To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.gamingOpen lugnet.gaming in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Gaming / 1116
1115  |  1117
Subject: 
RPG or PBM? (Was: Elements of a brick oriented RPG)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.gaming
Date: 
Mon, 20 May 2002 17:34:39 GMT
Viewed: 
3401 times
  
In lugnet.fun.gaming, Mike Rayhawk writes:

the means of advancing in power and stature is in getting hold of
basic bricks and building things with them.

This is a cool idea, but does it neccesitate no character advancement?  Is the
goal to just get away from the traditional RPG aspects, to simplify the rules,
or something else?  Would having both advancement mechanisms work?

Sort of like if you made one of
those real-time strategy games (starcraft, age of empires, etc.) into an
RPG: players would have to go out and secure sources of bricks, harvest
them, bring them back to wherever they wanted to build stuff, and begin the
process of construction.  Players could be required to construct devices and
vehicles, as well as hire minifig workers and technicians, to help perform
any of these tasks, especially as their constructions became larger and more
complex.

So, the idea is still really intriguing, but I'm not sure it's really an RPG.
If I need my character to go to the woods to harvest brown bricks, what is the
role playing opportunity?  It sounds to me more like a PB(E)M sim type of game.
Sort of an open-ended Roads and Boats ( http://www.splotter.nl/english/r&b.html
) with role playing (or maybe more appropriately, story-telling) opportunities.

What would make the system interesting is how you limited the types of
constructions players could build; you could try to relate it to the real
world (players have to harvest forests to get timber and do some quarrying
to get stones), or you could go full-on Lego and just say that each color of
brick is available in certain places and carries specific advantages and
disadvantages.

I like the former.  A complete abstraction starts to get, I think, too far from
main stream.  Though I'd be interested in seeing how it would work.

You might possibly consider making some types of brick 'expendable,' so that
(for instance) minifigs have to have a certain amount of yellow bricks to
eat or they'll starve...
This would limit players in the number of minifigs they could sustain
at any one time, according to how much of their land they dedicated to
growing food or how much of their money they dedicated to buying it.

Again, this sounds like you're not talking about an RPG in which a human
generally plays one character.  But it's still grooving with me as way cool.
I'm also thinkig that housing would limit the number of folks you could
control, or their level of health, or their free time, etc.

You might also consider creating a system in which minifig scientists and
wise men can research new and efficient uses of ABS and its miraculous
properties, although that is probably better left to the storytelling
abilities of individual GMs rather than to a system of rules.

Agreed.  And after the initial period of fooling around with the system, this
is the exciting part of the game.

Equipment could be limited to what a minifig can hold in his hands and carry
in one of various kinds of backpacks; it'd be fun to even limit money in
this manner, so that if a minifig wanted to carry large sums of cash around
he'd be required to have a cart with a chest.

Yeah!  And if you wanted to store piles of gold, I guess you'd have to build a
strong hold and pay (or at least divert them from other opportunities0 guards.

This is obviously a little
unrealistic if you want the minifigs to represent humans (who have pockets
and pouches and scabbards and all manner of things), but I don't see any
reason to make things so human-centric.  Let the minifigs represent
minifigs, and it will be one more reason to encourage players to construct
their way out of problems.

Totally Agreed.  Minifigs don't have pockets, and the basic coin size is about
the size of a child's head.  It doesn't have to make sense in humanesque way,
like accounting for quiver capacity and stuff.

I agree, there's no real reason that a good RPG has to involve combat at
all.  I have a suspicion that most RPG's use combat as a distraction so
players don't have to do any real role-playing.

Ummm...I'm not sure about this.  It seems that conflict is a part of every good
tale.  How do you envision removing conflict resolution from the game?  I guess
minifigs can be said to be indestructible, that would change the nature of
conflict to a large degree even if it wouldn't eliminate it.

For the type of game I'm picturing it would be best to limit each minifig to
one or two 'special' skills, and let all other skills be covered under a
generic 'skill' attribute.

Are you imagining the special skills to be just "written down" somehow, or
elemental in the construction of the minifig characters?

Silver Duplo 2x4...Cha-ching!

Cha-ching, if you could find some way to transport it to a bank!  Probably
wouldn't even fit out through the dungeon entrance.

Well, you'd have to build a way to move it in situ and then excavate the cave
entrance...

There were several notes on constructing setting elements.  I've been toying
with a terrain system that uses 4x4 plates offset so that they are
schematically hexagons (they border six other plates).  You can assemble
modules of terrain (with varying elevations) based on these units (which are
each flat).

This sounds like a good practical solution to force bricks to conform to
existing rules, but it does make for some pretty harsh constrictions on the
kinds of things you can build, I think.  Better to force the rules to
conform to the brick.

That's a good point.  I was specifically thinking of an implementation of a
close combat system using LEGO.  Something more intrinsically brickish would
make more sense.

Chris



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: RPG or PBM? (Was: Elements of a brick oriented RPG)
 
(...) I didn't really mean to exclude anything, I really just meant to raise the idea that character advancement isn't really an absolute necessity. The game would be a lot simpler if it were left out; in any case, with only four possible ratings (...) (22 years ago, 20-May-02, to lugnet.gaming)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Elements of a brick oriented RPG
 
(...) One of the ideas I've been keeping on the back burner for BrikWars is a supplement for some kind of construction-campaign system. It's anybody's guess as to when (or if) this idea will ever get fleshed out, so I'd be just as happy to see it (...) (22 years ago, 20-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
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR