|
Post by robertsconley on Jan 11, 2023 22:40:18 GMT -6
Hey good to hear from you. I still recommend the hell out of the Swords & Wizardry Quick Start as a way to get up to speed quickly with refereeing D&D in general. Thank you, that's really kind. I'm thinking, in light of all this, of genericizing the Quick Start into an OD&D-esque style of game, while referring folks back to a list of rules for specifics. Cool! Why go with a published example as opposed to a more general/generic approach? Is it to drive sales or a different reason? Two reasons 1) When I do sell to stores it helps to have a rule book to go along with it. And trying to do it with the retro-clone wasn't cost-effective. Like in I would taken a bath trying to order multiple copies. 2) I didn't stop developing what I did with the Majestic Wilderlands and want to share then. I think they turned into a nifty set of rules that people may find useful. Well, there is that. TBH, I think that this is going to end up in court and hopefully some clarity emerges. I listened to Ryan Dancey and there is a chance the case could be done quickly and cheaply because there only one question at stake. Whether Wizards can de-authorize the license or not. If the license is authorized then the party involved is clear of copyright infringment. But... here the kicker. I realized that I been hearing from dozens of pissed off attorney with some IP experiences. I don't know. I think this could be something new and can only happen in the era of the Internet. How is the best New York law firm going to compete with hundreds if not thousands of personally angry attorneys out for blood? Especially when it may not be complicated at all. Does Wizards have the right to de-authorize their license or not?
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on Jan 11, 2023 13:31:19 GMT -6
They, including myself, will have to put some work in to make sure their systems are free of SRD content. For example, changing Hit Points to Hit-to-kill or combat endurance. So basically, they're all going to have to turn into Dangerous Journeys or Lejendary Adventures? @_@ Maybe not that baroque.
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on Jan 11, 2023 12:16:55 GMT -6
I ran the Majestic Fantasy RPG through a text similarity tool (used to detect plagiarism) and found that I have a very low overlap with the d20 SRD or Matt Finch's Swords & Wizardry, Core 2nd Printing. All this means that except for a few section, I wrote everything in my own words. Doesn't mean I am in the clear. Where does one find such software? I'd be curious as to how close the S&W WB rules are to the d20 SRD. First off what you want are text similarity tools, they are usually accompanied by a plagiarism set of tools. But text similarity compares two files which is what we want here. There is a lot of scam stuff out there. And the best ones are usually priced for institutional use. However, the underlying research behind them is of academic interest so you can find some free functional tools out there. I been using this. people.f4.htw-berlin.de/~weberwu/simtexter/app.html
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on Jan 11, 2023 12:13:55 GMT -6
Hey good to hear from you. I still recommend the hell out of the Swords & Wizardry Quick Start as a way to get up to speed quickly with refereeing D&D in general. The general rule which I been advised when I engaged IP attorneys from time to time is that if you going the "mechanics can't be copyrighted" route AND want to stay close i.e. compatible with a target system. It is advisable to have a knowledge attorney review your work before publications. Which cost money. I had success but not that much success. So I have to weigh risks versus compatibility. I have some offers of free help from attorney game but there only so far I can go with that. The plan as such is to 1) Hear what Matt Finch has to say tonight 2) Identify areas where I copied and pasted from the S&W SRD 3) Compare my various lists to the d20 SRD and the S&W SRD to identify unique IP. 4) Then weigh the risks involve using the published examples like Thieves Guild, Palladium 1e, Worlds without Number, etc. With Into the Majestic Fantasy Realms, the job is easier. For example I just replaced Drow with Dark Elves. As for the EFF they tend to take a maximalist view as to creative freedom. I been following them a long long time as a software developer and sometime what they want doesn't account for what you have to deal with in the real world. But they are still a useful resource.
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on Jan 11, 2023 7:45:27 GMT -6
But what about publisher whose products are derivatives of a D&D SRD (e.g., the "close" retro-clones) that will become "unauthorised" (whatever that may mean) post OGL 1.1? Surely these publishers can't simply switch to CC... can they? They, including myself, will have to put some work in to make sure their systems are free of SRD content. For example, changing Hit Points to Hit-to-kill or combat endurance. Matt Finch is having a live stream on Swords & Wizardry tonight. Which may or may not have an impact on my Majestic Fantasy RPG. www.youtube.com/watch?v=7HMtk9SAjUI&ab_channel=MattFinchAs for myself, I ran the Majestic Fantasy RPG through a text similarity tool (used to detect plagiarism) and found that I have a very low overlap with the d20 SRD or Matt Finch's Swords & Wizardry, Core 2nd Printing. All this means that except for a few section, I wrote everything in my own words. Doesn't mean I am in the clear. So far I think I am pretty good on the lore (the descriptive text accompanying the mechanics) I tweaked things to how I view running a medieval fantasy campaign. Next I will have to look at my various lists (spells, monsters, magic items, etc) and see what has to be altered or tweaked. While I use a lot of D&Dish stuff, in general in my campaigns I like to work with a pretty bland generic list of stuff. The variation comes from fleshing out the individuals avoiding what I call all Klingon are honorable warrior syndrome. It is fortunate that I went this route when this situation arose. Hope that makes sense.
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on Jan 9, 2023 10:15:34 GMT -6
It would probably be very helpful for the "industry" to come up with a preferred version of CC that all the little RPG publishers can get behind. robertsconley any thoughts on that? Many are already deciding to go the Creative Commons route. Some Attribution only or CC-BY, but the other half going with the share-alike route as well or CC-BY-SA. Blackmarsh is already dual licensed (which means you can pick one of the two) under CC-BY and the OGL. My current project Into the Majestic Fantasy Realms will also be dual-licensed assuming that the OGL 1.0a is still around. So I am covered for both if the OGL 1.0a goes away. For my Majestic Fantasy RPG, I will have the luxury of seeing what happens after the OGL 1.1 is released. The larger issue is that trust in the irrevocability of OGL 1.0a has been shattered regardless of the outcome. This doesn't mean we should not fight for as keeping it allows us continued access to the literal millions of words shared with it. However it does means that going forward large segments of the hobby and industry are going to seek true independence from Wizards of the Coast. If the OGL 1.0a remains viable but you don't want to trust it. My recommendation is to use CC-BY. Clearly note which parts are not open content under CC-BY like your company name. Using CC-BY will allows the open content to be used as product identity in a work that combines it with open content released under the OGL. The OGL allows product identity to used but only if there is a separate license to use it. The separate license in this case is the CC-BY.
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on Jan 4, 2023 14:41:12 GMT -6
Unless you've been living under a rock you have heard of ChatGPT, powered by the OpenAI technology that uses Generative AI to answer any question, or to describe virtually anything you can ask it. I've been living under a rock. In addition to the above explanation Right now it is a step to being the ultimate random generator. It results are step above what you get from the donjon and AD&D DMG random dungeons but only a step. For example MeThe Burning Tors are a desert mountain range in the middle of the Forsaken Desert. To the north lies the deep canyon known as as Ironedge Chasm, and to the southern are the vast dunes of the Forsaken Deserts. Create a unique description of the Burning Tors based on the above description using various Dungeon & Dragons Monster Manuals. Chat GPTThe Burning Tors are a formidable range of mountains, their jagged peaks piercing the skyline like the spines of some great beast. Nestled within their rocky folds lies the Ironedge Chasm, a deep and treacherous gorge that is home to all manner of fearsome creatures. From the winged beasts that soar through the skies above, such as griffons and manticores, to the scaled horrors that lurk in the shadows below, like hydras and salamanders, the Burning Tors are a place of danger and adventure. Despite the risks, many brave (or foolhardy) souls venture into these mountains in search of ancient ruins and lost treasures. But they must be wary of the searing heat, treacherous footing, and the constant threat of monstrous attack at every turn. According to legend, the Burning Tors were once a peaceful range of mountains, home to a thriving community of dwarves and humans. But that all changed when a group of powerful mages, desperate for power, summoned a group of fire elementals to do their bidding. These elementals, bound to the will of the mages, were used to forge powerful magical weapons and armor. As the mages delved deeper into the mountains, their greed and ambition only grew. They began to extract more and more power from the elementals, pushing them to their limits. And as they did, the elementals grew more and more unstable, their flames growing hotter and more volatile. One day, something went terribly wrong. The elementals broke free from the mages' control, unleashing a massive inferno that engulfed the entire mountain range. The flames burned for days, turning the once-verdant peaks into a barren wasteland of ash and cinder. The mages, realizing the grave error they had made, fled the mountains in terror, leaving behind only ruins and charred remains. And so the Burning Tors were born, a testament to the destructive power of magic and greed. To this day, the mountains still burn, the flames fueled by the elemental spirits that were once bound to them. MeUsing the above description. Create for me a description of a monster lair in the Burning Tors based on the various D&D monster manuals. ChatGPTThe lair of the fire elementals is a place of scorching heat and flickering flame. Deep within the Burning Tors, the elementals have carved out a network of tunnels and chambers, each one glowing with the intense heat of their fires. The walls are blackened and scorched, evidence of the elementals' power and ferocity. At the heart of the lair is a massive chamber, filled with a sea of flames that dance and swirl in a never-ending inferno. The elementals move through this chamber with ease, their bodies made of living fire and immune to the scorching heat. They are led by a powerful being known as the Inferno King, a massive elemental with flames that burn brighter than the sun. The fire elementals are fiercely territorial, and they will stop at nothing to protect their lair from intruders. They are capable of conjuring great blasts of flame, melting through steel and stone with ease. Those who dare to venture into the lair of the fire elementals must be prepared for a fierce and relentless fight for survival.
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on Nov 8, 2022 13:42:38 GMT -6
I use milestone awards. But where players and the group as a whole set the milestone. My job is to decide how difficult it is to achieve the goal and set the award accordingly. I used this system for a long time when it comes to D&D. It takes more work on my part because I don't use any formal mechanics for setting goals. Instead, I have to pay attention to what the players want to do as their individual characters and what they decide to do as a group. For example, the group decides to explore the Cave of Chaos. That would be a major milestone in my judgment. Given the nature of the cave, the group would likely have will shortly have the plan to take it on. Listening to their plans will outline what the minor milestones will be. In addition, each player will generally have some goal in mind, saving enough to buy a suit plate armor for example. Finding a particular spell to copy into their spell book. Those are milestone once achieved I will tack onto a player's individual award. General once the players get used to the idea that I am perfectly fine with them trashing my setting, they will start planning to do things beyond just getting "stuff". Like making an ally out of the local baron for example. So those become milestones I give awards for. I very much dislike traditional XP awards because they force players into unnatural behaviors like being overly greedy. Or in the one campaign, I was recently involved with forced to spend incessantly which led to frivolous spending just so I can keep advancing in order to achieve the real goals I had for the character. In that campaign, gold didn't count for XP unless you spent it on something. Didn't like it one whit. But I do count traditional monster XP because in my opinion, that is a significant learning experience that makes sense to get experience from. Below is a copy of the original rules I used from the early 80s when I was using AD&D 1e. Then what folks will call milestones now, I considered rewarding good roleplaying. But I wound up adopting the milestone terms because many players don't like to be actors. I found it works just as well if the players just acts as version of themselves with the abilities of the character. The key is interacting with the setting and setting goals they can achieve for themselves from what they discover. And finally it helps with running my campaigns as a sandbox. It doesn't matter what the group decides to do it is something they can get XP from accomplishing.
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on Oct 17, 2022 6:15:18 GMT -6
The problem as I see it is that players want to do things other than spellcasting and fighting and want their character to be better at those things. It has been my observation that these things don't fall into nice archetypes but instead represent what any person can do to a greater and lesser degree. A choice could be to ignore these things by not having them come up in a campaign. Another is that it is all about player skill and how good their plan is. Another is to go with a simplistic mechanic typically based on an attribute like Charisma, Intelligence, etc. Still yet another method is to allow characters a chance to do things outside of combat and spellcasting but make the odds of failure ridiculously high like with various iterations of the thief class. For me, many of the traditional approaches are unsatisfactory because of what I focus on in my campaigns. Which is letting the players trash the setting. When they take advantage of this then things one can do outside of combat and spellcasting as a character become important. And I feel that they should have some decent chance at succeeding at one or two things even at 1st level. Hence why I have my ability system for my Majestic Fantasy RPG www.batintheattic.com/downloads/MW%20Majestic%20Fantasy%20Basic%20RPG%20Rev%2010.pdfI think back in the 70s, folks overreacted and in a lot of cases threw the baby out with the bathwater in coming up with their skill-based system. Also, it didn't help that the "why" of D&D wasn't explained well. In general, I find since the 1980s that D&D hobby always had a significant segment who wanted better character customization. That this group was one foundation of the popularity of other RPGs like Runequest, GURPS, Fantasy HERO, Warhammer, and so on. AD&D 2e tried to fix this with kits but it wasn't until the release of D&D 3.0 that Wizards found a decent compromise that worked with D&D class and level system; feats and skills. Then they too went overboard with is with 3.5 and 4e. Then dialed it back with D&D 5e. But the pressure remains, I wouldn't say it encompasses the majority of D&D hobbyists who are mostly there to have fun and game with family and friends. But it remains a large minority.
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on Oct 15, 2022 19:35:34 GMT -6
Updated the links with the correct one from the internet archive.
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on Oct 14, 2022 13:08:06 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on Sept 19, 2022 13:19:24 GMT -6
Sorry that so many don't like Rings of Power. My family and I are enjoying it and we're having a great time getting together every Friday to have dinner and watch the new episode together. You are not alone, I am enjoying it as well. It is not a 100% perfect, but having re-read the Second Age material I think it is a fair adaptation. The biggest issue I have seen so far was the slow start compared to House of the Dragon. For me, episode 3 laid enough of the threads on the table to see the bigger picture of where they are going and I am in for the ride. At this point, I say remember that Shakespeare is bad history but was entertaining drama. That Babylon 5 started slow and had a lackluster Season One then we got Season 2, 3, and 4.
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on Sept 11, 2022 20:55:38 GMT -6
These booklets are great; thanks for sharing! I have long thought about running a campaign that is closer to traditional legends and fairy tales than to modern fantasy. Yeah, thinking of faeries as being born of stories and strong emotions really helped me come up with adventures that fit the more traditional view. I am currently finalizing the Deceits of the Russet Lord which centers around the machinations of a Winter Sidhe Lord. Very useful booklets, thank you for posting these! I love the illustrations in the scroll. Thanks! One of the upgrades to CorelDRAW came with a medieval clip art folder and they had a lot of images like that. I managed to keep that folder on my HD for over two decades. now.
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on Sept 5, 2022 9:25:50 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on Aug 10, 2022 20:22:41 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on Jul 8, 2022 9:09:23 GMT -6
Maybe we should have that sort of thing here. Well we are talking about OD&D here. I think at this point we are all in agreement that given how the 3 LBBs and supplements were written, you have to decide how to interpret several sections right off the bat. Unlike 3.X or 5e, OD&D doesn't have a pure board/wargame mode where you resolve everything via the mechanics. However, outlining and detailing the most common interpretations would be useful.
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on Jul 8, 2022 9:04:53 GMT -6
This honestly doesn't apply to 99% of the folks here. This may be the single coolest community on the Internet. But in the broader arena of social media, the way gamers treat each other can be just awful. I have gotten a lot of mileage from saying "Here what I do, why I do it, what happened in actual play when I used it. Hope you find this or part of this useful." And not focus on judging other folks approaches. When I am negative it is from the standpoint of I tried X, Y happened, and the result wasn't suitable for what I was going for. And those of you who interacted with me here and on other forums know my opinions about gaming. That I often hold strong opinions about various topics. But when it comes to other folks playing or referee, I am well aware you have to do whatever makes it work for you as a fun hobby within the time you have for a hobby.
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on Jun 24, 2022 11:55:51 GMT -6
While I enjoy getting the revenues I get from my sales as Bat in the Attic Games. The biggest reward is getting to share my material and doing in it a way that is professional and useful. Since the point is sharing, I like to release most of the material I make as open content. Why? Part of it is promotion. Making it easy for others to share my stuff so people will seek out the other things I have. But the other important reason is to allow projects to happen that I don't have the resources or time to do, like translation into other languages. So I am pleased to announce that Blackmarsh has been published in French! Périlleuses contrées: FangenoireThis is due to the efforts of Philippe Tromeur and his team. They have a bunch of translations on DriveThruRPG for other products with open content. There will be a print version of this available in the next few months on Lulu I appreciate this and hope this makes Blackmarsh more accessible for those whose primary language is French. Important Rob's Note: I am perfectly fine with the fees charged by people who use my open content. A lot of work went into this and folks deserve to be compensated in the matter they see fit. If I had a problem with it I wouldn't have released it as open content. For Fangenoire, Philippe has opted to make the PDF free to download on DriveThruRPG. Other TranslationsHungarianSpanishOther VersionsBlackmarsh for Heroes and Other WorldsBlackmarsh SRD
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on May 27, 2022 12:49:04 GMT -6
Isn't LARPing in and of itself a classification or style? My view LARPS is a type of roleplaying game. As different and alike from tabletop roleplaying games as CRPGS and MMORPGs are. They all share a common focus on playing a character within a setting but handle the logistics very differently. And like tabletop roleplaying there is no one way to play a LARP like there is no one way of playing a CRPG or MMORPG. Whereas tabletop roleplaying is where players interact with a setting as their characters with their actions adjudicated by a human referee. A CRPG/MMORPG is where players interact with a setting as their characters with their actions adjudicated by a software algorithm. A LARP is where players interact with a setting as their characters with their actions adjudicated by the rules of a sport. Note it doesn't have to be boffer weapons. It could be like White Wolf's use of rock paper scissors. Whatever it is generally involves something doing something physical on the spot rather than rolling dice. Often it is minimal in terms of complexity to allow dozens of participants to use the mechanics without intervention from the event staff.
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on May 27, 2022 9:18:39 GMT -6
I'm actually quite fond of Bartle, partly because it's one of the early classification What classification systems do is very roughly fill in the gaps before you've had a chance to get to know people. Yeah, with players I've known for years I don't need them as I could write a thesis on how they play games. It's about newbies and other unknown factors. Good point and in hindsight a major part of why my NERO chapter talked about it a lot after we learned about it. However here is the riddle, how you do know which category the newbies fall into unless you get to know them. It is a chicken and egg problem. You can't describe a player unless you know something about them. But you still need to have something planned (for a LARP at least) knowing that you will have participants that you have never met. My solution is to learn about team-building techniques for the out-of-game stuff and to focus on creating interesting settings and situations in-game that are likely to have inherent appeal. While this betrays my bias about sandbox campaigns and techniques. What unfolds from that start is up to the players. If the campaign turns to be about the drama that surrounds basket-weaving then so be it. I will endeavor to bring that aspect of my setting to life in a way as adventurous, fun, and interesting as I can. As I would if the group decides to make it their focus to explore the elven ruins that dot the orc inhabited Dearthwood. But I have to bet on a random player or group, I would place my money on exploring the elven ruins. Where the approach pays off is for the times when the campaign is mostly but not always about exploring ruins/etc. With this players never feel they have to explore ruins otherwise, they would "waste" my prep. Instead, they can go off on some tangent. Most will return to it later but sometime the tangent becomes the new focus. Whereas you see the lack of nuance as a bug, I argue it's a feature. (If you start trying to work with classifications as anything other than broad generalisations that's when you get into the rigid "players always act in one way" issue that is the flaw with some other classification systems. I'm not saying that they're necessary at all or that they do anything but paint with an overly broad brush. Merely that shortcuts can sometimes be a useful tool. Like I said you have to learn enough in the first place to put the players into a category why not focus on taking that a step further and learn the nuances of that individual? Because this is in the context of a leisure activity focused on a specific genre or setting. Fantasy in our case due to us focusing on D&D here. I argue the extra time to do this is minimal. And I think your example of casual players is a really important one. But what you've done there is pinpointed another broad group of players that needs taking into account. "Casual players" is as much a classification as "actors" or "diamonds". If anything I think it shows the inevitability of dividing players in this way. Much as it would be lovely to study each one as their own special case, that's not always feasible. For me what I label causal is quickly determined by just talking to the players to gauge their interest. The two of tells are "lack of interest" or "lack of knowledge". That tells me among other things go easy on certain elements of my campaign. A recent example of all of the above is that I am preparing to run a campaign in the City State of the Invincible Overlord (my Majestic Wilderlands version). I have one player who likes all the lore and odd little corners of my setting. He and I talked quite a bit about his character which is going to be an assassin masquerading as a guy who gathers herbs and makes elixirs (non magical potions). He going to have some knowledge of the community of magic user to start off with. His goal for his character is to find and eliminate any magic-user dealing with demons. I have another player whose character is basically a thug hanging out at taverns doing anything for money. And that is pretty much it and he declined to go into any more details. Which is fine. All of this was developed through talking with them after a session for a campaign that I play with them.
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on May 27, 2022 7:29:55 GMT -6
robertsconley, I have nothing but respect for you and I learn from you constantly so I am trying to lean into what you are saying and learn from you. Appreciate the compliments and apologize if my post was not well written. I still find it hard to believe that you have not noticed that there are trends and types of play that are fun to refs and players. There are personality types. So it seems sane to think there might also be play styles. Sure in hindsight there are things that seem obvious in terms of personality and play styles for every individual. The problem I find in practice is what is it going to be today? I admit if this was a random roll the most likely result is what was previously observed. But I been at this long enough to have experienced multiple times when I guessed wrong. Since then I tried to figure out ways to avoid having to make that guess. I think one thing I am sensing here is that you are probably just simply and without qualification a better ref than I am! You clearly have the patience and wherewithal to devote yourself to helping anyone have fun at your table. You have a kind of flexibility in your own likes, then, that I think I do not have. I don't know if I am better. The only thing that seems to set me apart, other than just plain experience, is that I am willing to go with the flow of how players are rather than how I wish them to be in terms of what they want to do in-game. There are limits for example I am not particularly adept at anything gonzo or goofy. So players who like that sort of thing generally don't stick around long in my campaigns. I am not a jerk about it, just not very good at it. I wise guide in my life once said to me, "get people to 'no,' as quickly as possible." Meaning, to save myself energy drain and dismay trying to do things I am ill-suited to and which do not bring me joy, I need to help people along the process of discerning whether they want to join with me and do my thing or not. Not everyone can like everything. I have friends that know they do not like D&D. I don't play D&D with them or bug them about it. We do other stuff together. Well for me I make a distinction betwee3ne in-game and out-of-game. Out of game, I have pretty much the same sentiment as you do above. I am pretty accommodating but in general I want to like the people I hang out with every week. In-game however, I just try to setup an interesting situation based on what the players tell me prior to the campaign. Then when play commences I pretty much don't care what pieces they try to knock over or trash. . Obviously, if they go after the King or the Dragon at 1st levels it will probably not end well but given time, luck, and good planning they could pull it off. How this relates to your OP, is that play styles and personality obviously influence how the players approach dealing with the dragon or king over the long run. But I try to manage things so that the campaign is agnostic to how it is accomplished. One group I know would pretty much go the "amass wealth through dungeon exploration" route, another group I know is more likely to do stick to the cities and do a ton of roleplaying with NPCs to forge connections with the adventures being mostly about fulfilling favors to cement a relationship with an NPC. While another I refereed within the last 5 years is more likely to be focused on exploiting how magic works in my setting. I simply do not believe that there are not different identifiable styles of playing D&D and RPGs. I want to help folks get to "no" faster for their sake and mine so that they have fun with their time and I have fun with mine. My advice is best to learn to do this is to read all you can on small team interactions. What we need for a tabletop roleplaying campaign is not unlike what a small workgroup, a small committee, or a small volunteer group needs. One thing you will notice with this is the part about motivation and enthusiasm. Regardless of what setting you find the small group in, if they are more enthusiastic they are, the more productive they are. The equivalent for tabletop roleplaying is that they are excited to be there with you and the other players which makes them more flexible about what the group actually does. Which works out well for tabletop roleplaying because of the inherent flexibility that built into the whole referee describe, player describes, results are adjudicated cycle. Does that help to make sense of what I am trying for here? It is possible, that you are just so darn good and accommodating that you cannot understand me on this one! If that is the case, then just axios to you and I hope I get to sit at your table and watch you figure out what I like and accommodate my playstyle so I can see how a pro does it! Again thanks for the compliment. I will admit is hard for me to give advice on something that is more focused. But I will say that this is covered in the stuff you can learn about small group interactions (or team building is another term). Some teams or group have a pretty specific focus so the leader needs to have the tool to figure out who a good fit and who is not. Hope this helps or at least clarifies where I am coming from.
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on May 25, 2022 19:45:24 GMT -6
The player taxonomies map on one for one with the Actor/Gamer/Roleplayer model that's been informally doing the rounds in LARP for years. From what I can tell that originates with Walter Freitag and Rick Dutton. It's outlined in the book Nexus from Chaosium. Because it's not found anywhere else, I suspect it's a taxonomy from a local LARP scene only really known by people who've read that particular game. Back in the day of LARPING (1990s) Bartle is the first theory of classification I heard in the world of boffer LARPS (NERO, etc.) It hit around the mid 90s and organized gamers into Killers/Achievers/Socializers/Explorers. At the time most of us thought it was spot on but within the year, it became obvious that is was only a superficial description especially for the long term players. Why? The nuance problem I described in my previous post. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bartle_taxonomy_of_player_typesHow useful is it? At the very least, I use those categories when casting parlour LARPs to try and get a decent player to character match. Using Bartles didn't save any time for me or the people who ran NERO LARP (boffer) events with me. The only benefit is that it highlighted the fact that there was no substitute for knowing your audiences as best as you can before the event and paying attention to folks while the event unfolds. I know I am being very negative about classification systems. Just realize my negativity is born of running events for dozens of players over a span of a decade. At best Bartles applied to a quarter of the players who attend nearly all of them what I call causal players. They are there to hang out with friends. While they have fun only a few things engaged them. And it was possible to catagorize that interest on the basis of Bartle and also I could have done with it as well with the Actor/Gamer/Roleplayer system. Although that doesn't really capture the difference between those who were there for the sport of fighting with boffer weapons (Killers) and those who were there because of the Live-Action and physicality of actually exploring things (Explorers). The long term players continually shifted their interest. And it is worse with RPGs because while you don't have the immersion of live-action, the small group, the human referee, and the use of pen, paper, and dice means things can and do shift on a dime throughout the campaign.
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on May 10, 2022 9:18:19 GMT -6
The problem with classification is that it is so nuanced as a result of the only limits being what the players want to do as their characters and what the referee is willing to adjudicate. It opens even further once you add metagaming where you can do things as a player your character can't do.
One is better off learning as many systems they have time for. Then combine the elements that they like best as a starting point. Playtest over and over again until they got whatever it is they are looking for. It is the only thing I found that works every time and it is not hit or miss. The problem of course is that it takes time to execute.
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on May 9, 2022 9:57:39 GMT -6
I don't know if this will help so here it goes.
I view the point of the tabletop roleplaying as pretending to be characters having adventures in some imagined setting within the time one has for a hobby. The means by which this is accomplished is by a referee describing a setting, players, and the players describing characters that could adventure in the setting. The campaign commences when the referee describes the circumstances in which the players as their characters find themselves. The player then describes (or roleplays) what they do. The referee then describes the result. All of this is typically aided by the use of a rule system and dice.
If you notice nowhere I describe what the setting is, what it is about, or what type of characters are being played. These are creative choices of the referee and group prior to the campaign starting. Nor I describe any particular way in which the players deal with things. Only that there is a process where the referee describes the circumstances and the players describe what they do as their characters.
This can be done in a silly spirit, this can be done seriously, or anything in-between. In the end, it is a matter of taste and whatever seems fun for the group and the referee.
Also note, that I don't focus on the rules much. The rules are important but an aide to make this happen. The exact type of rules doesn't really matter to making this work. But the rules are crucial in making this enjoyable. And just as important, doable, and fun within the time one has for a hobby. This group favors using rules based on the 3 LBBs and their supplements. And clearly enjoys using those rules as an aide to running fantasy campaigns.
Nor do I focus much on why the players themselves want to pretend to adventure as characters within the setting. The only criteria I think is needed is whether they are having fun or not. For some groups, this means adventuring in a setting with highly detailed rules like GURPS with all the supplements, for others even something like OD&D is too detailed, and go with something like Microlite20 or a stripped-down Fudge/Fate. Players who like to "win" will enjoy campaigns where their characters keep finding themselves in situations that have a clear outcome, like defeating combatants or solving mysteries. While others like the nuances and uncertainty of campaigns involving dozens of NPCs each with their own schemes and personalities. If the setting can be imagined, it works as a basis for an RPG campaign with the right group of players.
Those rules help a lot in creating and running dungeon and wilderness adventures. But don't say much on how the campaign or adventures are to be run in terms of tone and tenor. Whether it is silly, serious, or something in between, whether it is a lot of roleplaying a lot of combat, a lot of exploring, or the more usually a mix.
The flaw in GNS and the rest is that they are overly simplistic when applied to actual people doing something for fun. Moreover, these theories focus way too much on the rules solving problems with the campaign. The primary mechanic that makes RPGs work the way they work, the one that Arneson and Gygax honed and proved out is the referee describing the circumstances and the players describing what they do in response.
What makes it fun is that the circumstances are taking place in a setting that the group finds fun to adventure in. So the players want to keep this process going with the referee to see more of what there and see what more they can do within the setting. And starting with the first proto-RPGs like the Braunsteins or Korns World War II games, this process can be quite addictive and fun as everybody wants to do "one more thing" and likes the fact they can by using this system.
So my answer to your question is to make a fun and compelling non-serious setting that players will find fun to adventure in. I personally run campaigns that are more grounded and serious so I don't have any particular insight on how to do that. But I have known and played in campaigns that did this and they were fun. The common element is that the referee came up with a setting with funny elements that worked as humor and we as a group were willing to play characters in this setting.
Hope this helps.
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on Apr 20, 2022 12:01:09 GMT -6
So, what if I wanted to us the OS board but the map was 25m instead of 5m per hex? ..... Could anyone do something like that for me? robertsconley? It would be somewhat different as the rivers and some other elements would be way out of scale if the hexes were 25 miles. Plus the amount of work would 361 times more. Instead of one hex you now have 19 hexes encompassed by the original OS map hex. And it matters because my take is using standard Judges Guild terrain symbols that are placed hex by hex. Even the original map used hex symbols. In short, it is doable but it is a pretty big project. To do it right it is not a matter of making a subgrid and overlay it on the map.
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on Apr 20, 2022 11:47:31 GMT -6
Hello odd74 I've just requested to join as Flintlock. Some of you may already know me from: I'm Black Leaf over on the RPGPub where I'm a mod. Devil's Avocado on RPG.net or from gaming at: Because I'm a Brit I don't think it's that likely that people will know me from games, but I was a longstanding member of HUGS. Unlikely those this may be, if anyone is involved in the En Garde! community you'll know me as Sam/King Louis from the Liminal game. Some of my pals on odd74 are: Rob Conley Mods, please see my membership request. robertsconley, can you confirm you know this person? Yes I do. Sorry for the belated reply.
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on Jan 11, 2022 12:25:23 GMT -6
robertsconley, I love your b&w rendering and I use it all the time. The guy who also refs in my campaign also uses it and it helps us coordinate the campaign. We have noticed a few mistakes / omissions but we cannot edit the doc. If I detail some of what we have noticed, would you be willing to make a few updates and re-share? Thanks for considering. Glad you are enjoying and yes I will be glad to update the file. Go ahead and post your errata.
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on Dec 27, 2021 11:01:17 GMT -6
I just casually perused the maps and noticed that WHITE FANGED BAY is missing the "I". It makes me wonder if there are any other errors which should be addressed. When it came to the text I focused mostly on the settlement names and other that were a smaller font size. They had the highest degree of tracing issues. I was surprised to see the I missing but was able to fix it up. In my sheer excitement I was on the verge of uploading one of these spectacular maps to Office Depot to print out a MASSIVE copy on polypropelene as a companion to my recently-received Outdoor Survival map, but... That sounds awesome. So I tried to do to spot error is put a scan on a layer and align it with the vector drawing. Then I turned off one layer and turned it back on. Most of the error appeared as blinks as things shifted around. The good news that with the SVG file now complete people don't have to wait on me. So close to perfection, it's still a thing of beauty! Appreciate the compliment. If you spot anything else let me know. meanwhile the PDF has been updated to Version 12c.
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on Dec 27, 2021 10:56:46 GMT -6
I applied more errata. Fixing up settlement symbols because of the lack of clarity in the original scan. Also restored the missing i in White Fanged Bay. Finally I sorted out the issue with the mountain and forest fills in the SVG file. They are now present.
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on Dec 24, 2021 14:54:08 GMT -6
First link is not functioning... Fixed, thanks for the heads up.
|
|