Posts made by Thenomain

@Insomnia

I'm waiting a bit to see if I get into the DLC Beta. You never know.

@tragedyjones said:

@Thenomain said:

@tragedyjones

That explains their combat system. Reverse Polish Combat Mechanics, throwing turn-based (jrpg) combat before the real-time inputs.

I have zero idea how much of that is a joke

About half. Reverse Polish Notation puts the operators in front of the operator. 1 6 + would return 7.

Witcher 1 combat is about half turn based and half real time. You select your target then you select your attack, but you do it in this kind of messed up real-time manner that makes it partial QTE.

With the word Polish being used, I decided to bring these two concepts together, calling the Witcher combat system an RPN of RPGs.

(Mind you, RPN is a lot closer to how computers think than 1 + 1, but let's not let that get in the way of a bad joke.)

@tragedyjones

That explains their combat system. Reverse Polish Combat Mechanics, throwing turn-based (jrpg) combat before the real-time inputs.

@tragedyjones, we could talk about it.

It's a thing. It's too bad it's a thing. Unless there are in Witcher 2 or 3, which I haven't played because I want to get through 1 first.

I'm still trying to play Witcher 1. If the controls for Witcher 3 are better than Skyrim, then a lot has changed because the control and combat scheme for Witcher 1 is pretty bad. A lot about Witcher 1 has been bad for me, so I can't confirm or deny the desire to play in a game based on it.

Three DLCs announced, two The Sims add-ons and one adventure. The adventure is almost as much as the add-on pack (until the 1st), meaning I might as well get the Season Pass and hope there's more adventuring and storyline to be had.

I, on the other hand, am now far more interested. It might go over as well as "Monte Cook's World of Darkness" (not bad, but not popular) or it might explode as The WoD With the Intense Metaplot.

I'm not sure what I think of that metaplot, but it hits the ground running and I don't see that, in itself, as a bad thing.

@Bobotron

I am both horrified and aroused.

@faraday

Is it really so impossible to provide feedback about the 3rd ed changes without knowing exactly what's on the action skill list, which is the 'whatever you want" part?

No, but it is impossible to do so without knowing what's changed, and without what the design is. Ferreting out thoughts from vitriol, the quality of the change is also going to depend on how many skills of each type that you have, and on the gameplay goals not explicitly stated.

For instance, one moment it's "make whatever kind of game you want" and another it's "I don't do it that way and I designed the core system around how I do things". Again grossly oversimplified, but these two statements are mutually exclusive, or close enough in my book that I'm going to make the assertion. It tells me that there's a wrong and therefore a right way to implement the toolkit. This way may not have straight-up rules, but we've seen at least one guideline for it come from your posts.

You do not need to like something to give useful feedback.

Quite true. But likewise, I do not need to implement all feedback given.

Nobody who understands the nature of "feedback" in the design cycle has said that you must. I don't know how I got roped into this category, but it's 110% wrong.

I was responding specifically to @Seraphim73, who was going so far as to say not to play something that you don't like. This seemed to be a veiled attempt to stave off criticism, which is a terrible thing to do. Criticism is beautiful. Hate-vomit isn't criticism.

And just to be clear - I do not mind that feedback. What I mind is the repeated badgering that says that the system is utterly broken/unusable without it and I'm a crack-smoking idiotic despot if I disagree.

This horse, she is dead. I think your ignoring of whining was a winning plan.

@Seraphim73

Is it okay to correct you if I think you're wrong?

You want a professionally[...]

Nope nope nope a thousand times nope. What we have is a framework that people are attacking as a system and Faraday is defending as a pet project. I keep trying, in my head, to treat it as a system because of the original question:

I'm mostly interested in feedback on the changes that were added in 3rd edition, or things that maybe you wish had been added but weren't.

I think Faradizzle has admitted maybe here wasn't the best place to ask this question, but I don't think the feedback has been entirely horrible. My place in it has been, "Okay, what's the game design?" The over-simplified answer has been, "Whatever you want."

That doesn't work. The answer is that there is no answer. There can't really be any feedback outside of existing implementation, and hereabouts there is no existing implementation.

Back to what Seaphim said:

If you don't like FS3, don't use it.

Now this I find pompous, missing the point that Faraday herself keeps admitting to, that she was looking for feedback. You do not need to like something to give useful feedback. That some of the feedback is brutally trying to make her choke on their dick is entirely their derangement, and I feel pretty sorry that Faraday has to endure it.

Or maybe you're attributing to me things said by others. If you are, please stop.

--

@faraday said:

But I'm still not quite sure what it would take to make it "a system" like @Thenomain is describing.

The answer was there in that post I made but MUSoapbox decided it would be funny to make it one word instead. What I'm going to do, though, is take some of the explanations from this thread and answer the original question, and separately pontificate (yes, I'm a rules pontiff) on game design. It make take a few days to gather all the thoughts and time necessary.

I used a spawn once but I can't remember why. Oth wise I don't use them, not even while staffing. I either can pay attention or I can't, and if I can't then I turn off the channels. If something critical happens when I'm off channel then people would either page or mail me.

For some reason, Skype is my best spawn window.

@faraday then this system is ass for deleting posts on mobile, and I was going to reform my thoughts later.

@faraday

Then

@faraday

It was partially self-mocking, my reply. But in this discussion I think what I really want is a more solid foundation, like d20 SRD. That you don't want to is fine, but your design philosophy should still be important to anyone who designs based on it. This system is for... (fill in the rest!)

@faraday

I want it to be a system, tho.

@Alzie said:

@Thenomain said:

@Alzie said:

@Faraday I mean, I don't really care about FS3 one way or another, but you built an RPG system and your premise was to make it inherently imbalanced?

It's like you've never played on any World of Darkness games, ever. Don't be an idiot.

World of Darkness is not inherently imbalanced as a premise. So i'm not sure what you're getting at.

I don't think FS3 is inherently imbalanced as a premise, so I'm not sure what you're getting at either. But WoD is imbalanced, and you volunteered to play with this kind of system. You coded for it, and on more than one occasion I pointed out the flaws in your coded systems and you told me that what's done is done. You are in no position to throw around these insults.

Man up and have a discussion about it if you want, but damn, boy.

@faraday

Couple of things. Firstly: Systems don't care about your personal preference. Sorry! You code, so you know that the goal of code is to implement system designs. So when you say "I think this system should be used thus" as the designer of the system, I wonder, then why not simply say to the people who want to use the system, "do it thusly". A lot of problems get solved this way.

Secondly, I like your examples of Action vs. Expertise skills. All of them have been useful to me to understand the underlying design and intent. edit: Tho I think the name 'action' for those skills is throwing me a bit. I'll have to think about it.

@Alzie said:

@Faraday I mean, I don't really care about FS3 one way or another, but you built an RPG system and your premise was to make it inherently imbalanced?

It's like you've never played on any World of Darkness games, ever. Don't be an idiot.

@faraday said:

@Thenomain said:

A lot of games are very specific about what happens if you try to do Skill-Thing without having Skill.

FS3 is too. Or I try to make it so - I would be happy to have feedback about the quality of the docs. You can default as long as there's a "reasonable chance" of success. Again see the footrace / brain surgery example.

I thought it did so, considering the Fudge/Fate Skill Pyramid going on there, but the way you were talking about it if 'drive' were on that list you couldn't drive if you didn't take points in the skill.

But a car to the average first-worlder is not an alien device. Zero points in 'drive' in this world doesn't mean 'can't drive'. (I am also starting to understand what would be required for game design with this system.)

As far as assuming average... Basically: If it's an Action Skill, it's likely to come up in the course of the game so you're expected to take it at the appropriate level based on your char's experience. Background Skills (now split into Interests and Expertise in 3rd edition) cover everything else and they're more "take what's important to your char". You're not expected to take Baseball just because you played catch in the backyard as a kid.

And this is design-document material.

Also, they're probing questions. I don't think any of them are meant to incite or harsh. You're taking it well, but it could look like a dog-pile.

Well it's hard not to take it harshly when words like "bad design", "terrible idea" and "broken system" are thrown around, but I did ask for feedback so I can't really complain too much.

Yeah, but I don't think even that person was meaning to be a jerk about it. Unless they were. In which case fuck 'em.

I still don't understand this complaint when 3rd ed forces you to take fluffy background skills and gives you up to four for free.

The way I'm reading it is "this skill is bullshit therefore I'm wasting points" in that, yes, cultural online-WoD way of things.

Games are also free to configure position-based skill packages.

This freedom is part of my issue, not because people are spoiled for choice but the "framework" etc. etc. I mentioned earlier, was acknowledged, and it's a horse that doesn't need any more beating.

For instance, all my military characters are required to buy First Aid/Firearms/Melee 1 just because of basic training.

And people don't remember on places like Haunted Memories (WoD) where people in the police force also had to have certain skill packages. It's not a new concept for anywhere.

@Ghost

We are using nodebb-plugin-poll so it should go like this:

[poll title="this is a poll"]
- choice 1
- choice 2
[/poll]

However, when I try it:

[poll title="this is a poll"]

• choice 1
• choice 2
  [/poll]

Go figure.