play a game I would enjoy, not one with the widest appeal. If they are the same thing, then cool. If not, so what?

    I agree 100% with that. We (mostly) don't do this hobby of Role Playing (in all of it's forms) for money or prestige; we do it because it's fun for us. If there's no fun, why bother? Now, there's as many definitions of fun as there are people, granted, but if you find others who are having fun alongside you, that makes it all the better.

    Well, let's be honest; a game without other people enjoying it with us is not very fun. I have been involved in enough of those projects that I would, myself, rather a game that appeals to more people even if it means compromising some of my own wants, because I know the pay-off can be absolutely worth it.

    Having a game with too many players because you've compromised too much can also be a bad thing. Just saying :)

    It's finding the Goldielocks Zone: ideally everything is just right.

    Allowing elements that are extremely incompatible with one another can work in the short term to balloon numbers but it will create an increasingly fragile edifice that will eventually collapse as players have a slow build of resentment that will eventually boil over.

    Check out the big brain on Brad!


  • Pitcrew

    @Wizz
    Yeah, he swings from "artistic, philosophical sort" to "misanthropic, badwrongfun neckbeard" pretty quickly.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to MU Soapbox was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.