Tabletop games: let's play them.


Ad Astra

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adeon Hawkwood View Post
It doesn't need to have an in-game effect to have an effect. A well thought out background influences the character's personality and how they interact with the plot, you don't need rules for that.


People will come up with backgrounds or neglect them based on their own preferences, rules don't change that. If a player doesn't care about their background and the rules force them to pick one they'll either do it at random or pick one they think will give them an in-game advantage. You can't force people to role-play.
The experts weigh in.

Advantage: me.


[B]The Once and Future Official Minister of Awesome[/B]
[I]And don't you forget it.[/I]
[URL="http://paragonunleashed.proboards.com/index.cgi"][IMG]http://gamefacelive.com/bre/joker.png[/IMG][/URL]

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Manofmanychars View Post
The experts weigh in.

Advantage: me.
You think RPG.net is experts?

Quote someone who matters (like maybe a decent game designer or writer), not an internet forum.


Too many alts to list.

 

Posted

In regards to game systems, backgrounds, etc.

Most players I know go into games with characters fitting the GM's style and tone, if they know it ahead of time.

If John is known for running games in which your characters backstory and motivations will never come into question, we make characters with very little in regard to those things. Instead, we focus on the things that will be focused on by the GM -- tactical combat and/or cooperative storytelling, for instance.

If Jane is known for running games in which the emotional depths of your character will be plumbed and every sentence you wrote in your background can and will have an impact on the characters adventure career, then we spend the time and effort to build well flashed out characters with families, motivations and reasons for doing x instead of y.


 

Posted

It's still an argument to authority. At the end of the day it all comes down to what works for you and your group, I find people are perfectly capable of deciding on a background for their character and fitting it into their style without needing to dangle carrots in front of them (in fact, I find the idea of doing so mildly offensive).


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adeon Hawkwood View Post
It's still an argument to authority. At the end of the day it all comes down to what works for you and your group, I find people are perfectly capable of deciding on a background for their character and fitting it into their style without needing to dangle carrots in front of them (in fact, I find the idea of doing so mildly offensive).
Well, unfortunately for your arguments, most personal accounts on RPG.net (y'know, the place where they do nothing but talk about their tabletop gaming experiences) seem to indicate that the more integrated story and gameplay become, the more the players roleplay.

But then again, the idea that keeping plot and mechanics separate detracts from immersion isn't anything new.

EDIT: And here's some more evidence for you.


[B]The Once and Future Official Minister of Awesome[/B]
[I]And don't you forget it.[/I]
[URL="http://paragonunleashed.proboards.com/index.cgi"][IMG]http://gamefacelive.com/bre/joker.png[/IMG][/URL]

 

Posted

Castle is correct here. Being aware of the GM's intent for the campaign is going to help considerably more than anything else.

If the GM is going to hand-tailor the campaign to the characters' backgrounds, then yes, the players are highly likely to write detailed, intricate backgrounds that are going to be useful to the GM.

If the GM is going to focus at first on establishing the group and camaraderie, you're likely to establish a background in broad strokes and let the rest work itself out.

Not knowing what the GM intends is probably going to be frustrating for the players, as well - bringing a combat-oriented character whose abilities are most useful manipulating a battlefield to a campaign where combat is handwaved without any actual notion of placement or strategy is going to piss someone off.

I'm not a big fan of attempting to use the carrot and stick method of encouraging the players to roleplay. It often winds up with players trying to munchkin their interactions, and sometimes even drives other players out of the game because one is demanding the spotlight as much as possible.


Dawncaller - The Circle of Dawn
Too many blasted alts to list, but all on Virtue.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Agonus View Post
What the samhell is chargen? o.0
I think, and this is a guess, that it's character generation.

I've never been able to get into tabletop games for a variety of reasons. Tried getting into D&D with some friends, but that sputtered out and died. I wanted to play, but no one else would be the DM. Tried joining a group in university, but just didn't like the people. I've always wanted a decent gaming experience with actual other people, but I just doubt it'll happen. Most experienced gamers tend to be a little too 'hardcore' for my liking.


They ALL float down here. When you're down here with us, you'll float too!

@Starflier

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Manofmanychars View Post
Well, unfortunately for your arguments, most personal accounts on RPG.net (y'know, the place where they do nothing but talk about their tabletop gaming experiences) seem to indicate that the more integrated story and gameplay become, the more the players roleplay.
And you're still spouting logical fallacies, in this case Argumentum ad populum.

All you demonstrate is that the majority of people on RPG.net support your view (and actually you don't even demonstrate that, you claim that). Any online community is, to some extent, self selecting. People tend to congregate with others who share similar viewpoints.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adeon Hawkwood View Post
And you're still spouting logical fallacies, in this case Argumentum ad populum.

All you demonstrate is that the majority of people on RPG.net support your view (and actually you don't even demonstrate that, you claim that). Any online community is, to some extent, self selecting. People tend to congregate with others who share similar viewpoints.
Way to totally ignore the linked article, which further demolishes your position.

Also, the only self-selection on RPG.net is tabletop RPG players. Hence the name, RPG.net. Kinda thought it was self-explanatory, there. But yeah, what does the largest online tabletop gaming community on Earth, many of whom spend much of their time reviewing RPGs (not to mention the people in the community who make RPGs, including pros like John Wick), know about RPGs?

Next you're going to question CERN's collective knowledge of quantum physics.


[B]The Once and Future Official Minister of Awesome[/B]
[I]And don't you forget it.[/I]
[URL="http://paragonunleashed.proboards.com/index.cgi"][IMG]http://gamefacelive.com/bre/joker.png[/IMG][/URL]

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Manofmanychars View Post
Way to totally ignore the linked article, which further demolishes your position.

Also, the only self-selection on RPG.net is tabletop RPG players. Hence the name, RPG.net. Kinda thought it was self-explanatory, there. But yeah, what does the largest online tabletop gaming community on Earth, many of whom spend much of their time reviewing RPGs (not to mention the people in the community who make RPGs, including pros like John Wick), know about RPGs?
...
You're still counting anecdotal evidence as fact.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adeon Hawkwood View Post
...People will come up with backgrounds or neglect them based on their own preferences, rules don't change that. If a player doesn't care about their background and the rules force them to pick one they'll either do it at random or pick one they think will give them an in-game advantage. You can't force people to role-play.
It's down to the players. As you said, some will pick a background purely for any rule advantage it may provide. Or they'll take one line in a narrow faction description and beat it to death during gameplay. That's part of why I hate White Wolf's Noun: the Nominative system, I think it -restricts- RP because it forces you into the pre-existing narrowly defined in-game factions.

I still think the best aid to getting people to RP in a tabletop setting are a quality role-player or three. If someone is open to talking in-character, but hesitant to do so for whatever reason, seeing people have fun IC always helps.


Tales of Judgment. Also here, instead of that other place.

good luck D.B.B.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Agonus View Post
You're still counting anecdotal evidence as fact.



It's down to the players. As you said, some will pick a background purely for any rule advantage it may provide. Or they'll take one line in a narrow faction description and beat it to death during gameplay. That's part of why I hate White Wolf's Noun: the Nominative system, I think it -restricts- RP because it forces you into the pre-existing narrowly defined in-game factions.

I still think the best aid to getting people to RP in a tabletop setting are a quality role-player or three. If someone is open to talking in-character, but hesitant to do so for whatever reason, seeing people have fun IC always helps.
Okay, allow me to point out that, so far, my evidence happens to be the only evidence. So, I'm calling it in my favor if you can't support your side of the argument. By the way, this is exactly the sort of topic in which anecdotal evidence is credible. Also, the linked article. Respond to it.

Here's that link again for you.

So, now I have linked public opinion, expert opinion, and a researched article. It's time to produce or concede the point, I've fulfilled my burden of proof.


[B]The Once and Future Official Minister of Awesome[/B]
[I]And don't you forget it.[/I]
[URL="http://paragonunleashed.proboards.com/index.cgi"][IMG]http://gamefacelive.com/bre/joker.png[/IMG][/URL]

 

Posted

I know this is a thread to find other roleplaying groups for people to join, but I just had to give my current game, which I'm running, a plug.

It's the Doctor Who Roleplaying Game: Adventures in Time and Space, by Cubicle7. In terms of capturing the feel and atmosphere of the show(s) (Doctor Who/Torchwood/The Sarah Jane Adventures), it does remarkably well, with a Merits and Flaws system (not unlike White Wolf) but a very simple 2d6+Trait+Skill system that makes play fast. And...unlike a lot of games, the emphasis is on talking and not fighting. About being smart and figuring things out and not using brute force.

And as a nearly thirty year veteran of games, I deeply appreciate and welcome that particular angle on things.

The company has been slowed down significantly thanks to the rebranding of the Who license and the change of actors, which meant all their products had to be reworked to cover the new version of the show. Not a great way to get the game products rolling.

But!

I recommend this game for both newcomers and veterans alike; for newcomers with a quick and simple game system and for veterans who want to challenge themselves with a game that has the setting of well....everywhere in time and space.

Check it out!


S.


Part of Sister Flame's Clickey-Clack Posse

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Manofmanychars View Post
Way to totally ignore the linked article, which further demolishes your position.
If I was claiming it as a fact then you would be perfectly justified in this but I'm not, I'm claiming this as MY OPINION and MY PREFERENCES. What other people think is pretty much irrelevant to a discussion between the two of us on what we think and prefer. If we were debating physics or politics then information by other people would be relevant

Quote:
Also, the only self-selection on RPG.net is tabletop RPG players. Hence the name, RPG.net. Kinda thought it was self-explanatory, there. But yeah, what does the largest online tabletop gaming community on Earth, many of whom spend much of their time reviewing RPGs (not to mention the people in the community who make RPGs, including pros like John Wick), know about RPGs?
All communities are self-selecting beyond the basic concept of the community. RPG.net is not the only community of gamers out there but, like any such community, a certain percentage of people will choose not to participate due to the general attitudes of the community. I haven't really bothered to read it in a while (mostly due to my interests moving away from RPGs and towards economic boardgames) but I recall when I did read it that there was a general "D&D sucks" attitude amongst a lot of the posters. I have no clue if that still persists but if it does then it is, by nature, going to discourage a certain portion of the RPG community (specifically those who like D&D) from participating.

Quote:
Next you're going to question CERN's collective knowledge of quantum physics.
Reductio ad absurdum


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adeon Hawkwood View Post
Not at all. You questioning the RPG cred of the largest, most experienced, and most respected group of RPG gamers on the internet is, in fact, tantamount to questioning the credentials of the researchers at CERN, or the Nobel Committee, or any other group that holds similar standing in its field. RPG.net is well-known in internet circles as the first and last word on tabletop gaming. If you refuse to acknowledge their expertise, then there can clearly be no convincing you that you're wrong, as no source will ever be credible enough for you.


[B]The Once and Future Official Minister of Awesome[/B]
[I]And don't you forget it.[/I]
[URL="http://paragonunleashed.proboards.com/index.cgi"][IMG]http://gamefacelive.com/bre/joker.png[/IMG][/URL]

 

Posted

I could go into why I hold RPGnet in considerably lower esteem than most, but let's be honest here: it's not worth the effort.

Their biases are well-known to anyone who cares to look, and it's better to take them with a grain of salt rather than as gospel.


Dawncaller - The Circle of Dawn
Too many blasted alts to list, but all on Virtue.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Manofmanychars View Post
Not at all. You questioning the RPG cred of the largest, most experienced, and most respected group of RPG gamers on the internet is, in fact, tantamount to questioning the credentials of the researchers at CERN, or the Nobel Committee, or any other group that holds similar standing in its field. RPG.net is well-known in internet circles as the first and last word on tabletop gaming. If you refuse to acknowledge their expertise, then there can clearly be no convincing you that you're wrong, as no source will ever be credible enough for you.
Except I'm not questioning their cred, I'm simply asserting that my opinion is not their opinion. How people play RPGs is not a matter of right or wrong it's a matter of preference. You prefer to have backgrounds baked into the rules to try and force role-playing. I prefer to let players make their own choice.

As for the analogy I still call Reductio ad absurdum. Scientists produced facts based on observation and repeatable results that are subject to peer review. RPG.net produces opinions based on personal observations. To equate the value of the two is absurd.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adeon Hawkwood View Post
As for the analogy I still call Reductio ad absurdum. Scientists produced facts based on observation and repeatable results that are subject to peer review. RPG.net produces opinions based on personal observations. To equate the value of the two is absurd.
*cough*

For peer review, just look at any given thread there.

As for whether or not results are repeatable, that's up for debate.


[B]The Once and Future Official Minister of Awesome[/B]
[I]And don't you forget it.[/I]
[URL="http://paragonunleashed.proboards.com/index.cgi"][IMG]http://gamefacelive.com/bre/joker.png[/IMG][/URL]

 

Posted

Interruping the fanwank for a moment...

1) Has anyone here ever tried to adapt the City of Heroes universe for another superhero system (Hero System, Mutants and Masterminds 2E, GURPS, etc?) I'm looking for ways to do that since the CoH PnP is pretty much vaporware.

2) Does anyone else here play over Ventrilo or Skype? I've been recently introduced to this method of RPG gaming via The Spoony Experiment forums.


My Blogs on TGWTG.com
Angels of Wrath/Evilnighters/Legion of Catgirls
Mission Arc: #352860 - RJ The Road Dog: Big Trouble in Little Tokyo

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by RaiderRich2001 View Post
2) Does anyone else here play over Ventrilo or Skype? I've been recently introduced to this method of RPG gaming via The Spoony Experiment forums.
I've been in (and run) a few games over TeamSpeak and MapTool. It works out very well, if your GM is prepared to put two or three hours a week into it outwith gametime. Setting up actual maps is pretty much a must for games like D&D, particularly first and fourth editions, and even if you're playing in a system in which the maps would actually detract (see: Feng Shui, Exalted), then you should probably still have at least an hour or two before games dedicated to setting up tokens.

It does kinda reduce your ability as a GM to just wing things, unless you have a token image already ready for everything the players could possibly encounter, but other than that, it works pretty much just like on tabletop.


"The gaping maw of your mind is filled with layered circles upon circles of bloody razors, I am finding."
- Twoflower

 

Posted

City of Heroes can be modeled fairly easily in Hero System, actually. I've always wondered if the very first write ups of the powers were done in Hero System.

Energy Bolt: EB 4d6, Does Knockback, cannot be spread or bounced, cannot be pushed, etc...

It's just an incredible pain to do, since there are tons of powers to write up, and background campaign rules to write up as well regarding the generation of characters. At least you can ignore leveling entirely, or tie security/threat levels to total points.

I can't imagine how much of a pain it would be to write up Dual Blades. Perhaps the best approach would be as a series of compound powers... ugh.

As for backgrounds and game mechanics, I like the Hero System 6e approach. You can use Complications; game mechanics enforced aspects of your character's personality and background. You can even throw in Complications that don't give you "points" to build with if you like.
Or you can avoid Complications, especially the Complications you don't want. You can write up your character's backstory, or not, in as much or as little detail as you want and fill it in in play.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Manofmanychars View Post
I guess John Wick was right when he said that tabletop gaming was dying.
You know? I lost a lost of respect for Wick when he said that. He began to sound a bit less like someone who loves the hobby and a little more like someone who's lost interest in a pastime.

That said, I'm in Asheville and I've pretty much given up on a steady gaming night here... too many young WoTC fanboys/girls, too many older gamers not willing to commit any of their "precious" time anymore.

However, I have enough of a group together to have played with "Atomic Highway" a bit. Some of the most fun I've had in chargen in a loooong time, and V6 is a nice rules-lite system for having gonzo fun with.


It's 106 miles to Grandville, we got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark and we're wearing faceless helmets

... Hit it ...

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jet_Boy View Post
You know? I lost a lost of respect for Wick when he said that. He began to sound a bit less like someone who loves the hobby and a little more like someone who's lost interest in a pastime.
Hey, he cited sales numbers and convention turnouts for us, it's not like he's just making wild assumptions out of thin air. We may not like it, but we need to rethink the way we try to attract new gamers if we want to avoid what happened to comic books all those years ago (no kids infusing the hobby with new blood caused the industry to implode like a bad soufflé). Hell, this issue comes up often enough with video games, I don't see how it's so hard to believe that it's threatening tabletop gaming, as well.


[B]The Once and Future Official Minister of Awesome[/B]
[I]And don't you forget it.[/I]
[URL="http://paragonunleashed.proboards.com/index.cgi"][IMG]http://gamefacelive.com/bre/joker.png[/IMG][/URL]

 

Posted

I'm not really sure who John Wick is and why we need to pay atention to his pronouncements on the topic of the decline in tabtletop gaming.

But as someone who has been involved in organizing some of those conventions with declining membership, I have to say that the economy has LOTS to do with the declining amount of money spent on things that can be considered "extra" like purchasing new games and more importantly, attending conventions - which can easily cost a single person a few hundred dollars (depending upon hotel expenses mainly), let alone those with families who may want to attend.

When you are worried about making rent or the mortgage payment, spending $40 or more on a hardback game book or $200-300 on attending a convention are generally one of the first things to go. But if you are a gamer who enjoys tabletop games - that just means you go back to what you already have sitting on your shelf, be it Vampire: the Masquerade or DnD 3.5 or whatever.


Altoholic - but a Blaster at Heart!

Originally Posted by SpyralPegacyon

"You gave us a world where we could fly. I can't thank you enough for that."

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Manofmanychars View Post
*cough*

For peer review, just look at any given thread there.

As for whether or not results are repeatable, that's up for debate.
You don't have even the vaguest understanding of peer review or repeatability.

In fact you also haven't the foggiest notion of why your arguments are rubbish.

Opinions on RPGs are just that, opinions. They are not scientifically reproducible facts. Citing the opinion of an 'expert' on RPGs is like citing an expert opinion of whether they like chocolate or not. It's still just an opinion. Nothing of the sort will change someone else's opinion of that product.

Also, as it has been mentioned, rpg.net is a self selected group which has effectively banished dissenting voices over time. If you wandered over to, say, ENWorld for example you would get a completely different set of opinions on gaming, with a completely different set of 'experts' providing your 'facts'.

I can cite Monte Cook for a completely different take on gaming to your cited game developer, and I'm willing to bet Monte has published games with a hell of a greater circulation (you know, like 3rd edition D&D). Nonetheless, Monte would be no more factual on matters of opinion than your 'experts'.


Too many alts to list.