|
|
| (31 intermediate revisions by 11 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | After a discussion of all the GMs (who's bases belong to us) we decided that the way to continue with a second game alongside exemplars would be to throw out, as we did before, a choice of Genres, let everybody vote, and see what comes out. When a Genre has been selected, anybody who has an idea for a game they'd like to GM in that genre can put together a SHORT synopsis (a paragraph or two) of the game they want to run: all the ideas will go up on the votin' page and then everybody will get to rank the specific game ideas. Whichever game idea gets the most votes is what we do, and whoever proposed that idea is the GM for the second game with which we move forward after the Jin Dynasty campaign ends.
| |
| | | | |
| − | Rank these in your preferred order, 1-7 (1 being the "best", and 7 the worst). When everyone (including both Nate AND Gabe) has voted, we'll add up the points. If one wins clearly (ie, by more than 7 points), we'll just go forward with that one: otherwise We'll have as many run-offs as necessary to winnow it down to one.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | So, the Genres:
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ==Post Apocalypse==
| |
| − | #1 Continue PA: Not really a genre, and I can't remember how the discussion went for this. This option would mean that I would wrap up, in an expedient fashion, the events currently in progress, and the group would move onto a PA campaign that Jason has been designing: one focused more on the necessities of survival, on scrounging, and on the everyday challenges of living in a post apocalyptic world. This game would run in parallel with exemplars after Jin.
| |
| − | --[[User:BenofZongo|BenofZongo]] 15:07, 3 February 2007 (MST)rank 5<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Jason|Jason]] 17:53, 3 February 2007 (MST)Rank 7 (i do want to get to this eventually, however, with or without the same characters)<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Matts|Matts]] 19:03, 3 February 2007 (MST)rank 5<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Edmiao|Edmiao]] 13:23, 4 February 2007 (MST) rank 5<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Gdaze|Gdaze]] Rank 2<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Dieterthebold|Dieter the Bold]] 13:48, 8 February 2007 (MST) Rank 2. I'm enjoying this campaign, although I do want the band back together.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ==Far Future==
| |
| − | #2 Far-Future: this genre includes space opera, space fantasy, space marines, space hulk, rogue trader, or any other ultra-high-tech based game
| |
| − | --[[User:BenofZongo|BenofZongo]] 15:07, 3 February 2007 (MST)rank 1<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Jason|Jason]] 17:53, 3 February 2007 (MST)Rank 4<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Matts|Matts]] 18:59, 3 February 2007 (MST)Rank 1<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Edmiao|Edmiao]] 13:23, 4 February 2007 (MST) rank 6<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Gdaze|Gdaze]] Rank 1<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Dieterthebold|Dieter the Bold]] 13:46, 8 February 2007 (MST) Rank 1. I'd like a Firefly-ish kinda' setting. I.e., space travel but low tech.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ==Modern==
| |
| − | #3 Modern or Near-Future: This includes realistic modern world settings, cyberpunk, drug lord settings, and beating up the jason bessonette.
| |
| − | --[[User:BenofZongo|BenofZongo]] 15:07, 3 February 2007 (MST)rank 6<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Jason|Jason]] 17:53, 3 February 2007 (MST)Rank 5<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Matts|Matts]] 19:00, 3 February 2007 (MST)Rank 2<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Edmiao|Edmiao]] 13:23, 4 February 2007 (MST) rank 7<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Gdaze|Gdaze]] Rank 4<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Dieterthebold|Dieter the Bold]] 13:55, 8 February 2007 (MST) Rank 7. Exemplars is already modern day (albeit slightly skewed). I'm not all that interested in doing today.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ==Historical==
| |
| − | #4 Historical: Settings based on actual time periods in human history: rennaisance, the wild west, roman, caveman, whatever.
| |
| − | --[[User:BenofZongo|BenofZongo]] 15:07, 3 February 2007 (MST)rank 7<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Jason|Jason]] 17:53, 3 February 2007 (MST)Rank 1<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Matts|Matts]] 19:01, 3 February 2007 (MST)Rank 3 given that it's fucked up a bit, ie Jonathan Strange and Mr Norrell<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Edmiao|Edmiao]] 13:23, 4 February 2007 (MST)rank 4<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Gdaze|Gdaze]] Rank 7<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Dieterthebold|Dieter the Bold]] 13:52, 8 February 2007 (MST) Rank 5. I enjoys me some History Channel.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ==Fantasy==
| |
| − | #5 Fantasy: A historical setting including magic, mythical creatures, etc. This would also include games like the Iliadic game (if you want to make an argument that it should fall into "historical" go ahead, but I think it fits here better)
| |
| − | --[[User:BenofZongo|BenofZongo]] 15:07, 3 February 2007 (MST)rank 2<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Jason|Jason]] 17:53, 3 February 2007 (MST)Rank 6<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Matts|Matts]] 19:02, 3 February 2007 (MST)Rank ?????<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Edmiao|Edmiao]] 13:23, 4 February 2007 (MST) rank 2 I'm indecisive so i gave three rank 2's instead of a 1, 2, and 3<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Gdaze|Gdaze]] Rank 5<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Dieterthebold|Dieter the Bold]] 13:49, 8 February 2007 (MST) Rank 3. I demand more gnome sex.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ==Supernatural==
| |
| − | #6 Supernatural: A game focused on things like vampires, werewolves, shub-niggoroth, or anything else sort of world-of-darkness-y.
| |
| − | --[[User:BenofZongo|BenofZongo]] 15:07, 3 February 2007 (MST)rank 4<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Jason|Jason]] 17:53, 3 February 2007 (MST)Rank 2<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Matts|Matts]] 19:02, 3 February 2007 (MST)Rank 6<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Edmiao|Edmiao]] 13:23, 4 February 2007 (MST) rank 2<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Gdaze|Gdaze]] Rank 3<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Dieterthebold|Dieter the Bold]] 13:51, 8 February 2007 (MST) Rank 4. All your sanity is belong to the Old Ones!!!
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ==Genre Mish-Mash==
| |
| − | #7 Genre Mish-Mash: A catchall for oddball games or unusual combinations: Steampunk, for instance (drawing a blank on other examples right now).
| |
| − | --[[User:BenofZongo|BenofZongo]] 15:07, 3 February 2007 (MST) rank 3<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Jason|Jason]] 17:53, 3 February 2007 (MST)Rank 3<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Matts|Matts]] 19:02, 3 February 2007 (MST)Rank ????<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Edmiao|Edmiao]] 13:23, 4 February 2007 (MST) rank 2<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Gdaze|Gdaze]] Rank 6<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Dieterthebold|Dieter the Bold]] 13:54, 8 February 2007 (MST) Rank 6. I vote an anime romance story. Gabe is the shy young girl who has a crush on the high school soccer hero Matt. But what's this, Jason is secretly in love with Matt, too, hoping for some hot boy-on-boy loving!?! And Ed's secretly an alien from outerspace trying to win Gabe's heart. Oh what will our hero(ines) do??
| |
| − | --[[User:Jason|Jason]] 14:13, 8 February 2007 (MST)^^^^^^This is the best idea EVAR. I vote for it and nothing else.
| |
| − |
| |
| − |
| |
| − | =Almost Results Or Something=
| |
| − | With only Nate left to vote the pendulum has swung thusly (with adjustment made for Matts inability to count to 7):
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Post Apocalypse: 26 <br>
| |
| − | Far Future: 14<br>
| |
| − | Modern: 31<br>
| |
| − | Historical: 27<br>
| |
| − | Fantasy: 23.5<br>
| |
| − | Supernatural: 21<br>
| |
| − | Genre Mish-Mash: 25.5<br>
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Lowest score wins, so unless Nate throws a monkeywrench into the plans Far Future will be the choice. But, if Nate ranks Supernatural ahead of FF, then we should have a runoff (it wont meet the 7 margin of victory ordained by Pope Benthedick). Actually, for purposes of interest I propose we all submit any ideas we have that fit either genre, then choose the one people like the best.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Thoughts?
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:Gdaze|Gdaze]]-- Sounds good to me.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:BenofZongo|BenofZongo]] 18:12, 8 February 2007 (MST)hold your horses, old man Harrison. We'll do the votin' fer this one the same way as before: everyone puts in their ideas that wants to by this Sunday, then we vote (rank 1-X, one being the best). once again, a differential of 7 is needed for clear victory. If you don't plan on putting up any proposals and know that, or if you have put up all the proposals you plan to submit, post it here under the "proposals" section. If everyone (except nate, who we can imagine to be as impassive and immovable as a stone, as long as he gets to blow some shit up) puts up that they have either submitted all their proposals, or that they are not going to submit any, then we can start the voting whenever that happens. Sound good?
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:Gdaze|Gdaze]]-- Jason since your going to be running supers, will you be able to run both space and supers? I know that planning out adventures takes a lot of your time (as it should be since your a good GM, actually I've liked all the GMs we've had, but anyway!). I just don't want you to load yourself down.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:Jason|Jason]] 17:53, 8 February 2007 (MST)He said load. Actually, I dont know. I have considered running another game with a different group, so I dont know how different that would be. The obvious difference is I wouldnt get to play. Besides that, Im not sure. Maybe Im just making these ideas hoping someone will steal them as their own and run it. Maybe Im crazy. Or, maybe Im old man Harrison who runs the broken down carnival. Zoinks!
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:Edmiao|Edmiao]] 23:51, 8 February 2007 (MST) Jason, you should decide if you are willing to gm both games, and what happens if one of your proposals wins. And to other GMs, if Jason makes the best proposal would other GMs be interested in running it?. Actually, I might suggest that as GM abscenses are easily accomodated by having two games running with two different GMs thus maybe Jason should not be both GMs. I might suggest it, but would not because Jason has never missed a session, so that is silly.
| |
| − |
| |
| − |
| |
| − | =Proposals=
| |
| − |
| |
| − | NEW vote! After some debate the categories are as follows:<br>
| |
| − | [[space marines of the 41st millenium]]<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Matts|Matts]] 19:09, 12 February 2007 (MST)Rank 4 (which isn't to say I don't want to do it) <br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Edmiao|Edmiao]] 19:12, 12 February 2007 (MST) Rank 2<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:BenofZongo|BenofZongo]] 19:41, 12 February 2007 (MST)Rank 2<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Dieterthebold|Dieter the Bold]] 22:09, 12 February 2007 (MST) Rank 3
| |
| − |
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Vague Space Opera (Ben, Matt or Jason's idea or some variation thereof at the GM's discretion)<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Matts|Matts]] 19:09, 12 February 2007 (MST)Rank 1<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Edmiao|Edmiao]] 19:12, 12 February 2007 (MST) Rank 3<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:BenofZongo|BenofZongo]] 19:41, 12 February 2007 (MST)Rank 1<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Dieterthebold|Dieter the Bold]] 22:09, 12 February 2007 (MST) Rank 1. I'm really in a Firefly mood.
| |
| − |
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [[User:BenofZongo]] #3 (ie "night watch")<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Matts|Matts]] 19:09, 12 February 2007 (MST)Rank 3<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Edmiao|Edmiao]] 19:12, 12 February 2007 (MST) Rank 4<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:BenofZongo|BenofZongo]] 19:41, 12 February 2007 (MST)Rank 3<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Dieterthebold|Dieter the Bold]] 22:09, 12 February 2007 (MST) Rank 2.
| |
| − |
| |
| − |
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [[Hunters]]<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Matts|Matts]] 19:09, 12 February 2007 (MST)Rank 2<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Edmiao|Edmiao]] 19:12, 12 February 2007 (MST) Rank 1<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:BenofZongo|BenofZongo]] 19:41, 12 February 2007 (MST)Rank 4<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Dieterthebold|Dieter the Bold]] 22:09, 12 February 2007 (MST) Rank 4.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | = Chat RE above =
| |
| − |
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Unless Nate votes, the "differential" needed is 6 votes (if he does, it's seven), otherwise we have a run-off.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:Matts|Matts]] 12:45, 12 February 2007 (MST)I can't say I have a particular preference for, or aversion to, any of the games above. I also hope we can stick with whatever we choose for a while; this process is exhausting and taxing for me.
| |
| − | <br>
| |
| − | Suck it up and vote. This process will be shortened by doing so. The more opinionated you make your vote, the more likely it is that we won't have to have a run-off.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:Jason|Jason]] 13:30, 12 February 2007 (MST)Ed has expressed concern about having the same person GM both games, and I think he has a valid point. One thing I mentioned before is that really, all these seeds are just ideas. They dont need to be shackled to one person or another necessarily. For instance, we have had three people say they would run a space game, if one of the space seeds wins, it seems to me any of the three can run it knowing what slant the players prefer. What do the rest of you think?
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:Gdaze|Gdaze]]--Oops not logged in, oh well. Ahem. Yeah, I think it sounds like either Matt or Ben could GM either of the space ones (or anyone else who wants to). I'm kinda leaning towards the combination idea, because that way the places we can go won't be so vast... well of course it will still be insanely huge, but ya know!
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:BenofZongo|BenofZongo]] 14:43, 12 February 2007 (MST)If we DON"T want the same GM for both games, I'd like that to be made clear before votin' ends, because it means I will likely change how I vote. I consider the ideas and the GMs pretty much linked: as pointed out, three of the ideas differ only in what GM runs them, so how you vote is likely based on who's style of GMing and whose types of adventures/plots you think is best suited to that style/setting of roleplaying. Another thing I've thought about: maybe GMs shouldn't rank their own ideas (don't know how this would skew things.)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:Jason|Jason]] 14:55, 12 February 2007 (MST)I look at the votes as a mandate of what the players want to see from a game, I dont link the GM in at all. What we could do is just vote for the game then afterwards someone can volunteer to GM. Its kinda like how we got to PA. We talked and people were interested in a PA game, then we determined who could run it and that was that.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:Matts|Matts]] 16:08, 12 February 2007 (MST)What does the vote for Space Game A vs Space Game B mean in this context then? Our ideas aren't differentiated beyond some very vague setting.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | I should also say that if I GM a game, I won't want to use the Hero system.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:Jason|Jason]] 17:13, 12 February 2007 (MST)I am souring a little on Hero myself. Its a little strange since its been my favorite system for 15 years or more with virtually no competition, but sometimes I feel constrained. The character generation is great, I love making characters. But sometimes it seems like we get a little trapped in what we can and cant do. I found it to be even more constraining in WHFRP, another system I have loved in its various forms since the mid-80's. I am almost thinking White Wolf v1 is the best system around for most things (I dont think it would do Champions well, but besides that).
| |
| − |
| |
| − | That being said, I think the votes for Space Game A vs Space Game B are a vote for a setting and general theme of the campaign. Players are telling us what they want to try, as GMs its our job to implement.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:Matts|Matts]] 17:29, 12 February 2007 (MST)Oh, well in that case, no need to vote for any of my settings; I understand if people have had enough of being hit over the head with the WarHammer.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:Jason|Jason]] 17:35, 12 February 2007 (MST)Dont give up too quickly chief, I think you will find I am almost always the minority voice.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Ben here: umm...I actually did almost no describing of the setting/game system that I was going to use for either far future or supernatural because I don't want to put twenty hours of work into a game world that I won't use. I've done that twice for fantasy, and I just don't have time for that right now. Also: if I run a space opera, I want to run it the way I want to run it: I'm willing to let the players tell me some general guidelines about what they want to see, but as far as "general guidelines" go, the games are as identical as Ed sees them (which is why I'm beginning to understand why he didn't see a difference between them). I have no intention of putting the details of my game world up for a vote, because that's not how I roll: if I'm GMing, It's a Roman style dictatorship, not a democratic people's republic. As such, I see a couple of solutions to the current hang up:<br>
| |
| − | 1.) We vote on the proposals as they are now, as separate units. once the voting is complete, we discuss whether or not the group wants one GM running two games, or two GMs running two games. If we pick the latter, people who are not Jason that want to GM the picked idea work it out as to who GMs.
| |
| − | 2.) We vote on "Space Opera" as a single unit, and the "night watch" and "hunters" and "space marines" as separate units (ie, four things to rank). Once a general genre has been picked, we decide 1/2 GMs, then proceed as above.
| |
| − | 3.) Something else that I haven't thought of.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:Jason|Jason]] 18:47, 12 February 2007 (MST)I dont see any point in voting then. Somebody just elect themself consul and tell us what we're playing.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:Edmiao|Edmiao]] 19:03, 12 February 2007 (MST) huh?
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:Matts|Matts]] 18:58, 12 February 2007 (MST)I elect myself consul and declare the vote to be between these parties: "Indiana Jones in Space", "Vague Space Opera", "Space Marines", "Night Watch", "Hunters". Go!
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:Edmiao|Edmiao]] 19:05, 12 February 2007 (MST) I elect myself grand inquisitor supreme and combine Indiana Jones and Vague Space Opera.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:Edmiao|Edmiao]] 19:08, 12 February 2007 (MST) After it took so long for 6 badasses to beat up 14 goons last friday, I am also questioning the Hero system. That would have been over in 15 minutes in WHFRP. I like WHFRP if you erase the names on the classes and remove magic. Course I have only played Hero, WHFRP and DnD.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:Jason|Jason]] 19:17, 12 February 2007 (MST)Dont be so sure, 20 combatants in WHFRP would have taken forever as well (dont forget the million parries), and no matter how weak those guys were, someone would have gotten seriously hurt.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:Edmiao|Edmiao]] 19:29, 12 February 2007 (MST) yeah, but goons in WHRP have no dodge skill and carry no shield so cannot parry. also, deciding a maneuver is much less complicated in WHFRP. simplicity vs depth, it's a toss up. Hopefully next time you'll just give the bandits the 7 gold and be done with them.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:Jason|Jason]] 19:26, 12 February 2007 (MST)My new crappy idea: Ben and Matt each put together a one shot preview of their favorite proposal. You jokers can talk it over with each other or wrestle or do whatever it takes to decide who chooses what. Then when Jin Dynasty is over we do each of your one shots in whatever order you guys pick. After both have concluded, the players vote on which one they like. Make these one-shots universe previews with pregen characters so players arent forced to understand something that hasnt been determined.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:Jason|Jason]] 19:34, 12 February 2007 (MST)Just because you have no shield doesnt mean you cant parry, remember parrying stance? WHFRP combats arent that much quicker than Hero combats once you are more familiar with running them. In general, however, in any game big combats (lots of people) take lots of time.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:Edmiao|Edmiao]] 19:35, 12 February 2007 (MST) Oh, right. btw, jin may take longer than i thought. might be more like 9 sessions total (7 more), if you want, we can alternate with another game, or we can power thought it. either way fine by me
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:BenofZongo|BenofZongo]] 19:44, 12 February 2007 (MST)Sure thing. Btw, as long as we're electing ourselves, I vote myself pirate-ninja shogun-captain.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:67.183.58.127|67.183.58.127]] 20:36, 12 February 2007 (MST)Because I can Im gonna vote myself Pirate-Ninja Daimyo-General. Suck on that!
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:Matts|Matts]] 20:51, 12 February 2007 (MST)I vote myself Teabagger General, adjunct to Sticking it In Gabe's Mom.<br>
| |
| − | <br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Dieterthebold|Dieter the Bold]] 22:19, 12 February 2007 (MST) I'm really in a Firefly mood. I'm up for either HERO or WHFRP or some third system, which I don't have any suggestions for. I'd like combat to be divided into ranged and personal, with personal being a little longer and not quite as deadly, while ranged is fast (no dodging, no parrying) and deadly. I think how the fighting was handled in Firefly is a good example of what I'm talking about. Unless you're a totally badass type like Jayne, Mal or Zoe, you get shot and you're down for the count. Even Book went down and staid down when he took a shot to the chest. I'm thinking something like a very limited range of BODY/HP/Wounds/Health, e.g., 8-12, with serious penalties for serious wounds. And guns inflict serious wounds. WHFRP ranged rules, with maybe the exception of a "Dive for Cover" maneuver allowed, and Cyberpunk damage with near total lack of armor. Maybe the occasional light armor unless you're government military/police, and then you have to ACTUALLY be part of those groups to be allowed to have it. So, yeah, I'm really thinking a Firefly world.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:Edmiao|Edmiao]] 22:25, 12 February 2007 (MST) Seems like all that will be up to the GM. Also seems like we have a likely winner, unless Jason or Gabe (or Nate??) seriously swing the vote. Are we going to decide GMs by popularity contest, or are we going to let ya'll flip a coin or duke it out?
| |
| − |
| |
| − | =Far-future=
| |
| − | --[[User:Matts|Matts]] 14:56, 8 February 2007 (MST)I've got two far-future proposals, both 40k related:<br>
| |
| − | [[space marines of the 41st millenium]]<br>
| |
| − | [[Rogue traders of the 41st millenium]]
| |
| − |
| |
| − | As an aside, do you think that the people in the 40k universe realize that their calendar was based on Jesus? Or was it?
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:Jason|Jason]] 15:00, 8 February 2007 (MST)Here was the one I had done so far:<br>
| |
| − | [[Indiana Jones in Space]]
| |
| − |
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:BenofZongo|BenofZongo]] 17:42, 8 February 2007 (MST)Click on my name and look at option #1 for my far future dealy<br>
| |
| − | <br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Dieterthebold|Dieter the Bold]] 13:30, 9 February 2007 (MST) I think I'll let WarHammer sit for a while, so my vote's against the 41st millenium bunch, although it's kinda' a weak vote against. I'm excited about all the Far Future stuff, but for our purposes here, I'd prefer Ben's #1 option with a dash of Jason flava'. Yes travel is slow, dangerous and tough, but there's also some giant secret/conspiracy in addition to the desperate lack of high tech components. Sorta' like archeology, except that's not the up-front focus. It really is some big secret that is potentially earth-shatteringly huge, but it's not at all obvious or on anyone's radar, and the struggle for survival is tough enough that there aren't any existent organizations that have the resources to pursue it 100%.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:Matts|Matts]] 23:44, 11 February 2007 (MST)I know I said I was done (in so many words), but I just got inspired by thinking about Firefly again, and reading the [[Dogs in the Vineyard]] system. So count me in for one more proposal: [[Non-Mormon Space Wanderers]].
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:Gdaze|Gdaze]]-- How do you do the time stamp thingy??? Anyway, as it seems far future is going to win, I'd really like who-ever gms it to have a system set up for cybernetics. For example, whats aviable, how costly are they, and what are the drawbacks? I understood paying character points for one in PA, after all they are extremely rare and quite useful. But in a normal far future... Doesn't seem like character points are the way to go. Just my 2 cents! My only 2 cents... I should vote.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:Jason|Jason]] 13:41, 12 February 2007 (MST)The time stamp is the second to last button on the toolbar when you are editing a section. In HERO cybernetics have to be paid for with character points because they are part of the character. They arent equipment like a gun, they cant be just taken away. And because removing them would cause massive damage, they probably shouldnt have a lim of more than -1/4. This is addressed in the book, but I dont have one here so I cant quote a page.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:Gdaze|Gdaze]]-- Ah I see. Could you post the quote here so I could read over it, or just send it via email. I've just never really run across rules for cybernetics in Hero except the restrainable limitation and even there it glossed over it. I should pick up the Space Hero book...
| |
| − |
| |
| − | =Supernatural=
| |
| − | Since this was in second place, we should put any ideas we have here as well.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [[Hunters]]
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:BenofZongo|BenofZongo]] 17:43, 8 February 2007 (MST)click on my name and look at option #3 for my supernatural dealy (I don't even want to hear "dealy" jokes, cause I thought of them ALL already, then promptly forgot them all)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | --[[User:Jason|Jason]] 17:51, 8 February 2007 (MST)My vote goes for this #3 dealy (Plaza? Who exactly gets shot in the head here?).<br>
| |
| − | <br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Dieterthebold|Dieter the Bold]] 13:34, 9 February 2007 (MST) I really like both [[Hunters]] and Ben's #3 dealy, but I'll have to go with Ben's on this one. It's closer to High Fantasy, which I'm also really interested in.
| |
