You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 04, 2016, 02:28:45 AM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: D&D (in every incarnation), Pathfinder and other System Games  (Read 42218 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline meikle

Re: D&D (in every incarnation), Pathfinder and other System Games
« Reply #375 on: August 17, 2011, 09:30:24 AM »
working with a system that wasn't completely broken

3.5?  not completely broken?

how exactly do you define 'broken' that 3.5 doesn't fall under the heading?

Offline TheGlyphstone

Re: D&D (in every incarnation), Pathfinder and other System Games
« Reply #376 on: August 17, 2011, 09:34:20 AM »
3.5?  not completely broken?

how exactly do you define 'broken' that 3.5 doesn't fall under the heading?

I think that's why she said 'not completely broken'. 3.5 as a whole was broken (particularly Core), but there was so much material that you could surgically stitch together a balanced Frankensteinian monstrosity from the non-broken and less broken bits. An unsalvagably broken game would be, say, World of Synnibar.

Offline Black Howling

  • Lady Luna's Werewolf, Blitzy's Otis, Lizzy's Alpha Comfort, Sephy's Cloak, Vampy's Other man, Always Big and Bad
  • Knight
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Nov 2009
  • Location: Roaming through Gnothi's Closet....
  • Gender: Male
  • Even Bad Wolves can be good
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 1
Re: D&D (in every incarnation), Pathfinder and other System Games
« Reply #377 on: August 17, 2011, 09:36:58 AM »

I think that's why she said 'not completely broken'. 3.5 as a whole was broken (particularly Core), but there was so much material that you could surgically stitch together a balanced Frankensteinian monstrosity from the non-broken and less broken bits. An unsalvagably broken game would be, say, World of Synnibar.
Even at core it wasn't depending on what people wanted to do. My first two years were with just the core books, and yeah I had to be creative at times; but the game works fine as written. Now it will get boring really quick without choice material from a few systems. Does that make it broke, I don't think so. I think it makes me out to be playing too much.
3.5?  not completely broken?

how exactly do you define 'broken' that 3.5 doesn't fall under the heading?
Broken as in being two pieces, shattered; unusable. People play the game all the time without an issue coming up. I think that pretty much covers it.

Offline meikle

Re: D&D (in every incarnation), Pathfinder and other System Games
« Reply #378 on: August 17, 2011, 09:41:08 AM »
Broken as in being two pieces, shattered; unusable. People play the game all the time without an issue coming up. I think that pretty much covers it.
Playing with broken toys does not make them less broken.

Offline Black Howling

  • Lady Luna's Werewolf, Blitzy's Otis, Lizzy's Alpha Comfort, Sephy's Cloak, Vampy's Other man, Always Big and Bad
  • Knight
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Nov 2009
  • Location: Roaming through Gnothi's Closet....
  • Gender: Male
  • Even Bad Wolves can be good
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 1
Re: D&D (in every incarnation), Pathfinder and other System Games
« Reply #379 on: August 17, 2011, 09:46:23 AM »
Playing with broken toys does not make them less broken.
On a system, broken is a matter of opinion. A toy purpose is to bring enjoyment, even a little shaky; a kid can fun with said toy so long as it is not unusable. Kids have fun with boxes all the time. You hate the system, that's understandable; but your bad experiences and opinions do not make it broken.

Offline meikle

Re: D&D (in every incarnation), Pathfinder and other System Games
« Reply #380 on: August 17, 2011, 10:03:25 AM »
You hate the system,

citation?

acknowledging that a game's function sucks (as with numerous games that I enjoy, like 3.5 -- with the whole 'linear fighter, quadratic wizard' thing, or Exalted, with the 'hardly functions at all' thing) doesn't mean that i dislike it.  it just means that i don't try to kid myself into thinking that just because i like something means that that something doesn't have (often glaring) problems.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 10:06:02 AM by meikle »

Offline MasterMischief

Re: D&D (in every incarnation), Pathfinder and other System Games
« Reply #381 on: August 17, 2011, 10:27:22 AM »
Which is nothing more than another alteration of the 10 year old 3.x system.  I love how when Wizards of the Coast does it (3e to 3.5) they get blasted for it.  But when Paizo does it, it's GENIUS!  They SAVED D&D!

Ayep.  Can you just imagine if WotC had tried to push through 3.75.  I can hear the wailing and gnashing of teeth and what greedy, soulless corporate shills they are.  Paizo does the same exact thing for the same exact reasons (to make money) and they are the second coming.

Broken as in being two pieces, shattered; unusable. People play the game all the time without an issue coming up. I think that pretty much covers it.

In which case no game is 'broken'.  I am sure you could find people that even play and enjoy Fatal.

Of course, I agree with the point that all of this discussion is pretty much subjective opinion.  Mine, of course, is the only correct one.

Offline TheGlyphstone

Re: D&D (in every incarnation), Pathfinder and other System Games
« Reply #382 on: August 17, 2011, 10:35:15 AM »
Ayep.  Can you just imagine if WotC had tried to push through 3.75.  I can hear the wailing and gnashing of teeth and what greedy, soulless corporate shills they are.  Paizo does the same exact thing for the same exact reasons (to make money) and they are the second coming.
That's a very slanted perspective, you have to admit. The difference between 3.x and 3.5, and 3.5 and 3.P, is that the former was the same company retconning/abandoning their own product to release a new, almost identical product. If Wizards had produced a 3.75, the same reactions would have occurred and deservedly so. The latter was a completely different company picking up an abandoned product that would have otherwise lain fallow and dead forever - WotC would no longer be profiting from 3.5 at all, so why shouldn't Paizo and give 3.x's legions of fans a company that actually gives a crap about what they want to play in the process?

Quote
Of course, I agree with the point that all of this discussion is pretty much subjective opinion.  Mine, of course, is the only correct one.
Nuh uh, mine is!

Offline MasterMischief

Re: D&D (in every incarnation), Pathfinder and other System Games
« Reply #383 on: August 17, 2011, 11:49:08 AM »
Nuh uh, mine is!

Please keep this in mind while I show you how terribly misguided you are.  :)

That's a very slanted perspective, you have to admit. The difference between 3.x and 3.5, and 3.5 and 3.P, is that the former was the same company retconning/abandoning their own product to release a new, almost identical product. If Wizards had produced a 3.75, the same reactions would have occurred and deservedly so. The latter was a completely different company picking up an abandoned product that would have otherwise lain fallow and dead forever - WotC would no longer be profiting from 3.5 at all, so why shouldn't Paizo and give 3.x's legions of fans a company that actually gives a crap about what they want to play in the process?

You call my perspective slanted, I call yours emotionally invested.  'Retconning', 'abandoning' and 'almost identical product' are rather charged words.  I challenge you to prove the differences between 3.0 and 3.5 are significant different than those between 3.5 and Pathfinder.

Pathfinder is different than 3.5, thus, Paizo retconned.  If they were truly carrying on 3.5 why did they need to reprint all the core books?  We all know that core books sell more than subsequent supporting material.  If everyone was buying up support material for 3.5 from WotC, they would not have needed to try and create new core.

This creation of new core is Paizo abandoning 3.5.  They saw an opportunity to reach the broadest set of angry gamers by putting out an entire new core product.  They were trying to make money just like WotC.  If Paizo really only wanted to continue 3.5, they could have gone on printing 3.5 Pathfinders.  They knew there was more money to be made.

One of Paizo's stated goals was backwards compatibility.  I can not help but think this was merely to appease that broadest market share they could appeal to.  If they wanted backwards compatibility, they could have just continued with 3.5 Pathfinders.  They made some significant changes that were more than just 'fixes'.

WotC announces 4e and people loose their mind (generally, because we humans fear change).  Paizo watches the wailing and gnashing of teeth for a while and sees an opportunity (does this make Paizo a Rogue?) to bite off a larger share of the gaming community.  They announce they are going to release a backward compatible (almost identical) game that fixes (abandons) 3.5.  Believing the changes will be minor and hopefully, things individuals want to see changed anyway, people proclaim that 3.5 'Thrives!'

Now imagine if WotC announces that sales are dropping off significantly (who would do this?!  It's crazy talk, but let's pretend for a moment that they are truly committed to being absolutely and brutally honest with their fans).  They say they need to do something to boost sales.  They discussed creating a new game so they can cash in on the core sales, but they know their fans will feel betrayed.  So, instead, they propose 3.75.  They will keep it backwards compatible, but fix some of the minor problems that people have said are broken.  How many people would have been so greatful 3.5 was not being 'abandoned'?

I do not like 3.0, 3.5 or Pathfinder.  I am not emotionally invested in this scene.  From my perspective, what I see is people running in circles because their favorite game is changing.  Then someone comes along and says they will only change it a little which calms everyone down.  Kind of like the frog in the pot.  If you try to put a frog in a boiling pot of water, he is going to freak and jump out.  If you gradually raise the temperature, he never notices the difference and stays in.

Still, this is all subjective opinion.  Maybe Pathfinder really is better than sliced bread.  I still hate classes.

Offline Black Howling

  • Lady Luna's Werewolf, Blitzy's Otis, Lizzy's Alpha Comfort, Sephy's Cloak, Vampy's Other man, Always Big and Bad
  • Knight
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Nov 2009
  • Location: Roaming through Gnothi's Closet....
  • Gender: Male
  • Even Bad Wolves can be good
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 1
Re: D&D (in every incarnation), Pathfinder and other System Games
« Reply #384 on: August 17, 2011, 11:53:12 AM »
citation?

acknowledging that a game's function sucks (as with numerous games that I enjoy, like 3.5 -- with the whole 'linear fighter, quadratic wizard' thing, or Exalted, with the 'hardly functions at all' thing) doesn't mean that i dislike it.  it just means that i don't try to kid myself into thinking that just because i like something means that that something doesn't have (often glaring) problems.
When you bash something constantly it is often though that you hate it. Also, your thoughts on there being problems that make it unplayable is indeed an opinion. There is no mechanical or mathematical formula, that is not situation dependent, that makes it unplayable. Every system has glaring problems, I have never seen one that does not. It's a game, and no game can be without issues.

Offline Callie Del Noire

Re: D&D (in every incarnation), Pathfinder and other System Games
« Reply #385 on: August 17, 2011, 12:09:53 PM »
Uh.. Guys.. be nice. Agree to disagree and back away.

No need to continually slam one another's game preferences. (Unless you like Cyperpunk 20XX...but that's a whole new store.. j/k)

Offline meikle

Re: D&D (in every incarnation), Pathfinder and other System Games
« Reply #386 on: August 17, 2011, 12:10:41 PM »
You are really excellent at attributing things that have no basis.

1) one post is not 'constant bashing'.
2) i never said D&D was 'unplayable'.

Furthermore, 'every system has glaring problems' isn't true, and it doesn't make problems cease to be problems in the games that do have them.

Offline Callie Del Noire

Re: D&D (in every incarnation), Pathfinder and other System Games
« Reply #387 on: August 17, 2011, 12:14:13 PM »
Fine.. I'm done. This thread is going from informative and interesting to bickering. Just look over the last 2 pages it's been more dissent than commentary.

Ciao.

Offline TheGlyphstone

Re: D&D (in every incarnation), Pathfinder and other System Games
« Reply #388 on: August 17, 2011, 12:19:51 PM »
Please keep this in mind while I show you how terribly misguided you are.  :)

You call my perspective slanted, I call yours emotionally invested.  'Retconning', 'abandoning' and 'almost identical product' are rather charged words.  I challenge you to prove the differences between 3.0 and 3.5 are significant different than those between 3.5 and Pathfinder.

I rip both systems to shreds and cherry-pick the best bits to complement my own houserules when I play, I'm not very emotionally invested in either one. I'm not at all concerned with the mechanical differences between 3.0/3.5 and 3.5/3.p, which is what you seem to consider paramount. It's the existence difference that I consider paramount - WotC chose to stop printing 3.0 and start printing 3.5; if they had not done so and continued to print 3.0, there would still have been 3.x material. Paizo picked up a product that WotC had no intentions of ever writing another word of product relevant to (and I'm curious what word you would use that's less 'emotionally charged' than 'abandoned') and resumed support for it, where if they had not, 3.x would cease to have new material.

To make an analogy, consider the analog/digital television conversion, minus the government regulations that caused all of it. In this analogy, 3.0 and 3.5 were the television industry changing the bandwidth of all their channels, forcing people to buy new TVs to keep up*. 4.0 is digital television, a completely new medium/system that again required a new round of TV purchases - except for Paizo Broadcasting Corporation, which began broadcasting its own analog TV signals and channels to fill the gap left behind after the major stations went off the air. This anology has no digital/analog converters, because I can't think of one that fits.

 WotC replaced one product with another. Paizo replaced an empty vacuumn with their product. That's the major difference between them.


*disclaimer: I have no idea how analog televisions function, this may be technically wrong. Work with the symbolism of the analogy, please.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 12:21:48 PM by TheGlyphstone »

Online Thufir Hawat

Re: D&D (in every incarnation), Pathfinder and other System Games
« Reply #389 on: August 17, 2011, 01:17:15 PM »
Nah, not really. Anytime you discuss ANY system mechanic, people without a lot of experience tend to get confused. My girlfriend has been playing off and on for a year, and she still just gets her mind shattered when any new system or option is talked about.

Such as GURPS, she still can't understand it in the least and I've been explaining it for quite a few weeks now.
Of course, when said "system mechanic" is expressed in either real-world terms or in terms we use about books and movies, the confusion time is quite a bit shorter, if there is any. Being able to explain the core of the system and the optimisation guidelines in under 15 minutes helps, too.

Really, that surprises me. Have tried explaining to her that she should just think in real world terms and how to map them to system terms to cover anything she comes up with?
IME, that's the easiest way to understand GURPS, and I've seen a group of novices grasping the system in under an hour.

When you bash something constantly it is often though that you hate it. Also, your thoughts on there being problems that make it unplayable is indeed an opinion. There is no mechanical or mathematical formula, that is not situation dependent, that makes it unplayable. Every system has glaring problems, I have never seen one that does not. It's a game, and no game can be without issues.
Really, every system's got them?
I'd like a list with the "glaring mechanical problems" of Savage Worlds, GURPS 4th edition, MRQ2, SotC, BoL and In A Wicked Age. Mind you, these should be problems with goals they have stated to have.
Thank you in advance, please start with IaWA >:)!

You are really excellent at attributing things that have no basis.

1) one post is not 'constant bashing'.
2) i never said D&D was 'unplayable'.

Furthermore, 'every system has glaring problems' isn't true, and it doesn't make problems cease to be problems in the games that do have them.
Agree on all counts with this.

Offline MasterMischief

Re: D&D (in every incarnation), Pathfinder and other System Games
« Reply #390 on: August 17, 2011, 02:17:32 PM »
I rip both systems to shreds and cherry-pick the best bits to complement my own houserules when I play, I'm not very emotionally invested in either one. I'm not at all concerned with the mechanical differences between 3.0/3.5 and 3.5/3.p, which is what you seem to consider paramount. It's the existence difference that I consider paramount - WotC chose to stop printing 3.0 and start printing 3.5; if they had not done so and continued to print 3.0, there would still have been 3.x material. Paizo picked up a product that WotC had no intentions of ever writing another word of product relevant to (and I'm curious what word you would use that's less 'emotionally charged' than 'abandoned') and resumed support for it, where if they had not, 3.x would cease to have new material.

To make an analogy, consider the analog/digital television conversion, minus the government regulations that caused all of it. In this analogy, 3.0 and 3.5 were the television industry changing the bandwidth of all their channels, forcing people to buy new TVs to keep up*. 4.0 is digital television, a completely new medium/system that again required a new round of TV purchases - except for Paizo Broadcasting Corporation, which began broadcasting its own analog TV signals and channels to fill the gap left behind after the major stations went off the air. This anology has no digital/analog converters, because I can't think of one that fits.

 WotC replaced one product with another. Paizo replaced an empty vacuumn with their product. That's the major difference between them.


*disclaimer: I have no idea how analog televisions function, this may be technically wrong. Work with the symbolism of the analogy, please.

Pathfinder did change the bandwidth of all their channels to force people to buy new TVs.  At least as much as 3.5 did.  If WotC tried to sell Pathfinder (exactly as it is) instead of coming out with 4e, people would have been just as pissed with them.  WotC was in a no win situation.  Well, maybe not exactly a no win, they seem to be doing quite well for themselves.  They just had to move past all the people that were going to brand them evil no matter what they did.

Offline TheGlyphstone

Re: D&D (in every incarnation), Pathfinder and other System Games
« Reply #391 on: August 17, 2011, 04:34:03 PM »
Pathfinder did change the bandwidth of all their channels to force people to buy new TVs.  At least as much as 3.5 did.
So I did botch the analogy - I should have said from 3.0 to 3.5, and from 3.5 to 3.P, changed all the bandwidths/frequencies of the channels and forcing people to, I dunno, buy new TV Guide listings or something.

Quote
If WotC tried to sell Pathfinder (exactly as it is) instead of coming out with 4e, people would have been just as pissed with them.  WotC was in a no win situation.  Well, maybe not exactly a no win, they seem to be doing quite well for themselves.  They just had to move past all the people that were going to brand them evil no matter what they did.

I'll take your word for it then.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 04:37:29 PM by TheGlyphstone »

Offline Black Howling

  • Lady Luna's Werewolf, Blitzy's Otis, Lizzy's Alpha Comfort, Sephy's Cloak, Vampy's Other man, Always Big and Bad
  • Knight
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Nov 2009
  • Location: Roaming through Gnothi's Closet....
  • Gender: Male
  • Even Bad Wolves can be good
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 1
Re: D&D (in every incarnation), Pathfinder and other System Games
« Reply #392 on: August 17, 2011, 06:50:53 PM »
You are really excellent at attributing things that have no basis.

1) one post is not 'constant bashing'.
2) i never said D&D was 'unplayable'.

Furthermore, 'every system has glaring problems' isn't true, and it doesn't make problems cease to be problems in the games that do have them.
Every one I have seen does have them. And this wasn't a comment at just your previous post, but those that I have seen previously in this thread and in others. I'd quote them, but too much time has passed and it makes them quite the trouble to look for. I'm not that fanatical. Though as you should before, what makes it not broken? That is technically a trick question. What is, and what makes the system you speak of not a broken or glaring issue one? I think you'll see what I mean.
Of course, when said "system mechanic" is expressed in either real-world terms or in terms we use about books and movies, the confusion time is quite a bit shorter, if there is any. Being able to explain the core of the system and the optimisation guidelines in under 15 minutes helps, too.

Really, that surprises me. Have tried explaining to her that she should just think in real world terms and how to map them to system terms to cover anything she comes up with?
IME, that's the easiest way to understand GURPS, and I've seen a group of novices grasping the system in under an hour.
Really, every system's got them?
Yes, she tears it apart because game statistics are not completely like real world no matter how hard you try to make them be. And as for the system issues, it's higher TL attack to armor ratio based on the core book. Even the highest TL weapons can only deal about 6 points of damage when maxed on dice to the highest TL armors. This becomes an issue when it takes an hour or two to detail a fight scene. I had to literally mod up the armor to damage ratio on a combat scene the other day because it was literally broken. The core mechanic wasn't though, so it was fairly easy with a bit of ingenuity. Still took time and extreme effort; which is what I'd call a glaring issue.

I'd also like to note, that the other systems you mentioned I do not know of. And don't feel like buying so I can speak on this thread.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 06:52:27 PM by Black Howling »

Offline TheGlyphstone

Re: D&D (in every incarnation), Pathfinder and other System Games
« Reply #393 on: August 17, 2011, 07:07:59 PM »
Would anyone agree to a temporary moratorium on primary discussion of D&D of any flavor for at least a page or so, give some time to defuse the tensions that are building here whether anyone means to or not? The thread title does mention 'Other System Games', but they're not getting much love at the moment.

For example, the best game session/system anyone's ever played in a non-D&D/d20 ruleset? I always like hearing awesome Shadowrun stories, for example.

Offline Black Howling

  • Lady Luna's Werewolf, Blitzy's Otis, Lizzy's Alpha Comfort, Sephy's Cloak, Vampy's Other man, Always Big and Bad
  • Knight
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Nov 2009
  • Location: Roaming through Gnothi's Closet....
  • Gender: Male
  • Even Bad Wolves can be good
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 1
Re: D&D (in every incarnation), Pathfinder and other System Games
« Reply #394 on: August 17, 2011, 07:09:25 PM »
Would anyone agree to a temporary moratorium on primary discussion of D&D of any flavor for at least a page or so, give some time to defuse the tensions that are building here whether anyone means to or not? The thread title does mention 'Other System Games', but they're not getting much love at the moment.

For example, the best game session/system anyone's ever played in a non-D&D/d20 ruleset? I always like hearing awesome Shadowrun stories, for example.
I don't really care, but my main topic is GURPS at the moment; not D20. My last post diverted from that entirely.

Offline TheGlyphstone

Re: D&D (in every incarnation), Pathfinder and other System Games
« Reply #395 on: August 17, 2011, 07:12:30 PM »
Okay, so share awesome GURPS stories then?

Offline Chris Brady

Re: D&D (in every incarnation), Pathfinder and other System Games
« Reply #396 on: August 17, 2011, 07:41:31 PM »
I have several stories that are for 40K Deathwatch and Mutants and Masterminds 3e/DC Adventures.  That OK?

But ONE LAST THING on the D20 front.  At no point you'll note that I said that people shouldn't play it.  Yes, there are some issues, namely caster/melee divide, multiclassing and built-in 'trap cards' that some people (enough that WoTC's marketing and survey team decided to try something new with 4e) find problematic.  However, if you're willing, or OK with overlooking, modifying or otherwise dealing with them (by letting them stand or not) then go with it.  Have fun, I will NEVER EVER tell you NOT to play something.  Even if it's objectively broken or not, I will NOT ever tell you that you shouldn't play it.  Because I hate 4e and I play it, because my friends, my crew, allows me to look past 4e's flaws and still have fun.  And likely, you have a crew/troupe that does the same for you.  So all I say to that is:

Happy Gaming.

Offline meikle

Re: D&D (in every incarnation), Pathfinder and other System Games
« Reply #397 on: August 17, 2011, 07:47:14 PM »
I'd quote them, but too much time has passed and it makes them quite the trouble to look for.

I'm sure you'd have some trouble finding things that don't exist.  (If you go looking earlier in this thread, my points will be about Games That Marginalize Women, which is not d20-specific at all.)

Quote
Though as you should before, what makes it not broken? That is technically a trick question. What is, and what makes the system you speak of not a broken or glaring issue one? I think you'll see what I mean.

I'd argue that whether or not a game is broken depends on whether or not it does what it sets out to do (and whether or not it does what it says it does.)  Exalted, for example, is broken because it tells us to expect a game of high-flying action-packed combat, and then provides a game where "not getting killed in combat" happens to mean playing combat in the most boring way possible (only spend resources on defenses, never expend resources on offense), or tells us to expect a game where social characters are meaningful and important and provides a system where the only mechanically appropriate response to someone speaking to you is to attack them before they can start making any important points (otherwise, engaging in social combat is the same as letting someone stab you for a few rounds.)

That is the definition of broken that I work from, and so I fit D&D under it, because D&D suggests to me that my fighter will be good at fighting, and then presents a game where the only person who is worse at fighting than my fighter is the character whose party role is 'cheerleader' (and I should play a druid or cleric or wizard if I want to really be good at fighting.)

Offline Dhi

Re: D&D (in every incarnation), Pathfinder and other System Games
« Reply #398 on: August 17, 2011, 08:36:05 PM »
Shadowrun was my introduction to tabletop games. I always liked playing a decker, but then the problem with deckers was that they did their thing on a playing field that the other group members typically weren't privy to. A whole matrix run can happen in less than a minute in the game world, but  that one in-game minute is a lot of play time where the other players aren't doing anything.

So I was pretty excited to hear that deckers in Shadowrun 4E hack on the fly, without jacking into a virtual world. But the system never flew here, so I never got to play it. I don't even really know how deckers work now.

Online Thufir Hawat

Re: D&D (in every incarnation), Pathfinder and other System Games
« Reply #399 on: August 17, 2011, 09:21:27 PM »
Yes, she tears it apart because game statistics are not completely like real world no matter how hard you try to make them be. And as for the system issues, it's higher TL attack to armor ratio based on the core book. Even the highest TL weapons can only deal about 6 points of damage when maxed on dice to the highest TL armors. This becomes an issue when it takes an hour or two to detail a fight scene. I had to literally mod up the armor to damage ratio on a combat scene the other day because it was literally broken. The core mechanic wasn't though, so it was fairly easy with a bit of ingenuity. Still took time and extreme effort; which is what I'd call a glaring issue.

I'd also like to note, that the other systems you mentioned I do not know of. And don't feel like buying so I can speak on this thread.
Wait, she thinks the weapons on, say, TL 3 have insufficient power against plate armour ;D? Or am I getting you wrong?
Because people usually think that weapons on TL3 have too much power against plate. For example, it was literally invulnerable against slashing attacks.
But she's right, that's one of the two problems of the system. However, since this one is easily amended by tinkering with the gear stats to produce the results you want, I wouldn't exactly call it "glaring".
The other one is the lack of a social system that mirrors the depth of the combat one, but then some people don't even want one of those ;).

Would anyone agree to a temporary moratorium on primary discussion of D&D of any flavor for at least a page or so, give some time to defuse the tensions that are building here whether anyone means to or not? The thread title does mention 'Other System Games', but they're not getting much love at the moment.

For example, the best game session/system anyone's ever played in a non-D&D/d20 ruleset? I always like hearing awesome Shadowrun stories, for example.
I'm fine with it and agree the thread needs it ;).
I've got too much sessions that I like, though, so it's hard to choose. This is, probably, merely a good session.

A street-level Unknown Armies campaign can look like this!
The PCs were a team of "occult detectives" in Chicago, 2011.
My character was an ex-Californian surfer, pacifistic and following the doctrines of Tibetan Buddhism. That included a specific kind of yoga, and Tantra, which made him popular with some of his female students. One of those provided an alibi for his friend when he desperately needed it. Most importantly, he could sometimes see your aura, if it pertained to some kind of suffering.
For the whole game, he never hurt anyone, except he sprayed a guy with CS spray. Of course, he apologised immediately, and I think brought him water to clean up his eyes 8-) !
He also repeatedly foiled the plans of everyone else, by trying to negotiate with people that were obsessive about getting all they wanted. And the guy wanted control over the whole of the occult underworld in Chicago. Not much room for a compromise there, everybody else was free to get lost, or get in jail. Hard to oppose a mystical Adept that can manipulate reality to take away anything you posses!
He made up for it by being the "face" man with the authorities, the drug dealers and the local occult underground. He knew quite a few people there, as his skills attested.
That is, it was hard, until his partner shot the Adept down. He used his powers to make him shoot himself in the foot, and drop his gun. He stumbled along and took out his other gun to finish the job.
My character just waited behind the wheel of the get-away car, having a crisis of consciousness, which he luckily passed. He knew he could either let them do this, or let the Plutomancer ruin people's lives, sell drugs that often killed the user, and basically, drive his friends to suicide.
He still felt dirty for it, though. At least, their other friends weren't any use in a straight fight, but covered their tracks with Magick, so no problems with the law!