Lamentation of Flame Princess is the skill system I see hacked into games the most. I think it's a simple 1d6 system. It's not one I like from when I last looks at it, but it is definitely popular.
I have no idea what we're talking about.
"Lamentation of the Flame Princess" sounds awesome tho.
@Tempest Violent, dark, weird fantasy D&D retroclone with a misogynist undercurrent, since the pictures of people being harmed are all of women. (Though, maybe he is a feminist and is showing that women can be just as badass and die in gruesome ways as a man can, since all of the heroes doing badass things and not dying are also women. It rubbed me the wrong way, however.)
It's by James Raggi, who also did Death Frost Doom (good but killer dungeon where the only winning move is not to explore it which works if you drop it into a pre-existing campaign), Better than Any Man (very good adventure/campaign), Hammers of the God (great adventure that can be dropped into any campaign), Fuck for Satan (very bad and a sadistic killer dungeon), The God that Crawls (good with the right GM, killer dungeon), the Grinding Gear (good with the right GM, killer dungeon), the Tower of the Stargazer (very good and modular, can be dropped into any campaign), and the Monolith from Beyond Space and Time (bad). He has a bit of a bad reputation (supposedly he supports some neo-nazi) and the misogynistic undercurrent also seems to be there. However, he definitely writes some great weird fantasy dungeons of the lethal variety.
@Tempest said in High Fantasy:
I have no idea what we're talking about.
"Lamentation of the Flame Princess" sounds awesome tho.
It's a great title.
It's a pretty shitty game. I got taken in by the title and some hype men pitching it and got myself a copy plus some supplements in a bundle. It's ... pretty lame. Not actively bad like Synnibar or FATAL or their ilk, which is actually a stroke against it because those are at least hysterical reading.
Then I read the author's rant against people having fun in games and the penny dropped.
@Misadventure said in High Fantasy:
There are also a variety of simplified skill approaches out there. ACKS may be the one whose approach I liked best. You get + stat in any skill, and +level and stat for selected skills. So everyone can try, and class/personal choice still matter. And you can of course RP that to whatever detail you like. many of the "Hacks" offer very simple yet fast and sometimes well done ways to play.
You know that dates back to the '80s with Rolemaster, right?
@WTFE said in High Fantasy:
You know that dates back to the '80s with Rolemaster, right?
Yes.
I would say that RM significantly complicates it with varied cost of skills per class, and varied class level bonuses, but it is the same approach.
I was playing RoleMaster when it was first published, why do you ask? Would you like to see my aging weapons charts? Perhaps you'd like to see my FINE one sided copy of the entire Middle earth books for the system I made so I could hole punch it and put it in binders? (Why? FIIK) Oh ChartMaster ...
Any suggestions on where to find that rant? I poked around for it for a while and found several references to it without actually finding it. I'm curious.
The original: http://lotfp.blogspot.com/2008/06/i-hate-fun.html?m=1
Later interview with Zak S about it with a touch of clarification of why he made the blog post:
http://dndwithpornstars.blogspot.com/2015/09/but-does-he-still-hate-fun-interview.html?m=1
@Sunny said in High Fantasy:
Any suggestions on where to find that rant? I poked around for it for a while and found several references to it without actually finding it. I'm curious.
It's just a game.
I hate fun.
I hate fun - One year later.
The guy comes across as an insufferable twat. I really wish I'd read his blog before buying his game. I'd have known to run away screaming instead of spending my money.
Here's a review of the game that pretty much cuts to the core of why I dislike it.
I have read comments from notable indie designers before where they detest the term "fun" and go for the term "enjoyment". Did you enjoy the game, were you caught up in it, did you get involved?
This is a particular bit of nomenclature that once you start digging into this level of game design comes from ones own development philosophy and creative beliefs. While I think that the idea of "having fun" being a statement of bubbly is a level of pretension, I don't have any problem with it being outside or even against anyone's design goals.
I would love to play Warhammer FRP 3rd Edition, but certainly not because it's labeled as fun.
I would not love to play LotFP because I've never been into the heavy metal genre, though this poor author may not accept Metalpocalypse as "fun", even though it was.
--
You know what RPG would be fun if tweaked to be high fantasy? Dresden Files RPG.
“If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
Thank you. It was as entertaining (ah ha ha ha) as I thought it would be to read. So very pretentious.
I had grand plans for a WoT MuSh using a slightly modified version of DF RPG. It fit so very well... but then realized I just don't have the time for that sort of endeavor, but it'd work! Especially for elemental based magic
@WildBaboons said in High Fantasy:
I had grand plans for a WoT MuSh using a slightly modified version of DF RPG. It fit so very well... but then realized I just don't have the time for that sort of endeavor, but it'd work! Especially for elemental based magic
I'd play the hell out of that. I always felt like the setting worked very well as a MUSH (maybe better than it worked as a series of dramatic novels). There used to be a decent audience for WoT games and I suspect it's still out there.
@Three-Eyed-Crow said in High Fantasy:
@WildBaboons said in High Fantasy:
I had grand plans for a WoT MuSh using a slightly modified version of DF RPG. It fit so very well... but then realized I just don't have the time for that sort of endeavor, but it'd work! Especially for elemental based magic
I'd play the hell out of that. I always felt like the setting worked very well as a MUSH (maybe better than it worked as a series of dramatic novels). There used to be a decent audience for WoT games and I suspect it's still out there.
I'd love to see a WoT game somewhere. That isn't a MUD where you have to write essays of solo-RP to get to be an Aes Sedai.
White Ajah 4ever.
I think you'd be best off setting the game in the middle of the books and just have the "heroes" off screen somewhere away doing their thing while PCs do something else.
There's the risk of dying from cancer induced by how many bad players would want to play terrible "secret black ajah sisters", but I think it'd be worth the risk.
@Tempest @Three-Eyed-Crow I'd be down for WoT. There was a game out there for a while (Cuendillar), but it fizzled. I want to say Nymeria had something to do with its eventual decline, but that could just be me misremembering my ancient MU* history.
Though I'd rather see some sort of alt-universe version, where there's no Dragon Reborn running around, Gary Stuing all over the place.
I would play WoT so freaking quick. It was absolutely hands down my favorite setting to do tabletop in for years. I wasn't a huge fan of the books, but the setting omg omg omg omg omg omg I would play it.
ETA: I think this is the only setting I want more than Buffy,
If i had the time I'd be all over it. The system conversion from DF RPG is really pretty simple and since I'm not a big number crunch guy I think it works well for a collaborative story telling environment like a MUSH or MUX. Sadly all the WoT places around these days are MUDs and I'm not just up for the grind of mob killing anymore.
If someone else were to take point though I'd absolutely help as I could.
I never got into Wheel of Time. My only experience with it is that I have the d20 tabletop RPG book somewhere. What sets it apart and makes it more appealing as a setting compared to the other existing IPs out there?
Ceterum autem censeo Carthaginem esse delendam
@Thenomain Dresden Files is what I am using for the base for a lot of things I am doing. It has a wide breadth of skills, wider than normal fate, and many of the abilities need only be tweaked a little thematically for what I am looking for. Like for example: Magic will be the lesser version rather than full blown wizardry like Harry and the White Council, still awesome, but not as overbearing.
So it's not a hard adjustment to make.
The original: http://lotfp.blogspot.com/2008/06/i-hate-fun.html?m=1
Later interview with Zak S about it with a touch of clarification of why he made the blog post:
http://dndwithpornstars.blogspot.com/2015/09/but-does-he-still-hate-fun-interview.html?m=1
