Current events
This page is for discussion of stuff related to the game coming up this week, no matter when that actually is. For instance, we can all assume Nate isnt coming for some lame reason and that Ed is sick of pizza and is bringing teriyaki or some other crap. They can post something here if that happens to be untrue.
Contents
Schedule
Date...........game................Location..........(Advanced attendance)
8/03/07......Entertain yourself!
8/10/07......WHFRP....Gabe's
8/17/07......Gemini....Ben and Dieter's wonderful gaming wasteland
8/24/07......sucking nuts.....each to his own
8/31/07......WFRP......BnD WGW
9/07/07......WFRP......The BnD Gaming Wunderhaus or the Wasteland!?! (Only you can decide)
9/14/07......WFRP......The BnD Gaming Wunderhaus
9/21/07......WFRP......The BnD Gaming Wasteland
9/28/07......WFRP......THe BnD Gaming Wunderhaus
10/5/07......WFRP......The BnD Gaming Wasteland
10/12/07.....WFRP......The BnD Gaming Wissenland
10/19/07.....Board games............BnD ..........(Dieter and Matt absent)
10/26/07.....WFRP.......................BnD
11/2/07......WFRP.......................BnD
11/9/07......Exemplars prequil/Board Games...BnD ............(Matt gone, Dieter possibly gone)
11/16/07.....Exemplars prequil...BnD..........(Matt gone)
11/23/07.....Go see the family...???..........(Matt, Ed, Ben, Gabe gone)
11/30/07.....Exemplars..............???...........
12/06/07.....Exemplars..............???...........
12/13/07.....Board Games....................???..........(Matt Gone to Japan)
12/20/07.....??????....................???..........(Matt Gone, Ben likely Gone)
12/27/07.....??????....................???...........(Ben, Matt Gone)
Attendance and Food preference
11/2/07 Hey guys. Nate here. I got really drunk quite early on friday, so driving to seattle was pretty impossible. Sorry I didn't call you. I'll hit u guys up next time I'm in town. Take care y'all.
BEN: present, and Brandon will be joining us again. Ed, I told him to come by around 6 so we can magic it up again, so why don't those of us that want to play magic before game meet up at 6?
--Edmiao 13:41, 31 October 2007 (MST) I'm in. see you at 6. no pizza.
--Gdaze -- I'm totally down! No pizza as well.
Ranting and raving or other random comments
--Gdaze -- So, this post is not to start some huge debate, but I'm starting to figure we all want/expect very different things from games. For example. I myself am about following the rules for the most part. Story telling is one thing but if you can't do something, you can't do it. Sure you may be able to in real life but part of role playing to me is also having your character NOT being able to do things. I also don't like mission based adventures as the only primary source of adventure unless that is the type of game being ran. I've noticed that our adventures are rarely free form and we are forced into doing certain things... well save for PA (for the most part). As for a game system being broken in the fighting rules, who the fuck cares. I mean like I said, I like following the rules for the most part but have come to accept that some should be changed.
I guess I feel that having the characters not able to do something contributes just as much to the story as having the characters constantly doing cool stuff.
Thats why I've really never run anything with this group. My adventures tend to invovle heavy amounts of comdey and combat. Plus I don't know any of the systems that well! I'm not saying I'm not enjoying myself. I really am for the most part. This post is more to see what each of us likes or dislikes in RPGs. So like I'm not saying change anything just kinda what I look for...
Also bored at work.
BEN: gaming is, like all hobbies, mostly about having fun. I think a big part of that for players is having their characters be good at what they want them to be good at. Interestingly, what that means is largely dependent on the GM style of the GM. Sometimes that means tailoring your character sheet, sometimes it means doing more description type stuff.
also, i disagree that we do more mission stuff: in fact, most of our games have ranged from 50% free form to essentially 100% freeform: PA, space opera, the first champions game, even our Adventure! game, and Gemini in particular (which was actually too freeform) were all largely driven by character decisions.
--Jason 11:05, 31 October 2007 (MST)I know I am in the minority here, and you have all heard what I have to say on this a million times, so I am just going to acknowledge that I read this and read what comes.
--Jason 11:18, 31 October 2007 (MST)One thing I do have to say though is I agree with Ben, I think the only mission based game we played was Jin Dynasty.
--Gdaze -- Actually I felt that the Jin dynasty was freeform over all. We were given a mission but allowed to do it the way we wanted to. I guess I should clairfy mission based. Basically forcing the players to do one thing, and not giving them the option of getting away. In Jin Dynasty we all had reasons to kill the Emperor because we were told that would be our mission. In the first warhammer game it become about finding the pillars and getting away from the witch hunter the entire time. Sure we didn't have to, but we would have been killed. Also I fealt our first champions was very forced overall. We were told what to do, we do it, come back, next mission.
I mean I like big stories and stuff like that, but I'm more use to having "archs". Like 5 or 6 adventures around one type of thing, then the characters move onto something else, that doesn't need to tie in with some huge story. I think its a more D&D style of play (does that make any sense????).
--Matts 11:50, 31 October 2007 (MST)You're saying you prefer scenario-based, more episodic play over longer-form stories?
Also, I'd just like to point out, in probably the only defense I'm going to make, that in WFRP right now I'm not constraining the characters to the plot at all. All I've done so far is define the relationships that exist in the gameworld, and what various parties want from the characters, and I've let you guys take care of the rest of it. When a player acts in the game, I try to make sure the results carry out appropriately. But for me, having a dynamic set of non-player characters with their own agendas is key to making the characters' actions important, and then making the game entertaining.
--Gdaze -- Indeed! That is why I said in the first warhammer one we played!
And yeah, I guess I like scenario. Because otherwise we never get anything done. Our characters start out as poor as they started with nothing to show for all their actions. I guess because we never reach the final "goal" it seems kinda wasteful. Thats one thing I like about the Jing dynasty is it had closure.
Dynamic npcs are always good! Never said they weren't!
--Edmiao 13:40, 31 October 2007 (MST) I agree with you, i like more closure than we get. almost all our games are long term plot based, which means that a lot of time can pass without the characters making progress on plot elements and that the game can come to an end without coming to a conclusion. Kind of soap opera like. Perhaps that is the nature of a freeform game with a long plot. Our games end when we get bored of them, rather than when the long term plot comes to fruition. I think I've said this before.
I also agree with Gabe's first point. I only agree with gabe so much because I owe his family favors via his mom. I prefer when characters are limited by their character sheets. Meaning, I roll my eyes when a character "pulls an Anjou". This is a fine line between good roleplaying allowing a player to move their character forward (good) and GM leniancy/favoritism allowing an assertive player to do things with his character that are silly and our of character (bad). I think I've said this before as well.
I think I've also made jokes about Gabe's mom before. now I will shut the fuck up.
BEN: yeah, a lot of the long form stuff is my fault, because that's the way I like to tell stories: I guess because I've historically been afraid of "running out of material". But in recent times I've realized that doesn't happen and want to move more towards more contained games the next time(s) I GM. I did like that about Jin, that it had an endpoint...although it could be argued it was an endpoint the way most of our adventures have an endpoint, in that the ending revealed that we were really only at the tip of the iceberg. But that's probably a semantic argument.
as for pulling "Anjous", since that was my character, that's also mostly me, I guess. If it really bugs people that I try to roleplay things that I don't have on my character sheet when I feel its character appropriate (or in the Anjou case, when my combat character has nothing to do in a city and I'm bored), I can stop. I prefer to have characters constrained by their backgrounds and try to roll as few dice as possible, but I know that can sometimes give me an unfair advantage over people that like to stick to the numbers on their sheet.
--Edmiao 14:07, 31 October 2007 (MST) I don't think you should stop trying to pull an Anjou. When I was doing Jin, I usually just made you roll for crazy shit or had things turn out badly. like when Zhi Zhi was in a room with three guards who were watching her like a hawk and she tried to Anjou some jewels. I asked exactly how that was going to happen, described the scene and it seemed pretty unrealistic. Also, when Zhi Zhi tried to pull a fast one on a guard in the middle of the city bridge. I think she was trying to slight of hand some cash out of a guards hand or something ridiculous. Ben cleverly described the situation, and got to make his roll. unfortunately the guard got a perception roll and Zhi Zhi landed in jail. That was very entertaining to me as a GM. I just think a GM has to be more careful around clever players like Ben and make sure that reality prevails.
BEN: so what you are saying is that regardless of player description, it should come down to the character sheet, or alternatively, the player should be punished for trying to be clever? I do enjoy pulling anjous for their own sake (for instance ZhiZhi's terrible pikey accent, because I wanted the character to sound all gypsy), but I will definitely do a lot less of them if I'm really only doing them for my own sake. I think after that bridge incident I mostly just started sticking to what was on my character sheet, which is, I suppose, what the GM wanted in the first place.
--Edmiao 14:38, 31 October 2007 (MST)I'm just saying it shouldn't be silly. Like a 16 year old french mecenary convincing a wine seller that the most expensive bottle is worthless. Or plucking money straight out of a watchful guards hand in the middle of a clearing surrounded by more watchful guards in a time of impending war at the country border. Or smuggling cocaine in a knapsack past drug sniffing dogs at LAX inbound from South America by fast talking and giving the dog a tasty treat. Or convincing Gabe's mom that no, she should not meet up with Matt tonight because she'd rather play Magic/Heroscape.
BEN: but...if it has little to no effect on power balance (the wine bottle was worth 10 silver, and Anjou ended up giving it away in a separate incident, to someone, incidentally, who we never spoke to again), and it creates interesting roleplaying situations that help give color/personality to the characters, doesn't that have intrinsic value? In fact, if it's for a useful purpose (such as Anjou's slide tackle of that one skaven on the boat), and thereby actually gives the acting character an edge, aren't those the situations most likely to offend other players? I think that the next game I run, I'm going to do my best to stick much more closely to the rules set I've designed, as well as much more tightly restrict character choice/design in the hopes that this will put everyone on a similar page. "Everyman" skills are crucial because otherwise characters can't function on their own. I'd rather bust out some random RP shit than be like "oh, well, I need to buy some better armor, I better get Ambrose because he has the highest fellowship, er, I mean, he's the most friendliest in our group and can get me the best deal." On the other hand, I guess this might foster some sort of increased group cohesion (vis a vis borobro and elrin with the healing).
--Matts 15:04, 31 October 2007 (MST)This is why I like DitV; your character is competent in any given situation, but gains extra competence in areas of specialty, rather than being incompetent in all but a few situations.
Also, note that if it's on your sheet it still needs to be roleplayed; as a GM I really dislike the "i just use my skill" style of roleplaying; I want actions to have context and flavor.
--Edmiao 15:22, 31 October 2007 (MST) I think for things like pulling an Anjou, it depends on what kind of game we are playing. Gemini was designed specifically to enable pulling an Anjou (storytelling points). in that game, pulling an anjou was setting appropriate, characters were supposed to be able to do minor miraculous things. If it's cinematics you want, then integrating that into the game system is fine. But if some players think they are operating in a real world-ish game while others live in a cinematic game then the real world folks are going so say "huh?" whenever Conan the Barbarian sits down to a table full of rich folk and busts out the high folk manerisms and gets appointed ambasador to china.
--Jason 15:29, 31 October 2007 (MST)This has nothing to do with DiTV: This is why I like DitV; your character is competent in any given situation, but gains extra competence in areas of specialty, rather than being incompetent in all but a few situations.
Its not in the rules anywhere; this is in your head. You like the dice mechanic in the game so you assign all these attributes to the game that are not there. It isnt really a system at all; its a single dice mechanic that works well in a limited set of interaction circumstances with an extremely weak framework of straw surrounding it. What is outside of that is you and only you. It is not inherent to the system in any way.
And the last line doesnt make any sense either. In most games, and especially the ones we have played, it is elucidated in the beginning of the rulebook that you dont need to roll for normal things. Characters arent incompetent in normal situations.
The other situation, of just use my skill, is really probably the best way to go in some senses. Characters roleplay what they wish to do, and describe it or whatnot, but success or failure is due to the skills on the sheet. You might say something really suave sounding to us, but if your character has no speaking skills, it probably doesnt sound so clever in the game world. Your character does not have your skills! If this is not followed, everyone should only buy physical skills, since those can only be abstracted, then we can all use our personal intellects to guide our characters. That becomes ridiculous quickly.
--Edmiao 15:35, 31 October 2007 (MST) WIKI BLOCKER!! DIE!!! ahem. what i was saying..... I wouldn't say you have to stick to your charcter sheet, because ridiculous things are going to be hard with skills too. convincing a wine seller that a priceless merlot is vinegar will be a persuasion test at -30% or some such. convincing a wine seller that a mediocre merlot is vinegar, regular persuasion test; and that means normal persuasion test to those who have it and everyman persuasion test for those who don't (like in WFRP conversation at half). It means that Elrin would be hard pressed to convince the armorer that his beat up chain is in perfect condition, but he could get fair market for it no problem. should i with good role playing be able to make Elrin suave? I would define that as bad role playing because he is not suave. his not suaveness is reflected by his 20% fellowship. The troube with anjou was that you wanted to play a suave character but rolled badly. Or as jason said, the trouble with Anjou is that Ben is suave and Anjou was not. As for just rolling skills....i liked the way matt gives bonus to roll for good description. that encourages the descriptions from players. but if they are not interested in drawing it out, just roll it. "I climb the sheer surface" vs "I look for handholds and i look for roots to grab and i...... (hey why are all of you guys looking at Deiter's computer screen?)....and then, very slowly, I move my left foot...."
this is all gabes fault. CURSE YOU GABE!!!!
--Gdaze -- It gives me something interesting to read. The problem is that in most books it says "If this can be roleplayed, do it that way." Then why put social skills in the game? Cause I think one should be limited by their character sheet. You got a guy with a low fellowship? Then you best be an asshole, or quite, or whatever that makes you generally unpopular, like posting this to a Wiki.
I don't know much about DiTV, but I wouldn't like a system where you are compatent in everything... thats kinda... m'eh.
Also making us roleplay EVERY action can becoming tiring. Even more so because every fucking time I've tried to buy something in warhammer, even when coming off polite I am met with some hardass merchant. Hmmm I take that back... at least roleplaying a little adds some flavor to the town.
Its just nice to see what people want from a game. Since I'm like going to be a social fucking tyrant in the current WHFRP with my fellowship of 65% and perform instrument of 75%. Yeah bitch! I'm gonna rock dat party! (Was I given the pillar?)
BEN: not unless you want to go back to the bank and convince them to get it out of our deposit box. I should mention that when I went back there last time, I got jumped by two guys who tried to knife me, and suffered 8 points of damage before running for my life. Not to mention that that Erich dude probably cleared the box out already. I have a replica of the pillar that I commissioned, but I'd rather keep that in case some more knife wielding maniacs come after us and demand it so that I can throw them off the scent.
I'm starting to look forward to playing a Hrulfgarr again, because with those characters its really easy to restrict yourself to the character sheet: their personality is: KILL KILL KILL, so you don't have to do well in social situations. But my current character, for instance, is supposed to be a sneaky politicking bastard. He has the 40 fellowship. He has gossip. He'll be taking charm in short order. But that's about all he can get. and he has like +10% fellowship available to him over the course of the campaign. So...do I restrict myself to winging things with my 40 fellowship? Or do I restrict myself to my skills?
--Jason 16:36, 31 October 2007 (MST)This is one situation where the system really does matter. I used to really like whfrp, but I think I have soured on it (this goes to a lesser extent for hero as well). In combat, its ok to have a 35% chance to hit because there is always next round. But in a social interaction, you have one chance (die roll) to succeed or fail. If all combats came down to a single die roll, things would be very different. It seems like something needs to be done differently. Maybe roll a d100 and add your FEL and the opponent does the same? That means you no longer have a 40% chance to succeed at something you are pretty good at.
Of course, its not my game and I am not even playing in it. But is something I have been thinking about.
--Edmiao 16:47, 31 October 2007 (MST)ooops i reverse wiki blocked you. I think that is GM dependent, Jason. GM could say, nope he's not convinced. then the character could continue to try to convince the NPC. GM: roll again. Still not convinced. more talk... roll again. success --> huray! failure --> this NPC is getting seriously pissed at you and refuses to listen to your constant jabbering (but that's after several failed rolls)
--Edmiao 16:40, 31 October 2007 (MST) 40 fellowship plus gossip and charm, what more do you need? sounds pretty decent to me. besides Iggy is kind of a creepy guy as far as I've seen, should he have much better than that? that just means he is going to be pretty good at convincing people but unlike Dim he cannot pass himself off as the wrong gender or convince the mayor to resign from office because the stars say so.
you lost the pillar already? jeez. last time it took us like 20 sessions to lose the pillar. i wanted to sell that thing for bank.
Ranting and raving about other stuff
--Edmiao 17:34, 31 October 2007 (MST) let's talk about gabes other comment about getting railroaded into doing things. I think gabe did not like the bad guy pirates in Gemini forcing us to do their dirty laundry. yet gabe liked Jin, which was a mission based game. i think what you are saying, gabe, is that you like missions, but don't like getting railroaded. you enjoy discreet short 3-6 session story arcs where there is a beginning that your character agrees to join a mission. there is a goal: to complete said mission. and there is an end: succeed or fail the mission. At the end of the arc, there is some kind of storyline that feels completed. afterwards, characters can go on to other missions, or maybe there is partial overlap in time of various missions. You don't like it when at the end of many of our stroy arcs, there is some kind of story line that seems top just open up more questions and reveal that we know nothing about what's really going on. The definition of being railroaded: NPCs do amazing things to manipulate PCs and make them do what the NPCs want them to do. Not getting railroaded: PCs offered a job or quest for money or the greater good which they accept for their own reasons, being greed or chivalry.
--Jason 17:40, 31 October 2007 (MST)NPCs having the drop on you is not being railroaded. It is the foundation of many great stories. In real life we often have to do things we dont want, and this can lead to great interactions and stories. It also can unite the characters and make their connection more pronounced.
--Edmiao 19:32, 31 October 2007 (MST) you're right. and i don't mind it so much. actually, i would be in favor of any railroading that brings a group together. I enjoyed being hunted by vonTuemar. I was trying to see if the above reflects gabe's point.
--Gdaze 00:02, 1 November 2007 (MST) I feel that railroading characters can be like taking them hostage, even more so when done too much. When you have adventure after adventure of being forced to do something and never even learning why you are... that isn't really fun for me is all I'm saying. Your above statement is too in detail Ed! Sometimes railroading is okay, other times it ain't.
Other Non-RPG gaming Events
The Next Step in WHFRP Reboot
--Gdaze-- So like, did the party happen? Or did everyone leave the city?
--Edmiao 09:08, 31 October 2007 (MST)I thought Dim was the only one going to the party.
--Gdaze-- Well guess that answers that! Did we get our moneyies back?
The Next Step in Exemplars
BEN: Er...could we get an update on where things stand here? Are all the chars made? Do we know when we will run the last 1 or 2 prequils? When is the game supposed to start? I would very much like to see the actual game start before year's end, we have a lot of space for another game and I personally would like to have something structured in place sooner rather than later. Board games, Heroscape, and Magic are lots of fun, and i'm happy to bust those out, but having another game in place soon would be good.
--Edmiao 15:42, 29 October 2007 (MST) yeah. logisticsally, if you want Matt there for session 1/2 that means adhering to the schedule above. I think it is very important to get past the phase of the game where Matt is required for sessions. As he is the GM of the other game, he is the one who should be expected to be absent the most, because any Matt absences will result in us playing Exemplars. From my breif experience GMing, the one big mistake I made, no the one bigGEST mistake I made was making sessions dependent on one character and then that person being absent. So I'd like to see that the whole game doesn't require Matt's attendance (although I love him even more than Gabe's mom).
Gabe: Seems to me that maybe we should just do board games for the next few weeks after this one. I will be gone the day after Thanksgiving as well.
--Edmiao 16:18, 29 October 2007 (MST) That opinion would be in the minority, I think. I strongly advocate the schedule above. did i get your absence date correct, gabe, 11/23?
Gabe: Oh okay, I didn't quite catch that last time! Yeah, that is the correct-o date.
--Jason 18:53, 29 October 2007 (MST)First of all, this last week has been hell. Work has been out of control. Second, absences are likely to be a problem whenever they occur. One great thing about having strong story roles is everyone is involved. One bad thing about it is when people skip because their aunts brothers cousin might be in town for a dinner it throws many things off kilter. I have Gabe's character, but he hasnt responded to my request for an hdc version. I need to email Dieter back on his character, since I have it in doc and not hdc, and my new laptop doesnt have word (yet) its been a hassle. Ben and I will need to discuss possible mechanical changes to his character, but nothing else is an issue. I have to go over there and grab my blue binder anyway, we can probably discuss it for an hour and get it figured out. I havent fully thought about that schedule, but I dont think I will be out of town anytime soon.
--Gdaze 19:43, 29 October 2007 (MST) Did the one character work well? Everytime I send an HDC version it comes out as HTML... I'll try emailing from a different provider.
--Jason 22:14, 29 October 2007 (MST)Did you try including it as an attachment? I can read the character, and he looks pretty good. I just have a few suggestions/requests. As for the schedule, we only have one prelude to do, thats Gabe's. Dieter has amnesia, so a prelude doesnt make much sense.
--Edmiao 22:24, 29 October 2007 (MST) prelude for Ben's character? otherwise we could board game it on the 16th.
