Subject:
|
Re: Elements of a brick oriented RPG
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.gaming
|
Date:
|
Wed, 15 May 2002 16:30:34 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3346 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.fun.gaming, Frank Filz writes:
> Aaron Sneary wrote:
> > In lugnet.fun.gaming, Frank Filz writes:
> > > 7. What is the intention of the game? A game for one off con events? An
> > > alternative RPG to give a break from something else? A long term
> > > campaign as a primary game?
>
> While this is a question I have to ask myself, I am curious how AFOLs
> who are also gaming fans feel.
I find that games at cons are (obviously) one-off events, and I find one-off
RPG's a bit lack-luster. They're great for introducing a new game or
system, but I veiw RPG's as something that needs a time commitment to really
enjoy; I want to see the characters grow and change. Wargames, "fun" games
(like Clay-o-Rama), and LARP one-offs are better suited to cons, IMHO.
> On the other hand, games like D&D have way too many creatures. You
> really shouldn't need more than a handful or two of humanoid type races,
> and a handful of creatures would work fine (I never used very many
> different creatures in Rune Quest for example).
I agree. Look at folklore, which typically only has a handful of
"thingies", or Tolkien, who had 3 classes of "thing": Orcs, Trolls (read:
big orcs), and Dark Things From Before (Balrogs, Shelobs and Watchers, oh my).
All bad guys fall into a few classes; little things that need to gang up,
big things are are dangerous by themselves, smart things, and "beyond you"
things. The first two classes only need to be a few types, not the varying
hundreds that D&D throws at you. Again, folklore is a good example.
Stories of giants or ogres or trolls all vary in the details; even different
stories about the same giant will paint it differently. All they have in
common is that they're a big lumbering thing.
> > You should definately look at the d20 system. It has some flaws, but is MUCH
> > simpler than AD&D 2nd Edition
>
> I probably should look at it. Do they have anything on the web which
> gives enough info to understand the basic system (I understand they
> limit what can be re-published in support materials so you have to buy
> the PHB and DMG which is a bit annoying).
I should look at it too, but I have a strong bias from experience that AD&D,
is a system that gamers use before graduating to real systems and real games. :)
> > In the games I've played, Elves tend to be slighter, faster, weaker, but
> > more agile. No magic preferences implied. Just a thought...
>
> That's perhaps common also, but elves seem to fit mostly within the
> human norm range, and often just seem to be a way to get a head start on
> a character who is going to be slighter, faster, weaker, and more agile.
> I don't like rules systems which encourage mini-maxing (or worse, make
> one feel really stupid if one doesn't mini-max).
I tend (when I use them) to use elves as they appear in folklore; sometimes
capricious, sometimes deadly, but always NPCs.
James
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Elements of a brick oriented RPG
|
| In lugnet.fun.gaming, James Brown writes: Oops - one snip too many, James is the single > (...) ...and Wargs, and Dragons, and Ents, and Hobbits, and Spiders, and Giants, and Elves, and Dwarves, and Really Big Eagles, and Sauron's Genetic (...) (23 years ago, 16-May-02, to lugnet.gaming)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Elements of a brick oriented RPG
|
| (...) Well, I do enjoy designing games (I've been a game designer almost as long as I've been playing war games - shortly after getting Tactics II, I designed a new board for it, I started fiddling with D&D [the original Basic D&D in the blue cover] (...) (23 years ago, 15-May-02, to lugnet.gaming)
|
48 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
