Posts made by Shaggy

@bored said in X-Men Game:

@shaggy said in X-Men Game:

I think Cable and Rachel are fine. Both predate the full glut of such characters and have significant history and connections. Plus, Time Travel and Future Past storylines are just part and parcel of X-lore and allowances should probably be made that some people may enjoy that sort of RP.

Rachel is only a little weird because she's basically just 'Jean II', including sharing the code-name (I took from @Ghost's list having Marvel Girl and not Phoenix that he means for Jean to have it, which... yes, please, her being default Phoenix from day-1 is always terrible to me). I don't really object to her conceptually/power level wise as she's no worse than being a another Jean, but... she's also just another Jean and that seems pretty lazy and also niche-crowding. Plus the more of them running around, the more it forces that relationship to the center stage.

Rachel's background is what makes her different than Jean, though. She grew up a Hound, raised to hunt her own people. She's chock full of trauma and angst, but is also pretty heroic and overcame a lot of that. She also had one of the sweeter mullets of the 1980s and was generally incredibly awesome in Excalibur. But I am generally a big fan of Excalibur (and X-Factor - Madrox is actually my initial first thought for a PC, but we're not nearly at that point, obv).

@bored said in X-Men Game:

Yeah I'd put all the 'Summers children from future' in that category, although maybe you can make exceptions for Cable? I've said it elsewhere but I really don't see the need for every X-game to be the same story all revolving around the same single person every time.

I think Cable and Rachel are fine. Both predate the full glut of such characters and have significant history and connections. Plus, Time Travel and Future Past storylines are just part and parcel of X-lore and allowances should probably be made that some people may enjoy that sort of RP.

But fuck a lot of Hope, I agree on that.

@tempest said in X-Men Game:

Idly, since Beast got brought up....

I dare you to find a more boring character.

I. Dare. You.

I love Beast, you're nuts.

@ghost That's a great list. And the narrower focus means that characters that would be seen as tertiary or insignificant on a widescreen game could instead get a chance to be meaningful contributors and really stand out. And, yeah, they'd have way less baggage to carry in terms of continuity.

@tempest said in X-Men Game:

What @Ghost said.

Also...

No. Alts.

Normally, I'm an alt person but I agree on a game this focused, you don't want somebody having multiple chars because there will inevitably be crossover. Mayyyyyyyybe two characters, just cause the itch is so common, but you'd need to show how the characters wouldn't cross the streams.

I am all in on the idea of the game though.

@Misadventure said in Descent Reboot:

I am a teeny bit sad every time I see the shortened title, and expect some disorienting dives into a zero-gee spaceship to do tasks.

I keep thinking it might be a game where people spelunk and fight weird monsters in the dark with caving tools.

@Lithium said in New Superhero Game Looking for Staff/Feedback:

@Shaggy This isn't precisely true. It is Hero vs Villain, sure, when someone is running a villain. As soon as there is nothing to do, it'll inevitably come down to 'spar' rp or the other usual suspects.

PvP will be a thing, just cuz personalities will clash and eventually it'll come down to dice.

At least, it has on every super hero game I've seen that uses an actual system.

I don't think I was saying it never happens, just that it's less common on superhero games than it is in other genres. And I did mention the villain thing. But yeah - Danger Room RP is a thing.

@ShelBeast said in New Superhero Game Looking for Staff/Feedback:

On the topic of players abusing system mechanics... My completely unsolicited two cents is that I have noticed a very distinct cultural difference between WoD games and Superhero games. It's been my experience that, in Superhero/Comic games, players tend to act more cooperatively than adversarial as they do in WoD, and even in what little SW MU*ing I've experienced. Now, most of the games I've played on have had a limited system that rarely, if ever gets used, but I was on one that was fully implemented to use the old DC RPG ruleset, and this still remained true.

Yeah, PVP isn't nearly so much a thing on superhero games - it can be more so if people are playing villains, but 90 percent of people play mostly heroes and rely on storytelling to provide combat and opposition through NPCs. Thus, that kind of abuse of the system will a) not necessarily affect other PCs directly and b) largely occur in places where someone is already adjudicating the scene and can judge and measure whether those actions are appropriate. I would definitely be concerned about it if I were going to play a villain, just to make sure I wasn't prone to getting mechanically knocked out in the first round or two of any conflict with the heroes. People who play supervillains on superhero games generally expect to lose more often than not, but they'd still like it to be competitive and fun.

I'm definitely for this. I'm not often crazy about dice-systems on games with canon characters, simply because those characters weren't created with that in mind and can rarely be shoved into the necessary boxes and limitations. With OCs, that's not a problem and you can create your character to fit the system rather than vice versa. I've also just gotten pretty bored with the existing superhero/multiverse type games.

@Arkandel said in Which canon property/setting would be good for a MU* ?:

Into The Badlands. Characters belong to different Baronies, maybe also to some neutral factions like the monks or mine owners, and let them go to town - heavy emphasis on martial arts (of course), betrayals and post-apocalyptic intrigue.

I know of someone who might be working on this one, fingers crossed and all things going well.

I love the idea of an OC-based supers game. I think it's probably notable that all of the most successful super games don't rely on much in the way of systems at all and are more consent-based with maybe some benchmarks/basic stats but very little in the way of dice rolling. I know that's anathema to some people, but most of the hardcoded supers games I've seen, whatever system they use, don't tend to get very successful.

Just an observation.