Monday, January 31, 2005
On Palladium, Part Three
Is it a game system or just a game? Let's face it. Who gives a shit? While it bugs me that Palladium pushes its various disjointed mechanics on the gamer community and calls them a system, whether or not a game is actually part of an overall game system doesn't make it good or bad. After all, GURPS is a game system, and I just found it to be too much number-crunching to be fun. Dungeons & Dragons 3E has so many rules that don't work together that the so-called d20 System is hardly a system. But it's damn fun, even if it's stupidly complicated at times (attack of opportunity, anyone?).
Perhaps it's unfair to Palladium to base the rest of my argument on the mechanics as they are laid out in Rifts, seeing as Rifts is the most disjointed of all the Palladium games, but it's what I have on-hand and it represents a good heaping handful of the Palladium mechanics. Basically, it tries to use just about everything and fails.
As many of my players know, the thing I hate most about roleplaying games is character creation. I don't mean coming up with an idea for a character, writing a history, choosing a name and determining his (or her) personality. What I'm referring to is the mechanical aspect of character creation. I hate doing it. I loathe it. I despise it. I think character creation should be the simplest thing in a roleplaying game so that you can let your imagine guide you the rest of the way and just damn well get playing. This is what I love about Vampire: The Masquerade (and the rest of the White Wolf World of Darkness games). Mechanical character creation takes five minutes if you know what you're doing. The concentration is on turning these simple-looking stats into an interesting personality.
Overly-complicated and time-consuming character creation processes turn me right off. This is partly why I stopped playing GURPS, as well as a good chunk of the reason why I think Hero System is probably not for me. If it takes more than, say, half an hour to do all the mechanics for a game, I don't want it. If I need an Excel spreadsheet just to figure out all the mechanical nuances, keep the game away from me.
While Palladium games' character creation isn't nearly as complicated as GURPS, it's very time-consuming, and hardly intuitive. To make matters worse, it's not only time-consuming, but it's boring as watching paint dry. Opening up my Rifts book, I note there are eight attributes -- Intelligence Quotient (I.Q.), Mental Endurance (M.E.), Mental Affinity (M.A.), Physical Strength (P.S.), Physical Prowess (P.P.), Physical Endurance (P.E.), Physical Beauty (P.B.) and Speed (Spd.). They're rolled randomly, but they can be affected later by choosing various different skills, which I'll get to in a minute.
As bizarre as it is, there are three different types of hit points in Palladium. There's Hit Point (H.P.), Structural Damage Capacity (S.D.C.) and Mega-Damage Capacity (M.D.C.). Some characters only have one of these, while others might have all three in some ways. Most tend to have one or two, though. Normal creatures tend to have H.P. and S.D.C., while supernatural creatures have M.D.C. Think of these as being normal damage (H.P. and S.D.C.) versus uber-damage (M.D.C., in which each point of M.D.C. actually equals 100 H.P. or S.D.C.). Stupid, definitely.
Assuming the character you're building has no magic nor psionics, which are a pain in the ass as it is, what you need to do afterwards is determine your race (human, elf, dwarf, or one of the other thousand other races), Occupational Character Class (O.C.C.) and/or Racial Character Class (R.C.C.). That's right. It's not enough to just have race and class. The game is so unintuitive that the author had to include a special class type based on a race. Not everything mixes and matches very easily, and the extraordinary diversity of power levels between character types is baffling. In the core book alone, you can make what is probably the most useless character class ever shown in a Palladium game -- the Vagrant O.C.C., which has no armour, a few crappy weapons, a bit of money and a bag full of junk. One shot from an M.D.C. weapon, which are the most common weapons in the game, and this dude is toast. Compare him to the Glitter Boy O.C.C., which is a character that wears powered armour and totes around a gun bigger than the armour itself. Where does balance fit into the equation?
Throw in Potential Psychic Energy (P.P.E.) points, and constructing a character has already taken some time.
But wait! It gets worse! Now we move on to skills. By taking physical skills, you can up your character's physical attributes, number of attacks per melee round and other things based on your character's physical strength and endurance. Then there are knowledge-based skills, all of which are assigned a percentile rating. This rating is calculated based on the skill's base rating, the character's I.Q. and the level of the character, not to mention the odd skill that affects another skill's rating.
Each character has class and secondary skills. Characters get a certain number of automatic skills based on their O.C.C./R.C.C. as well as a few they can choose themselves. The skills get so nitty-gritty that the author felt it was necessary that Basic Math be listed amongst the skills.
Now, there are also melee combat skills and weapon proficiencies, but by this point, my brain starts to beg to be relieved from the hell of Palladium character creation. Although I haven't built too many Palladium characters recently, I did run Rawl through a character creation session several months ago for a Rifts campaign I was thinking of running. I think it took us the better part of two hours -- and Rawl had indeed played Palladium games before.
The mechanics of character creation should be the simplest part of a roleplaying game. Palladium has failed miserably at this.
Perhaps it's unfair to Palladium to base the rest of my argument on the mechanics as they are laid out in Rifts, seeing as Rifts is the most disjointed of all the Palladium games, but it's what I have on-hand and it represents a good heaping handful of the Palladium mechanics. Basically, it tries to use just about everything and fails.
As many of my players know, the thing I hate most about roleplaying games is character creation. I don't mean coming up with an idea for a character, writing a history, choosing a name and determining his (or her) personality. What I'm referring to is the mechanical aspect of character creation. I hate doing it. I loathe it. I despise it. I think character creation should be the simplest thing in a roleplaying game so that you can let your imagine guide you the rest of the way and just damn well get playing. This is what I love about Vampire: The Masquerade (and the rest of the White Wolf World of Darkness games). Mechanical character creation takes five minutes if you know what you're doing. The concentration is on turning these simple-looking stats into an interesting personality.
Overly-complicated and time-consuming character creation processes turn me right off. This is partly why I stopped playing GURPS, as well as a good chunk of the reason why I think Hero System is probably not for me. If it takes more than, say, half an hour to do all the mechanics for a game, I don't want it. If I need an Excel spreadsheet just to figure out all the mechanical nuances, keep the game away from me.
While Palladium games' character creation isn't nearly as complicated as GURPS, it's very time-consuming, and hardly intuitive. To make matters worse, it's not only time-consuming, but it's boring as watching paint dry. Opening up my Rifts book, I note there are eight attributes -- Intelligence Quotient (I.Q.), Mental Endurance (M.E.), Mental Affinity (M.A.), Physical Strength (P.S.), Physical Prowess (P.P.), Physical Endurance (P.E.), Physical Beauty (P.B.) and Speed (Spd.). They're rolled randomly, but they can be affected later by choosing various different skills, which I'll get to in a minute.
As bizarre as it is, there are three different types of hit points in Palladium. There's Hit Point (H.P.), Structural Damage Capacity (S.D.C.) and Mega-Damage Capacity (M.D.C.). Some characters only have one of these, while others might have all three in some ways. Most tend to have one or two, though. Normal creatures tend to have H.P. and S.D.C., while supernatural creatures have M.D.C. Think of these as being normal damage (H.P. and S.D.C.) versus uber-damage (M.D.C., in which each point of M.D.C. actually equals 100 H.P. or S.D.C.). Stupid, definitely.
Assuming the character you're building has no magic nor psionics, which are a pain in the ass as it is, what you need to do afterwards is determine your race (human, elf, dwarf, or one of the other thousand other races), Occupational Character Class (O.C.C.) and/or Racial Character Class (R.C.C.). That's right. It's not enough to just have race and class. The game is so unintuitive that the author had to include a special class type based on a race. Not everything mixes and matches very easily, and the extraordinary diversity of power levels between character types is baffling. In the core book alone, you can make what is probably the most useless character class ever shown in a Palladium game -- the Vagrant O.C.C., which has no armour, a few crappy weapons, a bit of money and a bag full of junk. One shot from an M.D.C. weapon, which are the most common weapons in the game, and this dude is toast. Compare him to the Glitter Boy O.C.C., which is a character that wears powered armour and totes around a gun bigger than the armour itself. Where does balance fit into the equation?
Throw in Potential Psychic Energy (P.P.E.) points, and constructing a character has already taken some time.
But wait! It gets worse! Now we move on to skills. By taking physical skills, you can up your character's physical attributes, number of attacks per melee round and other things based on your character's physical strength and endurance. Then there are knowledge-based skills, all of which are assigned a percentile rating. This rating is calculated based on the skill's base rating, the character's I.Q. and the level of the character, not to mention the odd skill that affects another skill's rating.
Each character has class and secondary skills. Characters get a certain number of automatic skills based on their O.C.C./R.C.C. as well as a few they can choose themselves. The skills get so nitty-gritty that the author felt it was necessary that Basic Math be listed amongst the skills.
Now, there are also melee combat skills and weapon proficiencies, but by this point, my brain starts to beg to be relieved from the hell of Palladium character creation. Although I haven't built too many Palladium characters recently, I did run Rawl through a character creation session several months ago for a Rifts campaign I was thinking of running. I think it took us the better part of two hours -- and Rawl had indeed played Palladium games before.
The mechanics of character creation should be the simplest part of a roleplaying game. Palladium has failed miserably at this.
On Palladium, Part Two
It took me a few days to get around to this, but now it starts. To kick things off, the first thing I have to say that bugs me about Palladium in general is the insistence by head honcho Kevin Siembieda that Palladium is a game system. This is something I disagree with.
There are probably different definitions of what a game system is, and mine might be somewhat different than others. Palladium, however, doesn't fit the bill. At its most basic definition, a game system is a set of game mechanics that can work for anything and are used throughout a product line, making everything within that product line compatible. Steve Jackson Games' GURPS is the best example. Like it or love it, GURPS (Generic Universal RolePlaying System) products are compatible. The mechanics don't change. There are just modular components. You could take a GURPS Fantasy elf wizard, throw it into GURPS Cyberpunk, and it would work. You would need the GURPS core book (books, now that GURPS 4E is out and SJG has gone the route of dual core books) and the other two books, but you wouldn't need to do any fiddling to get them to work together. They're compatible.
GURPS probably has its share of mechanical mix-ups that make a few things less than fully compatible, but for the most part, you can swap characters in and out of any setting with zero difficulty. That's mechanically speaking, of course. Throwing an elf wizard into the American Wild West ... well, you're on own figuring out how they get there and whether an elf wizard should be riding along with a bunch of gun-totin' cowboys.
Hero System is another game that is typically considered to be a game system rather than just a game. I don't know a lot about Hero, but I've been learning a bit from both Logan and Rich. By the sounds of it, Hero fits my definition of game system. It sounds like there might be a few inconsistencies because the game is a toolkit to build your own game worlds and campaigns, but it still sounds mostly universal.
Palladium doesn't work this way. It's almost there, but not quite. Each Palladium game uses a similar mechanic, although there are such vast modifications for specific settings that you'd need to sit down and do some work to port a Rifts character into, say, Palladium Fantasy. It could be done, but it's that work that makes it, in my mind, not a system.
This would also fit into other games that are called systems. Unisystem from Eden Studios sounds like Palladium, in a way. The only Eden game I have is All Flesh Must Be Eaten, so it's difficult to make comparisons, but as I understand it, there are two different versions of the Unisystem -- the regular one and the cinematic one. I think they're mostly compatible, but there are some tweaks that set them apart slightly. Whether these tweaks render them incompatible, I honestly don't know, though.
There are probably different definitions of what a game system is, and mine might be somewhat different than others. Palladium, however, doesn't fit the bill. At its most basic definition, a game system is a set of game mechanics that can work for anything and are used throughout a product line, making everything within that product line compatible. Steve Jackson Games' GURPS is the best example. Like it or love it, GURPS (Generic Universal RolePlaying System) products are compatible. The mechanics don't change. There are just modular components. You could take a GURPS Fantasy elf wizard, throw it into GURPS Cyberpunk, and it would work. You would need the GURPS core book (books, now that GURPS 4E is out and SJG has gone the route of dual core books) and the other two books, but you wouldn't need to do any fiddling to get them to work together. They're compatible.
GURPS probably has its share of mechanical mix-ups that make a few things less than fully compatible, but for the most part, you can swap characters in and out of any setting with zero difficulty. That's mechanically speaking, of course. Throwing an elf wizard into the American Wild West ... well, you're on own figuring out how they get there and whether an elf wizard should be riding along with a bunch of gun-totin' cowboys.
Hero System is another game that is typically considered to be a game system rather than just a game. I don't know a lot about Hero, but I've been learning a bit from both Logan and Rich. By the sounds of it, Hero fits my definition of game system. It sounds like there might be a few inconsistencies because the game is a toolkit to build your own game worlds and campaigns, but it still sounds mostly universal.
Palladium doesn't work this way. It's almost there, but not quite. Each Palladium game uses a similar mechanic, although there are such vast modifications for specific settings that you'd need to sit down and do some work to port a Rifts character into, say, Palladium Fantasy. It could be done, but it's that work that makes it, in my mind, not a system.
This would also fit into other games that are called systems. Unisystem from Eden Studios sounds like Palladium, in a way. The only Eden game I have is All Flesh Must Be Eaten, so it's difficult to make comparisons, but as I understand it, there are two different versions of the Unisystem -- the regular one and the cinematic one. I think they're mostly compatible, but there are some tweaks that set them apart slightly. Whether these tweaks render them incompatible, I honestly don't know, though.
Friday, January 28, 2005
Hero System
It's been a quiet day, and I've been getting Logan and Rich to explain a bit about Hero System to me. I still have very mixed opinions about it, but I think I'm willing to find out more by tracking down a copy of the "lite" rules, Hero Sidekick, and reading them.
Thursday, January 27, 2005
Skype
A few of us at work are trying out Skype, free Internet voice communications software that uses a peer-to-peer networking connection. It's actually kind of cool, and it doubles as an IM client. Good stuff.
Free Comic Book Day 2005
Free Comic Book Day has been scheduled for May 7th this year.
Wednesday, January 26, 2005
Palladium, Part One
I had an IM discussion yesterday with a guy named Kyle, who is someone I used to hang out with a lot when I was in the SCA. He and some friends (all other people I used to hang out with during my SCA time) have been playing various Palladium games, and I ended up slamming the system. To quote, I called it "broken."
Thankfully, although Kyle really likes the game, he's not a rabid Palladium yes-gamer. I only pointed out a couple of things that bug me about the game, such as the ridiculous way attacks per melee are handled (so if I've got eight APM and you have three APM, we'll exchange attacks evenly three times in a row and then I get to hit you five more times -- what???) and the ridiculously long time it takes to make up a simple character.
While I really think Palladium has come up with some interesting game worlds and concepts, the system is horribly broken, mangled and a danger to the mental health of gamers everywhere. The so-called system was built back in the early 1980s, and it really shows its age. It hasn't had an update since Rifts launched around 1990/1991, and even then, it wasn't much of an update. The only real update was the changes made from Palladium Fantasy 1st Edition to 2nd Edition and from Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles & Other Strangeness 1st Edition to 2nd Edition. Otherwise, the game has more or less remained the same ever since it was created -- even though Palladium keeps mangling the system and creating more problems with every new product release.
The above text was just a rant to start off my dissection of the Palladium system. Think of it as the opening diatribe that kicked off my Shadowrun rant. However, I'm much more capable of dissecting Palladium and pointing out its stupidities, so once the true dissection begins, it could last weeks. ;)
EDIT (01/27): I should point out that there's a slight error above. TMNT&OS never had a 2nd Edition. It had a Revised Edition. The Law also pointed out that Heroes Unlimited had a Revised Edition before TMNT&OS.
Thankfully, although Kyle really likes the game, he's not a rabid Palladium yes-gamer. I only pointed out a couple of things that bug me about the game, such as the ridiculous way attacks per melee are handled (so if I've got eight APM and you have three APM, we'll exchange attacks evenly three times in a row and then I get to hit you five more times -- what???) and the ridiculously long time it takes to make up a simple character.
While I really think Palladium has come up with some interesting game worlds and concepts, the system is horribly broken, mangled and a danger to the mental health of gamers everywhere. The so-called system was built back in the early 1980s, and it really shows its age. It hasn't had an update since Rifts launched around 1990/1991, and even then, it wasn't much of an update. The only real update was the changes made from Palladium Fantasy 1st Edition to 2nd Edition and from Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles & Other Strangeness 1st Edition to 2nd Edition. Otherwise, the game has more or less remained the same ever since it was created -- even though Palladium keeps mangling the system and creating more problems with every new product release.
The above text was just a rant to start off my dissection of the Palladium system. Think of it as the opening diatribe that kicked off my Shadowrun rant. However, I'm much more capable of dissecting Palladium and pointing out its stupidities, so once the true dissection begins, it could last weeks. ;)
EDIT (01/27): I should point out that there's a slight error above. TMNT&OS never had a 2nd Edition. It had a Revised Edition. The Law also pointed out that Heroes Unlimited had a Revised Edition before TMNT&OS.
Beyond Belief Games
Beyond Belief Games is the main site for the group/company that offers It's A Dog's Life, a game I linked to a couple of days ago. Tales From The Wood just looks fun. The initial descriptions reminds me of the cartoon show Fables of the Green Forest, which was one of my favourite cartoons as a kid.
Monday, January 24, 2005
Yourself!Fitness
I wasn't sure what to make of Yourself!Fitness when I discovered a review of it on Metacritic, but I think I'm weighing towards calling it brilliant. I just love the irony of using a machine that helps people to get fat and lazy to help them get thin and trim.
In fact, if I find this in a bargain bin somewhere, it is soooooo mine.
In fact, if I find this in a bargain bin somewhere, it is soooooo mine.
It's getting a bit later in the day, and I'm feeling a bit tired. I think I've written over two thousand words today for work. Doesn't sound like much, really, but when you factor in how dry the topics are, it sounds worse. Not that I'll bother telling you what those factors are, of course.
It's A Dog's Life: The RPG
There are just some game ideas that are just too funny. In It's A Dog's Life, players take on the roles of intelligent prairie dogs on the North American plains. How many RPGs can give you that option?
Friday, January 21, 2005
In fantasy societies like those found in Dungeons & Dragons, does technology ever progress or has technological evolution been destroyed by the existence of magic? And if it's been nixed completely, how did any technology really evolve? Shouldn't everything be magic-based?
On another gaming note, my uber-simplistic Mechamorphosis campaign Website is now up.
On another gaming note, my uber-simplistic Mechamorphosis campaign Website is now up.
Wednesday, January 19, 2005
Quote of the Day
Found in the signature of a RPG.net forum poster...
Love is never having to say you're sorry. Power is being able to kill anyone who asks for an apology.
Love is never having to say you're sorry. Power is being able to kill anyone who asks for an apology.
The reinstall of Windows XP on my laptop went well, and now my laptop is purring like a kitten. Well, probably more like clunking like a spare tire in the trunk. I mean, it is an old laptop using Celeron technology. A new Pocket PC has a better processor than my laptop.
Tuesday, January 18, 2005
Geekly Thought of the Day
Ever wonder why there are never any bathrooms in dungeons? When I run Dungeons & Dragons adventures in underground complexes, few rooms are ever described as "smells like urine" or "there's a big pile of shit in one corner." Why is that? Do monsters not excrete? Or are do they hold it and then go outside so as not to leave any droppings in the dungeon? Or are there bathrooms hidden behind secret doors? Hmm...
Not a good day at all. Last night, Jacquie used my laptop to go looking for cheats and downloads for The Sims 2. Unfortunately, she ended up at some malware site that ended up throwing a shitload of Trojans, cookies, spyware and adware on my laptop (note: I use my laptop for work, so this is extraordinarily bad). To make things even worse, the Trojans were rather nasty and stubborn ones that anti-spyware/anti-adware/anti-virus software couldn't seem to get off.
I've just backed my laptop's hard drive up and starting the rather long process of wiping the hard drive and starting again. I just hope I managed to back everything up ... or else I am fucked.
I've just backed my laptop's hard drive up and starting the rather long process of wiping the hard drive and starting again. I just hope I managed to back everything up ... or else I am fucked.
Monday, January 17, 2005
Eureka! I struck nostalgia!
While sifting through the various boxes occupying our storage room yesterday, I came across all of my old Dungeons & Dragons books -- the ones from the 1980s. Nostalgia struck, and instead of shoving them back into the box to be forgotten about yet again, I took them out and set them on my desk with the intention of flipping through them.
Years ago, my gaming group put those books to much use. Of course, the group was completely different then, and nobody from those days is still playing in my regular group.
Years ago, my gaming group put those books to much use. Of course, the group was completely different then, and nobody from those days is still playing in my regular group.
Saturday, January 15, 2005
I'm not sure whether I should thank Rich or curse him. You see, several months ago, Rich was bitten hard by the photography bug, and ever since, he's been doing a lot of shooting. He learned the first rule of photography really well (better than I ever learned it) -- to carry your camera with you everywhere you. At any rate, I'm envious of his discipline.
Of course, Rich isn't the type to talk about all of his hobbies or anything. I've heard him chat about photography a couple of times, and I've mostly just stayed out of the conversation. Even with my bit of formal training, I'm a pretty piss-poor photographer. Like a lot of photographers, the good shots I occasionally get come after hundreds of bad to mediocre shots ... and even those rare good shots are by pure luck. I'm just not much of an artist. So anyway, I've mostly listened whenever he's talked about photography.
Last night, Rich, Rawl and I went out for a few drinks at the Bear & Firkin, and at some point in the evening, I engaged Rich on the topic of photography. Digital, 35mm, video, photography as art, photojournalism (which I only brought up to say that while I loved learning about photography as art, I really hated photojournalism), online photography sites, going out on shoots, etc.
Well, now the photography bug has bit me. It's been awhile since it struck. While I do use my Minolta digital camera a bit (mostly for snapshots), I broke it and my Pentax K-1000 35mm manual camera out this morning with the intention of taking them out and doing some shooting over the next few days.
Thanks, Rich. And curse you.
Of course, Rich isn't the type to talk about all of his hobbies or anything. I've heard him chat about photography a couple of times, and I've mostly just stayed out of the conversation. Even with my bit of formal training, I'm a pretty piss-poor photographer. Like a lot of photographers, the good shots I occasionally get come after hundreds of bad to mediocre shots ... and even those rare good shots are by pure luck. I'm just not much of an artist. So anyway, I've mostly listened whenever he's talked about photography.
Last night, Rich, Rawl and I went out for a few drinks at the Bear & Firkin, and at some point in the evening, I engaged Rich on the topic of photography. Digital, 35mm, video, photography as art, photojournalism (which I only brought up to say that while I loved learning about photography as art, I really hated photojournalism), online photography sites, going out on shoots, etc.
Well, now the photography bug has bit me. It's been awhile since it struck. While I do use my Minolta digital camera a bit (mostly for snapshots), I broke it and my Pentax K-1000 35mm manual camera out this morning with the intention of taking them out and doing some shooting over the next few days.
Thanks, Rich. And curse you.
Friday, January 14, 2005
Shadowrun, Part Trois!
The comments regarding my last Shadowrun post are getting a bit long, and the personal shots are starting to come out. You just gotta love my friends, eh? ;)
And yeah, I know who TBO is, but I won't out him here. :P I will admit that I didn't know originally who it was. I had guessed correctly, but then I convinced myself I was wrong ... and that it really was some stranger who reads my blog. I should've known better.
With all the trashing of Shadowrun's mechanics, you'd think my opinion of the game is very low. However, that's not really the case. Like I wrote in my original post, the concept of the game is great (one of my favourites, in fact), but the system never sat well with me. Of course, I can also only talk about the second edition version of the game, as I'm not really familiar with too many of the changes in the third edition.
So it's probably about time I actually explained some of the mechanical things that I don't like about Shadowrun. The first thing that always makes a game more complicated is when it requires multiple dice just to figure out the simple question of "do I hit him or not?" In a game where combat isn't the focus, such as Vampire: The Masquerade, this isn't really a problem, but in a combat-heavy game like Shadowrun, the quicker you can resolve to-hit rolls, the better.
In fact, combat in Shadowrun is like a more mechanically advanced version of what is found Vampire (actually, I guess it's probably the other way around -- Vampire is a less mechanically advanced version of Shadowrun, seeing as Shadowrun is older than Vampire by a couple of years). You take your dice pools, throw them on the table and start counting successes. Of course, with Shadowrun, if you roll a six (it's based on six-sided dice), you reroll the die and add the new result to the six. If you have a difficulty target number that's higher than six, you might very well need those extra points. Vampire doesn't have any such rule, but Vampire uses a botch mechanic, wherein if you roll a one (the game is based on d10s), it cancels out a success. In the end, though, Vampire isn't about combat and Shadowrun ... well, it wouldn't be Shadowrun without exchanging some lead with NPCs.
In the few games of Shadowrun I've been involved in, I don't remember combat ever going quickly. There's a lot of rolling. It's a very nitty-gritty system in that respect. And that's just fine if that's the way you like your combat. Dungeons & Dragons, on the other hand, uses a single d20 roll to see if you hit. Then you calculate damage. It's somewhat quicker, which ends up working for me. I don't think combat encounters are the highlights of roleplaying game sessions, and when combat is going on, I like the mechanical aspect of it to go by as quickly as possible, leaving me to give details on what happens.
As with Shadowrun, D&D's combat complexity starts to factor in when you start dealing with combat maneuvers and tactics -- surprise rounds, called shots, flanking, charging, assisting, tripping, disarming, attacking multiple times, shooting blind, etc., etc., etc. In this case, both of the systems are needlessly complicated, and trying to recite from memory what the penalty is to a called shot to the head is just a pain in the ass. I might as well be playing a war game if all I'm doing is memorizing and regurgitating combat rules.
So what's the message here? Games suck. Or something like that. Frankly, this is now just too long and it's time to click "publish."
And yeah, I know who TBO is, but I won't out him here. :P I will admit that I didn't know originally who it was. I had guessed correctly, but then I convinced myself I was wrong ... and that it really was some stranger who reads my blog. I should've known better.
With all the trashing of Shadowrun's mechanics, you'd think my opinion of the game is very low. However, that's not really the case. Like I wrote in my original post, the concept of the game is great (one of my favourites, in fact), but the system never sat well with me. Of course, I can also only talk about the second edition version of the game, as I'm not really familiar with too many of the changes in the third edition.
So it's probably about time I actually explained some of the mechanical things that I don't like about Shadowrun. The first thing that always makes a game more complicated is when it requires multiple dice just to figure out the simple question of "do I hit him or not?" In a game where combat isn't the focus, such as Vampire: The Masquerade, this isn't really a problem, but in a combat-heavy game like Shadowrun, the quicker you can resolve to-hit rolls, the better.
In fact, combat in Shadowrun is like a more mechanically advanced version of what is found Vampire (actually, I guess it's probably the other way around -- Vampire is a less mechanically advanced version of Shadowrun, seeing as Shadowrun is older than Vampire by a couple of years). You take your dice pools, throw them on the table and start counting successes. Of course, with Shadowrun, if you roll a six (it's based on six-sided dice), you reroll the die and add the new result to the six. If you have a difficulty target number that's higher than six, you might very well need those extra points. Vampire doesn't have any such rule, but Vampire uses a botch mechanic, wherein if you roll a one (the game is based on d10s), it cancels out a success. In the end, though, Vampire isn't about combat and Shadowrun ... well, it wouldn't be Shadowrun without exchanging some lead with NPCs.
In the few games of Shadowrun I've been involved in, I don't remember combat ever going quickly. There's a lot of rolling. It's a very nitty-gritty system in that respect. And that's just fine if that's the way you like your combat. Dungeons & Dragons, on the other hand, uses a single d20 roll to see if you hit. Then you calculate damage. It's somewhat quicker, which ends up working for me. I don't think combat encounters are the highlights of roleplaying game sessions, and when combat is going on, I like the mechanical aspect of it to go by as quickly as possible, leaving me to give details on what happens.
As with Shadowrun, D&D's combat complexity starts to factor in when you start dealing with combat maneuvers and tactics -- surprise rounds, called shots, flanking, charging, assisting, tripping, disarming, attacking multiple times, shooting blind, etc., etc., etc. In this case, both of the systems are needlessly complicated, and trying to recite from memory what the penalty is to a called shot to the head is just a pain in the ass. I might as well be playing a war game if all I'm doing is memorizing and regurgitating combat rules.
So what's the message here? Games suck. Or something like that. Frankly, this is now just too long and it's time to click "publish."
Snitz
Something I'd really like to do is to play with a forums application on this site. There's no real purpose to having a forum here. I'm just curious how they work ... and if I can get one up and running. Snitz is the one that I've been thinking of using, but quite frankly, I'm not the most technically-savvy person when it comes to knowledge about the inner workings of Web servers. I really don't have a fucking clue how to do this.
News flash: The dead will rise!
I've been spending a fair bit of time reading the All Flesh Must Be Eaten core book, and I'm really impressed with it. In fact, I'm so impressed by the quality, I'm dying to pick up supplements for AFMBE, as well as other games published by Eden Studios.
The Unisystem, which most of Eden's games use is designed to be simple to learn, but it's also designed to fade into the background and let the story take centre stage. Now, I'm not sure whether it does that any more than any other game, but I do kind of like what I see. The first big thing that's different is that combat is treated like anything else -- just another skill roll. There are no complicated war game-like extended rules for doing combat, which is kind of nice. I do get tired of trying to remember the various rules in D&D for things like flanking, charging, bull rushes, range increments and other crazy combat stuff. It just gets to be a bit much at times.
The Unisystem uses a fairly simple task resolution mechanic. You roll a d10, add in an attribute/skill. If it all adds up to a nine, it's a success. Of course, the game master can add bonuses or penalties to a roll based on difficulty, distractions and whatnot. Damage is done by rolling d4s, d6s and d8s, and then factoring in multipliers. Here and there, the mechanics get a little more complicated, but for the most part, it looks fairly simple to learn.
The system is also fairly brutal. Combat can be deadly, by the looks of it. But as a zombie survival horror game, I wouldn't expect anything else. I know with the Buffy the Vampire Slayer RPG, Eden implemented a more cinematic version of the Unisystem. I don't really know what the differences are, but I would imagine it's a lot harder to die.
The Unisystem, which most of Eden's games use is designed to be simple to learn, but it's also designed to fade into the background and let the story take centre stage. Now, I'm not sure whether it does that any more than any other game, but I do kind of like what I see. The first big thing that's different is that combat is treated like anything else -- just another skill roll. There are no complicated war game-like extended rules for doing combat, which is kind of nice. I do get tired of trying to remember the various rules in D&D for things like flanking, charging, bull rushes, range increments and other crazy combat stuff. It just gets to be a bit much at times.
The Unisystem uses a fairly simple task resolution mechanic. You roll a d10, add in an attribute/skill. If it all adds up to a nine, it's a success. Of course, the game master can add bonuses or penalties to a roll based on difficulty, distractions and whatnot. Damage is done by rolling d4s, d6s and d8s, and then factoring in multipliers. Here and there, the mechanics get a little more complicated, but for the most part, it looks fairly simple to learn.
The system is also fairly brutal. Combat can be deadly, by the looks of it. But as a zombie survival horror game, I wouldn't expect anything else. I know with the Buffy the Vampire Slayer RPG, Eden implemented a more cinematic version of the Unisystem. I don't really know what the differences are, but I would imagine it's a lot harder to die.
A conversation from the IM world...
Note: This was sparked by the previous post's link to a "how-to" on writing an epic fantasy novel the Tolkien way.
Walking Dead says:
Heheh. http://members.ozemail.com.au/~imcfadyen/notthenet/fantasy.htm
The Law says:
Funny.
The Law says:
That's why D&D campaigns don't feel epic enough.
Walking Dead says:
Right.
The Law says:
I should try to factor in some of these rules to my game.
Walking Dead says:
I think it's about time I tried writing a novel.
The Law says:
Oh yeah?
The Law says:
A fantasy Epic?
Walking Dead says:
Maybe. It would be fun to follow this formula. Heheh.
The Law says:
You know what would be really interesting?
Walking Dead says:
Ever since November's National Novel Writing Month, I've been thinking of blogging a novel.
The Law says:
Follow this formula, but make it current/non-fantasy.
The Law says:
A desk-jockey is told the fate of the world rests in him taking a sacred artifact to the edge of the world...
The Law says:
On the way he's accompanied by a Dead-head, accountant, housewife and circus midget...
Walking Dead says:
Heheh.
The Law says:
He has a wise, but absent-minded advisor — that's a tough one...
Walking Dead says:
I think a humourous fantasy novel where a nerdy D&D player is placed into a real fantasy world would be funny. Y'know, but everything he thinks he knows about fantasy is wrong. For instance, kobolds would be these fifteen-foot-tall killing machines.
The Law says:
An early days Wiccan guy/druid...
The Law says:
Yeah. That could be funny.
The Law says:
Want to make this an (unpublished) challenge?
The Law says:
Man to man...
The Law says:
(You know it'll never happen)
Walking Dead says:
We could have some fun and collaborate on a novel. Aim for 50,000 words and bounce ideas off each other.
The Law says:
Maybe.
The Law says:
Or, we could come up with a word-count and write -- for fun -- novelettes/short stories based on a formula.
The Law says:
And a timeline.
Walking Dead says:
Right.
The Law says:
I'd be down with either of them... I think it could be fun.
Walking Dead says:
Well, NNWM gives you one month write a novel.
The Law says:
If we said our timeline was 2005, that would be good.
The Law says:
NNWM?
The Law says:
What's that?
Walking Dead says:
National Novel Writing Month.
The Law says:
Oh.
Walking Dead says:
In 30 days, you write a novel from start to finish. Assuming you aim for 50,000 words, that's less than 1700 words per day.
The Law says:
True.
The Law says:
But that's still a lot when you have day jobs, right.
The Law says:
Now many words did you say we've written in the year on the board?
Walking Dead says:
I know. But people do it. A heck of a lot of people participate in NNWM.
Walking Dead says:
57,652 words.
The Law says:
Right.
The Law says:
Hahaha: "The important thing about an epic fantasy novel is that the reader must be exhausted at the end of it. They must feel that they have overcome as many obstacles in getting through the book as the heroes have in fulfilling the quest. So the book must be as difficult to read as possible."
The Law says:
I love that.
The Law says:
I also love the bit about wizards and lords not using their magical powers... I noticed that in LoTR. For all his power, Gandalf almost never casts a freaking spell.
Walking Dead says:
Yep.
Walking Dead says:
With all his power, why couldn't Gandalf have his giant hawk-thing fly the fucking hobbits to Mordor?
The Law says:
Again why D&D doesn't work.
The Law says:
Hahaha.
The Law says:
Cause the journey was as important as the destination.
Walking Dead says:
Heheh.
Walking Dead says:
Then nix the giant hawk-thing.
The Law says:
We could just re-write LoTR with them actually being practical.
The Law says:
It would be like 20 pages.
Walking Dead says:
Heheh. A LOTR spoof where the characters do something sensible. I love it!
The Law says:
Gandalf sees the ring... puts in in an envelope and has the hawk-things carry it and drop it in the mountain. Done.
Walking Dead says:
Heheh.
The Law says:
"Oh Frodo, I was going to ask you... oh, never mind, I forgot I took care of that... you run along and frollic with your little gay friends."
The Law says:
I mean, the fucking birds not going to want the ring... have you ever seen a bird wear a ring?
The Law says:
Have you ever seen birds get engaged? Or ask for jewelry. No, crackers... Gandalf could bribe it with crackers.
The Law says:
"And lo, the dark lord Saron was defeated, only crums remain of his evil empire, which was brought low by wheat-thins."
Walking Dead says:
"Hello, big, giant hawk-thing friend," said Gandalf. "Would you be a peach and take this envelope to Mordor and drop it in Mount Doom?
"Squawk!" said the big, giant hawk-thing.
"Well, there's a whole box of hobbit crackers in it for you," Gandalf said.
And with that, the big, giant hawk-thing flew off and destroyed the One Ring.
The Law says:
Hahaha.
The Law says:
All the forces of the West are, like, collecting up to battle the orcs and such, and Gadalf's, like, "tee hee" getting high on hobbit leaf.
Walking Dead says:
Heheh. http://members.ozemail.com.au/~imcfadyen/notthenet/fantasy.htm
The Law says:
Funny.
The Law says:
That's why D&D campaigns don't feel epic enough.
Walking Dead says:
Right.
The Law says:
I should try to factor in some of these rules to my game.
Walking Dead says:
I think it's about time I tried writing a novel.
The Law says:
Oh yeah?
The Law says:
A fantasy Epic?
Walking Dead says:
Maybe. It would be fun to follow this formula. Heheh.
The Law says:
You know what would be really interesting?
Walking Dead says:
Ever since November's National Novel Writing Month, I've been thinking of blogging a novel.
The Law says:
Follow this formula, but make it current/non-fantasy.
The Law says:
A desk-jockey is told the fate of the world rests in him taking a sacred artifact to the edge of the world...
The Law says:
On the way he's accompanied by a Dead-head, accountant, housewife and circus midget...
Walking Dead says:
Heheh.
The Law says:
He has a wise, but absent-minded advisor — that's a tough one...
Walking Dead says:
I think a humourous fantasy novel where a nerdy D&D player is placed into a real fantasy world would be funny. Y'know, but everything he thinks he knows about fantasy is wrong. For instance, kobolds would be these fifteen-foot-tall killing machines.
The Law says:
An early days Wiccan guy/druid...
The Law says:
Yeah. That could be funny.
The Law says:
Want to make this an (unpublished) challenge?
The Law says:
Man to man...
The Law says:
(You know it'll never happen)
Walking Dead says:
We could have some fun and collaborate on a novel. Aim for 50,000 words and bounce ideas off each other.
The Law says:
Maybe.
The Law says:
Or, we could come up with a word-count and write -- for fun -- novelettes/short stories based on a formula.
The Law says:
And a timeline.
Walking Dead says:
Right.
The Law says:
I'd be down with either of them... I think it could be fun.
Walking Dead says:
Well, NNWM gives you one month write a novel.
The Law says:
If we said our timeline was 2005, that would be good.
The Law says:
NNWM?
The Law says:
What's that?
Walking Dead says:
National Novel Writing Month.
The Law says:
Oh.
Walking Dead says:
In 30 days, you write a novel from start to finish. Assuming you aim for 50,000 words, that's less than 1700 words per day.
The Law says:
True.
The Law says:
But that's still a lot when you have day jobs, right.
The Law says:
Now many words did you say we've written in the year on the board?
Walking Dead says:
I know. But people do it. A heck of a lot of people participate in NNWM.
Walking Dead says:
57,652 words.
The Law says:
Right.
The Law says:
Hahaha: "The important thing about an epic fantasy novel is that the reader must be exhausted at the end of it. They must feel that they have overcome as many obstacles in getting through the book as the heroes have in fulfilling the quest. So the book must be as difficult to read as possible."
The Law says:
I love that.
The Law says:
I also love the bit about wizards and lords not using their magical powers... I noticed that in LoTR. For all his power, Gandalf almost never casts a freaking spell.
Walking Dead says:
Yep.
Walking Dead says:
With all his power, why couldn't Gandalf have his giant hawk-thing fly the fucking hobbits to Mordor?
The Law says:
Again why D&D doesn't work.
The Law says:
Hahaha.
The Law says:
Cause the journey was as important as the destination.
Walking Dead says:
Heheh.
Walking Dead says:
Then nix the giant hawk-thing.
The Law says:
We could just re-write LoTR with them actually being practical.
The Law says:
It would be like 20 pages.
Walking Dead says:
Heheh. A LOTR spoof where the characters do something sensible. I love it!
The Law says:
Gandalf sees the ring... puts in in an envelope and has the hawk-things carry it and drop it in the mountain. Done.
Walking Dead says:
Heheh.
The Law says:
"Oh Frodo, I was going to ask you... oh, never mind, I forgot I took care of that... you run along and frollic with your little gay friends."
The Law says:
I mean, the fucking birds not going to want the ring... have you ever seen a bird wear a ring?
The Law says:
Have you ever seen birds get engaged? Or ask for jewelry. No, crackers... Gandalf could bribe it with crackers.
The Law says:
"And lo, the dark lord Saron was defeated, only crums remain of his evil empire, which was brought low by wheat-thins."
Walking Dead says:
"Hello, big, giant hawk-thing friend," said Gandalf. "Would you be a peach and take this envelope to Mordor and drop it in Mount Doom?
"Squawk!" said the big, giant hawk-thing.
"Well, there's a whole box of hobbit crackers in it for you," Gandalf said.
And with that, the big, giant hawk-thing flew off and destroyed the One Ring.
The Law says:
Hahaha.
The Law says:
All the forces of the West are, like, collecting up to battle the orcs and such, and Gadalf's, like, "tee hee" getting high on hobbit leaf.
Ever wanted to learn how to write a best-selling epic fantasy novel? Click here.
Thursday, January 13, 2005
What Is It?
That's a damn good question. The trailer for Crispin Glover's What Is It? doesn't really answer the question, either. But damn, is this ever bizarre!
It's hard to be believe George McFly would come up with something so freaky.
It's hard to be believe George McFly would come up with something so freaky.
I must admit I enjoyed The Phantom of the Opera. I'm not sure why I was so skeptical. I think I once thought that it would make a good movie ... if done right. And I think Joel Schumacher did do it right. The cinematography was good, and he stuck very well to the moods and styles of the play itself.
Unfortunately, musicals have zero emotional impact on me. Jacquie sat there crying by the end, but I was just happy it wasn't a complete waste of more than two hours.
So it was good, but I'll never be able to get rid of my hang-up with musicals.
Unfortunately, musicals have zero emotional impact on me. Jacquie sat there crying by the end, but I was just happy it wasn't a complete waste of more than two hours.
So it was good, but I'll never be able to get rid of my hang-up with musicals.
Wednesday, January 12, 2005
I think I'm going to be victimized by The Phantom of the Opera tonight. Bah!
Shadowrun, Part Deux
I love irate gamers. A comment to my criticisn of the Shadowrun game mechanics was posted by some anonymous roleplayer. Said person uses a little bit of fuzzy logic, but makes a reasonable point. Specifically...
Yes, there are three core D&D 3E rulebooks. However, all of the rules that are necessary to play the game, with the only exception being the awarding of experience points, are in one of those books -- specifically, the PHB. However, I will say that D&D can be a rather complicated system, and it's far from perfect. I use it because the 3E incarnation is a lot more user-friendly than past editions and because it's a staple. It's pretty easy to find gamers with the core D&D books.
My first introduction to Shadowrun was several years ago at the Pandemonium gaming convention in Toronto. Out of the group of six players, two of us were not really familiar with the game's mechanics. While the GM told an interesting story and had a solid grasp of the game rules and setting material, not even he nor any of the other players at the table could really communicate the Shadowrun game mechanics effectively to the two of us who were newer to the system. I don't think either of us newbies learned much about the system that day, but we did at least hear a good tale of fantasy cyberpunk.
Now just to be a total ass, I'll quote again from the anonymous commenter:
I'll be quite frank here. Last time I checked, this was ChrisTalbot.com. Did you not expect to read my opinions of various games on the market when you pointed your browser in this direction? :P
Well in response to that I'd like to point out that D&D 3.0 (one of the games you do play and as such by extrapolation has a ruleset which you consider acceptable) requires you to own not one but three core rule books each of which is essential if you plan to run a game.
Shadowrun has only one core book which is roughly the same size as any one of the three core books for D&D. Add to that the fact that you can quite easily run your entire game with just that and I ask you, which of the two games really has a needlessly complicated system?
Yes, there are three core D&D 3E rulebooks. However, all of the rules that are necessary to play the game, with the only exception being the awarding of experience points, are in one of those books -- specifically, the PHB. However, I will say that D&D can be a rather complicated system, and it's far from perfect. I use it because the 3E incarnation is a lot more user-friendly than past editions and because it's a staple. It's pretty easy to find gamers with the core D&D books.
My first introduction to Shadowrun was several years ago at the Pandemonium gaming convention in Toronto. Out of the group of six players, two of us were not really familiar with the game's mechanics. While the GM told an interesting story and had a solid grasp of the game rules and setting material, not even he nor any of the other players at the table could really communicate the Shadowrun game mechanics effectively to the two of us who were newer to the system. I don't think either of us newbies learned much about the system that day, but we did at least hear a good tale of fantasy cyberpunk.
Now just to be a total ass, I'll quote again from the anonymous commenter:
Some food for thought at least before you go around trashing another game system (specifically one which I do happen to like).
I'll be quite frank here. Last time I checked, this was ChrisTalbot.com. Did you not expect to read my opinions of various games on the market when you pointed your browser in this direction? :P
As a RPG player and game master for umpteen years, I've found there are far too many games with great concepts but game mechanics that are just plain bad ... or maybe not bad, but just don't work for me.
Shadowrun is the best example. What's this game got that others don't? Not a lot, really, but it takes elements from different genres and mixes them all together to form a pretty good whole with some interesting history to the setting. Shadowrun is set in a cyberpunk future (William Gibson-like, with cybernetic implants, a fully-immersive Internet dubbed the Matrix, a veritable ton of weaponry that is both useful and stylish, nifty physical augmentations and enhancements, etc.), but it's also a future where magic has returned to the world. Mages, dwarves, elves, trolls, orcs -- they all exist alongside high-tech devices. It takes two of my favourite gaming settings and mixes them together. What could be wrong with that?
Well, I'll tell you what's wrong with that. The system for the game mechanics makes me cringe. It's always seemed needlessly complicated to me, and I've never really been able to bring myself to learn it.. However, many fans of the game are likely to say that it's not too complicated once you know it -- with the possible exception of the Matrix rules, which are even more fucked up than the rest of the rules. Character creation isn't enjoyable at all, and since I dislike generating stats for characters as it is, Shadowrun's thoroughly painful character generation method turns me right off.
That said, I have a bunch of Shadowrun books, although not one of them is from the latest edition. I've read several of the books, but I've yet to really use them in a game. I have them, but they don't get played. And likely, they never will get used in a game because while I love the setting, I just can't get behind the rules. That is really too bad.
Shadowrun is the best example. What's this game got that others don't? Not a lot, really, but it takes elements from different genres and mixes them all together to form a pretty good whole with some interesting history to the setting. Shadowrun is set in a cyberpunk future (William Gibson-like, with cybernetic implants, a fully-immersive Internet dubbed the Matrix, a veritable ton of weaponry that is both useful and stylish, nifty physical augmentations and enhancements, etc.), but it's also a future where magic has returned to the world. Mages, dwarves, elves, trolls, orcs -- they all exist alongside high-tech devices. It takes two of my favourite gaming settings and mixes them together. What could be wrong with that?
Well, I'll tell you what's wrong with that. The system for the game mechanics makes me cringe. It's always seemed needlessly complicated to me, and I've never really been able to bring myself to learn it.. However, many fans of the game are likely to say that it's not too complicated once you know it -- with the possible exception of the Matrix rules, which are even more fucked up than the rest of the rules. Character creation isn't enjoyable at all, and since I dislike generating stats for characters as it is, Shadowrun's thoroughly painful character generation method turns me right off.
That said, I have a bunch of Shadowrun books, although not one of them is from the latest edition. I've read several of the books, but I've yet to really use them in a game. I have them, but they don't get played. And likely, they never will get used in a game because while I love the setting, I just can't get behind the rules. That is really too bad.
I've just pulled myself myself out of the Pickerville Co-op blog. It's something I've been thinking of doing for awhile. I just don't contribute much to it. And for that matter, neither does anyone else. Seeing as the topics are kind of out of my realm of interest, I've deleted myself from the roster of members.
Tuesday, January 11, 2005
Troy ... what a waste of film
Jacquie whined at me last night until I agreed to sit down and watch Troy with her. Here's a big shocker: I thought it sucked. The characters were whiny bitches, and I seriously wanted to take Orlando Bloom out back and introduce his face to my battle axe (yes, I have a battle axe -- don't fuck with me). And honestly, what the hell was with the fake English accents? It's a movie set in Ancient fucking Greece, not England, but there they were -- Americans putting on fake English accents and pretending to be Greeks. What the fuck?
Sunday, January 09, 2005
Always The First To Die
Always The First To Die is a little D&D-inspired song. Somewhat funny.
Thursday, January 06, 2005
Take that, Jim Davis!
It seems that the Los Angeles Times has finally admitted, in its own way, that Garfield just isn't a funny cat. How so? It's dropped the unfunny strip from its daily comics page. However, the Sunday strip will continue.
Jim Davis, you're not funny.
Jim Davis, you're not funny.
Trekkies, child molesters ... they're all the same
As usual, I enjoy Doug Brunell's Excess Hollywood column at Film Threat. Today, he's tackling -- or attacking, really -- Trekkies.
Tuesday, January 04, 2005
I curse whoever gave me this cold. Jacquie says I should blame my father. He was pretty sick over the holidays, so it surely could be his fault. ;)
The holidays are over, and I'm back at work. I think I'm getting sick. Somebody I came in contact with over the holidays is in big trouble for passing on his or her virus.
Number of visitors since Jan. 7, 2004:
