Is it possible to create a 'true successor' to Baldur's gate?

[Lhynn]

TSR got the license for the Conan movies and made two modules based off of the movies. This was during Gary Gygax's term at TSR before being pushed out. Now Gary did write up Conan in Dragon #36. I have only an image of what the basics of Conan as seen by Gary but nothing in depth.

From what i can see he didnt believe level to be a static thing, depending on the activity of the adventurer they could go up or down. As in a few years of peace could dull your senses and decrease your effectiveness a lot. Ive toyed with this idea for a long time, interesting to see the old man also did. It could also influence your attributes, which doesnt seem bad, and on par with his narrative approach to the system and his "rules dont matter, change it if you want" attitude.

Well, the book is there for storing the formula and to retain lore. Its just that the forget part of firing the spell doesn't really apply if what wizards do instead is called Preparation, as opposed to Memorization. In fact, I think I read this here on the Codex years ago.

I guess? Scrolls seem to contradict this tho. because once the energy is gone and the formula inscribed in it expended you are only left with a blank page. Also to make a scroll you need to memorize the spell and its expent after you make it.
Maybe in third edition?

 

[JamesDixon]

Wasn't the memorization fluff changed to 'Wizard prepares spell by casting the majority of the magical formula during rest phase, triggers prepared spell during the day but doesn't really forget it' pretty early in dnd?

I believe it was.

 

[Delterius]

And thats the deal: what a wizard does during the rest phase is to cast 98% of the spell. The rest phase is there so that the ritual can be made and the magic effect may take shape. Afterwards, the wizard opens the book and executes a trigger for the spell, thereby expending it. Naturally, spellbooks and scrolls work a bit different. This would be called the Preparation fluff.

The other representation is that magic is more than simply applied knowledge. Spells are entities, words given intent, consciousness and trapped inside the mind of the Wizard. This is the Memorization or Fire and Forget fluff in its entirety. It is somewhat outlandish but it can be cool to. I remember some story where a wizard learned a dark spell so horrendous that his other spells refused to be cast.

 

[JamesDixon]

And thats the deal: what a wizard does during the rest phase is to cast 98% of the spell. The rest phase is there so that the ritual can be made and the magic effect may take shape. Afterwards, the wizard opens the book and executes a trigger for the spell, thereby expending it. Naturally, spellbooks and scrolls work a bit different. This would be called the Preparation fluff.

The other representation is that magic is more than simply applied knowledge. Spells are entities, words given intent, consciousness and trapped inside the mind of the Wizard. This is the Memorization or Fire and Forget fluff in its entirety. It is somewhat outlandish but it can be cool to. I remember some story where a wizard learned a dark spell so horrendous that his other spells refused to be cast.

According to AD&D 2E, the mage spends the time preparing the spell by mentally inscribing the pattern for the spell and summoning the magical energy to match it in his mind. Only during the actual use does it require a trigger, so the spellbook isn't necessary in the casting of the spell. It's only during the preparation that it is important. Without the spellbook, a mage cannot do the ritual to prepare the pattern and assign the magical energy to it.

EDIT: So the spells of OD&D/AD&D fit with the Sword & Sorcery genre, with the only difference being the amount of time to cast the ritual. OD&D/AD&D it's 10 minutes per spell level while in S&S it's hours based upon spell level.

 

[JamesDixon]

Now to tackle the other example of Skele Tony's which is Elric. Elric appeared first in Gods, Demi-Gods, & Heroes for OD&D in Supplement IV. His next appearance was in AD&D 1E's Deities & Demi-Gods 1st and 2nd Printing. Here is an image of Elric from Deities & Demigods 1st or 2nd Printing.

As one can see that this is actually a really good representation of Elric from the books. He's a monster of a guy as a multi-class character according to AD&D 1E. For Pete's sake, he's got 69 combined levels as a character which according to ODD & AD&D that he would be a God in his own right.

OD&D/AD&D may not be perfect as a system, but with a lot of work it can be done to simulate a lot of fictional characters and worlds. For the typical Sword & Sorcery campaign disallow wizards as player characters and increase the preparation/casting times of their spells to match the fiction. Instead of 10 minutes per spell level it would be hours per spell level with the fact that preparation also means that the spell is cast right then and there. No preparation of spells for later use. The amount of spells that can be prepared would be ignored and used as a guideline on how many spells the wizard knows. In the old S&S genre, from the late 1880s to 1940s, wizards were evil and their spells took hours to complete.

 

[Keldryn]

Yes, in 3e the spell mechanics stayed the same, but the explanation was changed from memorizing to preparing. During the 1 hour it now took to prepare spells, the wizard or cleric started casting the spell, leaving it ready to complete later.

It works if you don't think about it too hard, as there are spells with long casting times that make this a bit nonsensical.

 

[SkeleTony]

Except that Conan was translated to AD&D 1E and had his own modules called Conan Unchained and Conan Against Darkness. His stats are as follows:

Fighter 13/Thief 7
Hit Points: 100
Luck Points: 12
STR: 18 (90)
INT: 14
WIS: 10
DEX: 18
CON: 18
CHA: 17
WP: Sword (all types), Bow (all types), Axe (all types), club, mace, and dagger
Secondary Skills: Fletcher, Forester, Gambler, Hunter, Sailor, Trapper
Special: Surprised only on a 1 in 8
Equipment: Leather Armor, Broad Sword, Dagger, and 50 GP

Yes, as I said. What is your point?

 

[SkeleTony]

Swear to god, i understand Excidium II more and more every day


What if it takes place in harry potters world? what if it takes place in tron? what if it takes place in marvel cinematic universe? Stop being so god damn retarded.

What if WHAT takes place in these other NOT heroic fantasy/sword & sorcery settings?! What point are you struggling to make here?

Uhm, not idea what you are talking about mate.

You repeatedly called me a "cuck" which I believe is some white guy who gets off on seeing some black guy fuck his wife or some such but when I called you a "bronie" you whined 'at least my insults make sense' as if your lame 'me too!' usage of "cuck" made any sense (if you knew who I was you would not have called me such) whereas mine seems to make all the sense in the world as you seem to be an anime fag anyway and have a lot of weird issues with sex.

You ready to have a discussion yet or do you wanna keep doing this stupid shit?

That is if you ever get to fire it in the first place. Its not a hard concept to grasp mate, you store the formula and the energy, you release it, spell takes effect, say bye to both.

It is nonsensical and you are trying to play word games here. AD&D, as I have demonstrated before in this very thread, does not work the way you are trying to characterize it. It IS literally the "fire and forget" Vancian system. It requires that a mage memorize a specific quantity of spells (including the same spell multiple times) and then each memorization vanishes from memory after you recite the spell. To put this in perspective it is like someone memorizing 4 recitations of "The Road Not Taken by Frost and then forgetting one of those every time he reads that poem so that after 4 such readings he completely forgets the poem altogether. There is NOTHING to indicate any "energy" is expended during this or that the memorization had anything to do with mystical energy reserves. Rationalize all you want but don't get mad when rational folk don't buy your rationalizations.

Unno, like a shit ton, how many D&D based books have there been? Also not a flaw, just a matter of preference, you dont seem to like it, but i dont know why i or anyone else should care. You simply seem to have taken a wrong turn on the street that lead to gurps. Its not a valid criticism to say "but X fiction rules are not supported by this system" no matter how much you want that to be the case.

Wow. Way to dodge a fuck ton of points you could not answer eh? Why on earth would you think I am some GURPS advocate?! You want to start a thread criticizing GURPS then I will join you in that but WTF does it have to do with this subject?

Wisdom gave bonus to mind affecting stuff, Constitution gave bonus to the poison save, plus system shock throws that determined whether you survived things like massive damage or big changes in your body.

That sounds right. A few minor modifications to a few save throws for a few attributes. I knew my memory wasn't THAT bad...

Its just an interpretation, and HP goes up with levels because you become more experienced at handling incoming damage, more able to see it coming, thus it takes less out of you to do it.

I did not ask you to restate what we can read ourselves in the AD&D sources, You said that HP measured how much punishment one could take. How much punishment one can take is determined by physique primarily (with the armor reducing damage taken in better systems). The problems I keep mentioning which you keep dodging are that if HP instead represent all this other nonsense like experience, training, luck/fate/gods' favor, etc. then what does "cure light wounds" do? If it heals "luck, training, stamina etc." then could it be cast at a gambling table to improve ones odds? Does one's 'training' take damage and get depleted when he is hit by an umber hulk's claws? And all the other issues you keep dodging...

Nope, im not talking about fatigue, just the ability to push your body beyond its limits,...

I wasn't talking about "fatigue" either. I was talking about vigor and stamina...which allow one to push his body to its limits (and in a fantasy game BEYOND).

eventually you will lose your focus, makes sense even within the system because the biggest heal of them all heals the mind as well.

How does that bald assertion address the problems at hand? Seriously how does that begin to deal with the problems I have presented to you here? When a blacksmith who is stressed about his wife leaving him is unable to focus on his work can a cleric cast a "cure heavy wounds" to remedy the situation?

There are degrees of damage, maybe he took just a small hit, a graze, or got hit only with the blunt of the sword. i have explained why i believe this is so.

And AGAIN, how does the game distinguish between 30 points of acid breath damage and 30 points of sword hits (including which sword hits were just grazing shots or made with the flat of the blade) and 30 points of stamina/vigor reduction from running around in circles (since as you say HP are in large part a measure of focus/stamina/energy/chutzpa/whatever the fuck)?

Uhm, not really, its clearly listed in weapon proficiencies. Mages that use a weapon they are not proficient with have a -5,

Why do you keep arbitrarily switching over to later/more recent D&D editions that tried to correct these issues somewhat? You really should go read the original (A) D&D stuff just to get an idea of why they had to fix these matters . Also why can't a magic-user learn to use a sword?

clerics if i remember correctly got a -3 and fighters got a -2. What gygax didnt let you do was put points into weapons your class had no business knowing how to handle, because expertise in more advanced weapons and techniques would cut your time with your real profession short.

LOL! Yeah Gygax was full of silly rationalizations. Not much of a game designer I'm afraid but boy did he try to justify his bad designs! So a cleric cannot learn to use a sword because of ethos (even if he is evil and has no such ethical dillemmas) in AD&D and a magic-user cannot learn to use a sword because it would take too much time and effort and somehow prevent him from his magical studies but a thief can learn the fine arts of picking pockets, climbing sheer surfaces, disarming traps (and about a half dozen other complicated skills) and still have no problem learning to use a sword, a bow etc. and that same magic-user can also learn a fucking language as alien as Drow or dragon but cannot learn to swing a sword at someone to defend himself?!

Of course i do, who in their right mind would call AD&D perfect? its a flawed gem that despite its numerous flaws makes for a really entertaining playing experience. What is lost in the abstraction is won in narrative and gameplay.

You give the system too much credit still. Other systems achieved all the good you think AD&D achieved but still had logically consistent systems that emulated heroic fantasy well and did not require a slew of rationalizations and excuses for flaws within. But I am glad you seem to begrudgingly acknowledge this much at least.

You had kits.

Kits were introduced in which edition of D&D again? Possibly late in 2nd ed. but I am thinking it was 3rd edition after WoTC took over. Am I wrong in this? Because I have already acknowledged that 3rd/3.5 ed. was MUCH improved over previous versions of (A)D&D.

Just make one on your own if you didnt like the ones offered to you, it was encouraged. You cant fit every archtype ever devised in fiction into your game. Battle-mages were a thing, swabucklers were basically thief-warriors, wouldnt be strange if conan had its own.

Okay so it was 2nd ed. AD&D. So you are advocating for THAT specific edition and not original AD&D or OD&D then? WTF does this have to do with MY positions here?! 2nd ed. also introduced improvements to various classes such as the Ranger, the cleric, the druid etc. but the system was still bad for the reasons I have stated already (inconsistency in the die systems used (percentile for thief skills, d6/d8/d20 for others, hit points, saving throws magic system etc.).

Nice, you could have just pasted the relevant definition tho.

abstract: relating to or involving general ideas or qualities rather than specific people, objects, or actions.

I listed ALL the usages to avoid you coming back with "Way to put words in my mouth cuck!" and allowed for you to tell me which usage you thought was a problem for me and WHY.

So why is the above usage something contradicting anything I have said here?

AD&D is a narrative experience, ...

Oh FUCK OFF already with this shit. "Narrative experience" is the sort of buzzword term for advocates of lazy game design (the "Rules are stoopid! it is much funner if the DM is able to quickly resolve every instance by ignoring rules and just making shit up on the spot!" crowd)

Here's a hint for you. It is quite possible to have a well designed game system which is also fun and quick enough even for the ADHD crowd of kids. RuneQuest is a "narrative experience" too. So is Champions and Call of Cthulhu and Space Opera and Toon and Ghostbusters.

No mate, the problem here is that you are vying for a simulationist approach and a specific system that relates to the fiction you like.

ALL RPGs have always been "simulationist" by definition. You want a non-simulationist RP experience? "Cowboys and Indians" and "Cops and Robbers" were that and we grew out of such as kids because they always devolved into "Hey I shot you! You're dead!"/"No you missed because I dove behind this tree!" arguments and were not much of a 'game' to begin with. The reason D&D ever even existed was because it evolved from squad-based tactical miniatures wargames. They figured out that it was possible to actually quantify the abilities of fantastic characters, monsters, etc. and use randomizers (dice) against these quantification to simulate what it would be like to be a party of adventures, from muscular warriors to pointy hatted wizards and so forth. AD&D is simply WAY overcomplicated and unnecessarily so and that is why better games followed it through the door.

As i told you before, this system isnt gurps,...

WTF is your obsession with GURPS?! GURPS had some MAJOR flaws itself but even that game was far better designed than D&D will ever be.

D&D has both its own mechanics and its own settings. If you feel like you have to adapt it to whatever fiction you happen to be reading, then do so, but dont criticize the system for not being a faithful representation of something its not supposed to represent.

I have never done that. I have always criticized AD&D for being a poorly designed game that does not do well what it intended to do (by its authors' stated intentions).

 

[SkeleTony]

Now to tackle the other example of Skele Tony's which is Elric. Elric appeared first in Gods, Demi-Gods, & Heroes for OD&D in Supplement IV. His next appearance was in AD&D 1E's Deities & Demi-Gods 1st and 2nd Printing. Here is an image of Elric from Deities & Demigods 1st or 2nd Printing.

As one can see that this is actually a really good representation of Elric from the books. He's a monster of a guy as a multi-class character according to AD&D 1E. For Pete's sake, he's got 69 combined levels as a character which according to ODD & AD&D that he would be a God in his own right.

You think THAT is a good representation of Elric?! Compared to BRP's?? The reason they had to give him all these nonsensical druid/cleric/illusionist/thief/assassin levels is because they could not accurately represent him with the (A)D&D system. They made him a god because they could not write him up as a Melnibonean (non-god and essentially human). Why didn't you include the write up for Stormbringer (as important a facet of Elric's character as anything else)? Don't get me wrong; D&D had some great writers and designers working (at TSR) and I was alwasy impressed by folks like Roger Moore and Monte Cook in what they were able to do within the severe constraints of D&D, but even those guys could not work miracles and so Elric and Conan and Fafhrd etc. could not be well simulated or represented within that system. Elric was never a "druid" or a "cleric" or a thief etc.

OD&D/AD&D may not be perfect as a system,...

To say the least.

but with a lot of work it can be done to simulate a lot of fictional characters and worlds. For the typical Sword & Sorcery campaign disallow wizards as player characters and increase the preparation/casting times of their spells to match the fiction. Instead of 10 minutes per spell level it would be hours per spell level with the fact that preparation also means that the spell is cast right then and there. No preparation of spells for later use. The amount of spells that can be prepared would be ignored and used as a guideline on how many spells the wizard knows. In the old S&S genre, from the late 1880s to 1940s, wizards were evil and their spells took hours to complete.

None of that gets us around the problems of AD&D's magic system though. The problem is with the way it tries to represent magic use with the silly 'fire and forget' system. Does not match Elric, LoTR, Conan, King Arthur or anything but one book by Jack Vance.

 

[JamesDixon]

You think THAT is a good representation of Elric?! Compared to BRP's?? The reason they had to give him all these nonsensical druid/cleric/illusionist/thief/assassin levels is because they could not accurately represent him with the (A)D&D system. They made him a god because they could not write him up as a Melnibonean (non-god and essentially human). Why didn't you include the write up for Stormbringer (as important a facet of Elric's character as anything else)? Don't get me wrong; D&D had some great writers and designers working (at TSR) and I was alwasy impressed by folks like Roger Moore and Monte Cook in what they were able to do within the severe constraints of D&D, but even those guys could not work miracles and so Elric and Conan and Fafhrd etc. could not be well simulated or represented within that system. Elric was never a "druid" or a "cleric" or a thief etc.

Considering that Michael Moorecock approved the design of his character, I would say yes that is a fair representation of Elric. I'd also say that his opinion and approval means a hell of a lot more than yours.

None of that gets us around the problems of AD&D's magic system though. The problem is with the way it tries to represent magic use with the silly 'fire and forget' system. Does not match Elric, LoTR, Conan, King Arthur or anything but one book by Jack Vance.

In AD&D 2E, they did present different types of magic systems in the Player Options: Spells & Magic book that range from using spell points to having to hit rolls. All official rules. You hate ODD/AD&D, we get it.

 

[Keldryn]

The true power of the D&D rules is to inspire the exact same debates 40 years later.

 

[Shadenuat]

In IE I love the feel of control, lethality and finesse of RTS game layered upon depth of an RPG system. I think it's the most important part and why combat in these games, especially in BG2, is so addictive. It is sort of "controllable chaos" that has its own tempo you get used to and enjoy, as opposed to safe, stale and tanky style of combat in PoE.
Lowbrow D&D "angsty teenage" writing being optional, but I still romanced Aerie & Vi 7 times.

 

[octavius]

Lowbrow D&D "angsty teenage" writing being optional, but I still romanced Aerie & Vi 7 times.

You did both at the same time?

 

[Shadenuat]

Mods take care of any preferences good gentleman might have.

I'd recommend Imoen and Edwin too. But I fear I already said too much.

 

[JamesDixon]

Here's the text that accompanies the picture of Elric from Deities & Demi-Gods to help SkeleTony understand that ODD/AD&D can be used for most fantasy settings.

The fact that Elric is an albino causes him to be very weak, and he must use artificial means to supplement his strength and constitution. He makes strength potions for his own use out of rare materials. As he travels about, there is a chance that the materials he needs to give him greater strength are no available. At any given time, there is an 85% chance that he has the needed materials, and his strength and constitution will be up to 15. These may be altered by his magic sword, Stormbringer (see below). He employs a great many spells of an unusual nature, as he has the magical studies of all his ancestors to draw upon.

Well that explains all the caster levels. Now for Stormbringer.

This huge black rune-carved blade is actually a chaotic evil sentient being from another plane which takes the form of a sword on the Prime Material Plane. Stormbringer is possibly the most powerful magic weapon possessed by a mortal anywhere. It has an Intelligence of 18 and an Ego of 20. It is +5 to hit and damage, and every time it hits, it drains energy levels from its opponents. On a successful hit it will either drain all or one-half of its opponent's remaining levels (50% chance of either). Any creature killed by Stormbringer has its soul or spirit as well as its energy levels sucked out and devoured. No creature so killed can be raised, resurrected, reincarnated, or brought back in any manner whatsoever.

Stormbringer transfers its stolen levels to Elric in the form of strength and hit points. For every two levels stolen, Elric gains 5 hit points and 1 strength point. Elric's strength can be increased to a maximum of 23, but the only limit to the amount of hit points he can acquire is that the sword will only drain 200 levels before it becomes sated (this satiety lasts 8 hours). The strength and hit points added last 10 turns, and then Elric reverts back to normal. When wielding Stormbringer, Elric's movement is 15" and his effective armor class is 6. It also confers to Elric an 85% magic resistance.

In battle, Stormbringer makes an evil, eager moaning, and gives off a weird black radiance. Creatures with less than 5 hit dice confronted with the black blade must save vs. death or flee in panic. It has been known to act as a dancing sword at Elric's command, but there is only a 15% chance of this.

If Elric is separated from Stormbringer, there is a 60% chance that he will be able to summon it to him, even from another plane.

Stormbringer is in all ways evil. Its purpose is to eat souls, thereby damning them to a horrible eternal death. Sometimes, in battle, Elric and the sword go into a killing frenzy, and slay everything within range, including Elric's friends, whose souls the sword particularly enjoys stealing.

All in all with Stormbringer, Elric is a god which fits with the stories by Michael Moorecock. Afterall, Elric did kill his own god in the stories with the help of Stormbringer.

 

[octavius]

IIRC he killed the top three Chaotic gods at the end, before Stormbringer devoured the last soul availble to it.

 

[Lhynn]

What if WHAT takes place in these other NOT heroic fantasy/sword & sorcery settings?! What point are you struggling to make here?

Only that its not an all purpose game.

You repeatedly called me a "cuck" which I believe is some white guy who gets off on seeing some black guy fuck his wife or some such but when I called you a "bronie" you whined 'at least my insults make sense' as if your lame 'me too!' usage of "cuck" made any sense (if you knew who I was you would not have called me such) whereas mine seems to make all the sense in the world as you seem to be an anime fag anyway and have a lot of weird issues with sex.

I dont watch anime and i have no issues with sex.

It is nonsensical and you are trying to play word games here. AD&D, as I have demonstrated before in this very thread, does not work the way you are trying to characterize it. It IS literally the "fire and forget" Vancian system. It requires that a mage memorize a specific quantity of spells (including the same spell multiple times) and then each memorization vanishes from memory after you recite the spell. To put this in perspective it is like someone memorizing 4 recitations of "The Road Not Taken by Frost and then forgetting one of those every time he reads that poem so that after 4 such readings he completely forgets the poem altogether. There is NOTHING to indicate any "energy" is expended during this or that the memorization had anything to do with mystical energy reserves. Rationalize all you want but don't get mad when rational folk don't buy your rationalizations.

But this is not rationalization of mine, other posters in this thread have indicated how it works, those are the rules of the system, and they make for an interesting gaming experience.

Wow. Way to dodge a fuck ton of points you could not answer eh? Why on earth would you think I am some GURPS advocate?! You want to start a thread criticizing GURPS then I will join you in that but WTF does it have to do with this subject?

Because you seem to advocated for universal systems while getting mad at those that arent.

I did not ask you to restate what we can read ourselves in the AD&D sources, You said that HP measured how much punishment one could take. How much punishment one can take is determined by physique primarily (with the armor reducing damage taken in better systems). The problems I keep mentioning which you keep dodging are that if HP instead represent all this other nonsense like experience, training, luck/fate/gods' favor, etc. then what does "cure light wounds" do? If it heals "luck, training, stamina etc." then could it be cast at a gambling table to improve ones odds? Does one's 'training' take damage and get depleted when he is hit by an umber hulk's claws? And all the other issues you keep dodging...

I already said, it both restores your flesh and bones and with that your ability to keep from getting killed.

I wasn't talking about "fatigue" either. I was talking about vigor and stamina...which allow one to push his body to its limits (and in a fantasy game BEYOND).

Mental fatigue and physical fatigue arent the same thing.

How does that bald assertion address the problems at hand? Seriously how does that begin to deal with the problems I have presented to you here? When a blacksmith who is stressed about his wife leaving him is unable to focus on his work can a cleric cast a "cure heavy wounds" to remedy the situation?

Your example doesnt make sense.

And AGAIN, how does the game distinguish between 30 points of acid breath damage and 30 points of sword hits (including which sword hits were just grazing shots or made with the flat of the blade) and 30 points of stamina/vigor reduction from running around in circles (since as you say HP are in large part a measure of focus/stamina/energy/chutzpa/whatever the fuck)?

Why do you need it to distinguish it?

Why do you keep arbitrarily switching over to later/more recent D&D editions that tried to correct these issues somewhat? You really should go read the original (A) D&D stuff just to get an idea of why they had to fix these matters . Also why can't a magic-user learn to use a sword?

Non weapon proficiencies are an AD&D thing, what are you even talking about. And a magic user can pick up a sword just fine.

LOL! Yeah Gygax was full of silly rationalizations. Not much of a game designer I'm afraid but boy did he try to justify his bad designs! So a cleric cannot learn to use a sword because of ethos (even if he is evil and has no such ethical dillemmas) in AD&D and a magic-user cannot learn to use a sword because it would take too much time and effort and somehow prevent him from his magical studies but a thief can learn the fine arts of picking pockets, climbing sheer surfaces, disarming traps (and about a half dozen other complicated skills) and still have no problem learning to use a sword, a bow etc. and that same magic-user can also learn a fucking language as alien as Drow or dragon but cannot learn to swing a sword at someone to defend himself?!

Sure, sounds bout right.

You give the system too much credit still. Other systems achieved all the good you think AD&D achieved but still had logically consistent systems that emulated heroic fantasy well and did not require a slew of rationalizations and excuses for flaws within. But I am glad you seem to begrudgingly acknowledge this much at least.

Sure, but im not begrudgingly admiring anything. i clearly stated this like 2 or 3 posts back. AD&D is more fun to play tho.

Kits were introduced in which edition of D&D again? Possibly late in 2nd ed. but I am thinking it was 3rd edition after WoTC took over. Am I wrong in this? Because I have already acknowledged that 3rd/3.5 ed. was MUCH improved over previous versions of (A)D&D.

Kits are 2nd edition, prestige's are a 3rd edition thing. I havent played 1st edition in any shape or form, im not that old.

Okay so it was 2nd ed. AD&D. So you are advocating for THAT specific edition and not original AD&D or OD&D then? WTF does this have to do with MY positions here?! 2nd ed. also introduced improvements to various classes such as the Ranger, the cleric, the druid etc. but the system was still bad for the reasons I have stated already (inconsistency in the die systems used (percentile for thief skills, d6/d8/d20 for others, hit points, saving throws magic system etc.).

I thought it was clear we are talking about 2nd edition, what the fuck edition do you think baldurs gate was made of? how are any of the other editions or even other games relevant to this discussion? Also excuse my french but you dont seem to know shit about shit, and are p. much arguing points while being ignorant of them.

I listed ALL the usages to avoid you coming back with "Way to put words in my mouth cuck!" and allowed for you to tell me which usage you thought was a problem for me and WHY.

I think you are smart enough to at least be able to tell what im talking about.

So why is the above usage something contradicting anything I have said here?

Its not, you brought the word up as something that needed defining, not i.

Oh FUCK OFF already with this shit. "Narrative experience" is the sort of buzzword term for advocates of lazy game design (the "Rules are stoopid! it is much funner if the DM is able to quickly resolve every instance by ignoring rules and just making shit up on the spot!" crowd)

That was basically gygax take on the game, and i happen to adhere to it.

Here's a hint for you. It is quite possible to have a well designed game system which is also fun and quick enough even for the ADHD crowd of kids. RuneQuest is a "narrative experience" too. So is Champions and Call of Cthulhu and Space Opera and Toon and Ghostbusters.

Sure, i even played half of those, they were even more flawed in execution than D&D, and the gameplay experience they provided was short lived at best. There comes a point where rules just get in the way.

ALL RPGs have always been "simulationist" by definition. You want a non-simulationist RP experience? "Cowboys and Indians" and "Cops and Robbers" were that and we grew out of such as kids because they always devolved into "Hey I shot you! You're dead!"/"No you missed because I dove behind this tree!" arguments and were not much of a 'game' to begin with. The reason D&D ever even existed was because it evolved from squad-based tactical miniatures wargames. They figured out that it was possible to actually quantify the abilities of fantastic characters, monsters, etc. and use randomizers (dice) against these quantification to simulate what it would be like to be a party of adventures, from muscular warriors to pointy hatted wizards and so forth. AD&D is simply WAY overcomplicated and unnecessarily so and that is why better games followed it through the door.

Lol, no they arent, they have some simulationist aspects, but abstraction plays a bigger role because you cant emulate everything, but you sure can abstract it.

WTF is your obsession with GURPS?! GURPS had some MAJOR flaws itself but even that game was far better designed than D&D will ever be.

I guess, i found it an interesting concept that lead to very few interesting situations, my players werent very interested in it either. it was dropped. Good design is something that can be seen in results, you can theorize all you want tho.

I have never done that. I have always criticized AD&D for being a poorly designed game that does not do well what it intended to do (by its authors' stated intentions).

But it does, i have fun with it and so do my players, thats what it was intended to do, anything else you may point up is literally irrelevant crap when you realize this.


Anyway, fun arguing your nonpoints with you but im sort of done with you. I get it, you hate the system, i just think your points are all invalid when it comes to actually playing PnP.

 

[ArchAngel]

In IE I love the feel of control, lethality and finesse of RTS game layered upon depth of an RPG system. I think it's the most important part and why combat in these games, especially in BG2, is so addictive. It is sort of "controllable chaos" that has it's own tempo you get used to and enjoy, as opposed to safe, stale and tanky style of combat in PoE.
Lowbrow D&D "angsty teenage" writing being optional, but I still romanced Aerie & Vi 7 times.

Even PoE control is still miles better than so called RPGs that come from Bethesda.

 

[Lonely Vazdru]

Lowbrow D&D "angsty teenage" writing being optional, but I still romanced Aerie & Vi 7 times.

Did you romance them the Vancian way ? Fuck and forget.

 

[SkeleTony]

Considering that Michael Moorecock approved the design of his character, I would say yes that is a fair representation of Elric. I'd also say that his opinion and approval means a hell of a lot more than yours.



In AD&D 2E, they did present different types of magic systems in the Player Options: Spells & Magic book that range from using spell points to having to hit rolls. All official rules. You hate ODD/AD&D, we get it.

WTF relevance does Michale Moorcock approving of the use of his characters (which he did NOT by the way. If you do some Googling you will find that TSR got in some deep shit for using a bunch of characters that were not theirs to use, including Elric and also the Cthulhu stuff, both of which were either already licensed to Chaosium or were in the process of such)?! That is like Ice-T doing a cameo on the Big Bang Theory. It does not mean he likes the show or understands ANY of it. It just means he does not mind hte pay (and possibly the positive attention/respect). WTF does Moorecock know about game design in RPGs?! How does his alleged approval remove all the problems I already pointed out?!

You are not doing well here kiddo.

 

[JamesDixon]

WTF relevance does Michale Moorcock approving of the use of his characters (which he did NOT by the way. If you do some Googling you will find that TSR got in some deep shit for using a bunch of characters that were not theirs to use, including Elric and also the Cthulhu stuff, both of which were either already licensed to Chaosium or were in the process of such)?! That is like Ice-T doing a cameo on the Big Bang Theory. It does not mean he likes the show or understands ANY of it. It just means he does not mind hte pay (and possibly the positive attention/respect). WTF does Moorecock know about game design in RPGs?! How does his alleged approval remove all the problems I already pointed out?!

You are not doing well here kiddo.

Actually, Michael Moorecock did give his permission. Here's a quote from Gary Gygax on the matter.

Originally Posted by Gary Gygax
That’s when I was complaining about the Dieties and Demigods book, when [Brian Blume] took out the Cthulhu and the Melnibonean mythos. The Melnibonean stuff came out simply because he refused to plug any other company. He said ‘I won’t plug Chaosium’s stuff.’ We had permission from Michael Moorcock to do that. Unbeknownst to him, of course, his agent had licensed the books to Chaosium, but I had the letter from Michael, and I had plugged Michael’s stuff for free for a long time because I really liked it. He thanked me at a DragonCon in 1994 for doubling his readership.

http://www.quartertothree.com/game-...80fb7a2b97308b2a1493c26&p=1270236#post1270236

TSR could have used the Cthulu Mythos since it was already public domain, but as pointed out by Gary that Brian Blume refused to plug Chaosium in TSR books and pulled Elric as well as the Cthulu Mythos.

Seems to me that the only one not doing well is you. I pointed out that ODD/AD&D can do Elric and Conan contrary to what you said.

 

[JamesDixon]

Oh silly me, SkeleTony, I forgot to give you Michael Moorecock's view on it.

I gave both TSR and Chaosium the okay to use my characters. In those days it wasn't big business. Then Chaosium threatened to sue TSR (even though both had equal rights) and because I hardly knew what was happening suddenly Chaosium 'own' the game rights. They have controlled the board and card game rights ever since. I haven't been happy with their presentation or distribution, though have no quarrel with most of the texts, though they are currently breaking their contract terms by not showing them to me before they come out. I'm going to have to deal with all this soon.

http://www.multiverse.org/fora/showthread.php?s=1f6426c20438a3d8c65b021675c26fd8&p=107806#post107806

According to Michael Moorecock, he was shown the texts of his characters before they were published. He also wasn't happy with Chaosium's use and control over his characters. In the end, I can safely say that the ODD/AD&D version of Elric is much closer to what Michael Moorecock wanted than Chaosium's version.

 

[SkeleTony]

Only that its not an all purpose game.

WTF relevance does that have?! Was anyone anywhere saying it was an "all purpose game"?! WTF IS an "all purpose game"?!

I dont watch anime and i have no issues with sex.

Well then...I guess we are even since I have never watched a black man having sex with anyone, let alone a hypothetical wife of mine. Funny how fast you can catch up when the shoe is on the other foot eh?

But this is not rationalization of mine, other posters in this thread have indicated how it works, those are the rules of the system, and they make for an interesting gaming experience.

False. Regardless of WHO first came up with these rationalizations they were only offered after it became widely apparent that the 'fire and forget' system was silly for exactly the reasons I have outlined here. OD&D and AD&D (1st and possibly 2nd ed.) stated that the system by which Magic-Users cast spells was precisely as I have described. The M-U memorizes one instance of each spell he wants to cast, limited in number by the M-U's level and once he casts one of these spells the number of memorizations decreases by one. Now as for the fluff rationalizations of more recent times, where they offer that you can substitute "preparation" for "memorization", yeah that makes for better fluff but is ultimately irrelevant and full of it's own problems. You are still stuck with these silly complicated tables with numbers of X-level spells you can memorize/cast per day when a 'Power point' system would achieve the same thing in a much better, more efficient and logical way. And before anyone starts in, I am all for adding heavy preparation, material components (with increasingly hard to obtain regents the higher the level of spell) because one almost universal problem of magic in RPGs (save perhaps for Ars Magica and one or two others) is that it is too 'quick & dirty' and easy and powerful.

Because you seem to advocated for universal systems while getting mad at those that arent.

False. In fact I am almost quite the contrary (except that I cannot bring myself to dismiss a well designed RPG because it is "universal"). I could go on all day about the problems with GURPS but I will save that for the proper thread.

I already said, it both restores your flesh and bones and with that your ability to keep from getting killed.

Why are you dodging my question and points here? No one asked you whether you could repeat the same vacuous tripe you spouted before.

Mental fatigue and physical fatigue arent the same thing.

Debatable and also irrelevant to my point which you dodged again.

Your example doesnt make sense.

Yes it does if you stop and think about what you said for a minute. You are claiming that HP are (like Gygax rationalized) some mish-mash of things including "energy", "focus" (your words there), capacity to take "punishment" (again, your words...paraphrased a little), etc. So if a "cure light wounds" spell is healing all of these things then surely it should also heal the "lost focus" of the blacksmith who is stressed out.

Why do you need it to distinguish it?

BECAUSE OF WHAT YOU FUCKING SAID in your defense of the AD&D system! Are you not paying attention to the very debate you are trying to take part in?! Go back and read the previous few posts of yours and mine so you can keep up with what we are discussing.

Non weapon proficiencies are an AD&D thing, what are you even talking about. And a magic user can pick up a sword just fine.

Holy fuck you are dense. Tell you what, rather than me going back and copy/pasting the last several posts from both of us to remind you what the debate was about why don't you just go read the fucking things and come back when you are more ready for this.

Sure, sounds bout right.

So you concede the point I made then? You concede that the "takes too much time/effort away from his primary studies' nonsense does not work as a rationalization given the same mage can learn any number of much more difficult skills without sacrificing his magical studies? I realize it was an attempt to enforce character archetypes (i.e. the staff carrying wizard) but it was still absurd and there were better ways to achieve such.

Sure, but im not begrudgingly admiring anything. i clearly stated this like 2 or 3 posts back. AD&D is more fun to play tho.

WTF are you talking about?! Who said anything about "begrudgingly admiring anything?!

Kits are 2nd edition, prestige's are a 3rd edition thing. I havent played 1st edition in any shape or form, im not that old.

Then you are ill equipped to even be engaging in this discussion. You seem to be coming from a position that "First there was AD&D 2nd edition, then...".

I thought it was clear we are talking about 2nd edition, what the fuck edition do you think baldurs gate was made of?

What fucking relevance does this have?! My position is/was and has been that ALL D&D versions are badly designed RPGs and the reason is because they had to evolve (against the cries of teenagers for them to not change a single thing) from one of the worst RPG designs of all time (forgivable since it was the first such game but they should have allowed their DESIGNERS to determine what needed fixing and what did not, not so much the players).

how are any of the other editions or even other games relevant to this discussion? Also excuse my french but you dont seem to know shit about shit, and are p. much arguing points while being ignorant of them.

Go read and learn what the discussion is about. I can't keep holding your hand here kiddo. In ANY debate about the validity of game systems/mechanics other game systems are most certainly relevant and all editions of the game in question are certainly relevant, if for no other reason than to show how they fixed and improved upon the older editions with the newer.

Demonstrate where I seem to be completely ignorant of the subject matter we are discussing.

WTF does "p.much" mean?! Is this twitter/facebook nonsense where you abbreviate the word "pretty" with the letter 'p'?!

I think you are smart enough to at least be able to tell what im talking about.

Well that's a pretty big promotion from "don't know shit about shit" eh?

But you are really only just dodging the ownage here kiddo. You know good and well that I was right to ask you which usage of the term applied and how it was in contradiction to my points.

Its not, you brought the word up as something that needed defining, not i.

False. YOU invoked the term like 4 times as an unqualified assertion fallacy that you thought answered my points. Being quite familiar with the term (including it's usage relating to game design concepts) I knew you were full of shit here and the best way to illustrate this was to ask you which usage you were invoking (so I could not be accused of putting words in your mouth or assuming things) and how is contradicted my points (as you claimed).

That was basically gygax take on the game, and i happen to adhere to it.

Good for you. I think he was a shitty designer. You can play his D&D, his "Bionic Commando" and "Dangerous Journeys" for all I care.

Sure, i even played half of those, they were even more flawed in execution than D&D, and the gameplay experience they provided was short lived at best. There comes a point where rules just get in the way.

You can't get away with the unqualified (aka "bald") assertion here kiddo. Which of those games was somehow more flawed than D&D specifically and how? Remember the measure of a well designed RPG is logical consistency, ease of use (i.e. it does not require a clusterfuck of complicated shit to achieve simple things for example...like AD&D which is the poster child for this.), how well it simulates/represents a particular genre or setting. So for a game like Skyrealms of Jorune this aspect need only be judged by how well it simulates playing a role on JORUNE, not science fiction in general. But AD&D is and was a "universal" system for the genre of heroic fantasy, in that the designers wanted DMs to be able to create their own settings or adapt most of the seyttings found in fantasy fiction/sword and sorcery.

Lol, no they arent, they have some simulationist aspects, but abstraction plays a bigger role because you cant emulate everything, but you sure can abstract it.

You are not making sense here and I suspect it is because you do not understand the terms I am using and the points I am making. Which RPG is NOT primarily about simulating what it might be like to be a different being in a particular genre or setting? Why does AD&D have attributes like "Strength", "Dexterity", and "Charisma" if the purpose is not to simulate being a character in a heroic fantasy setting, when they could have just used massive "abstraction" for the game (thus rendering it something other than a roleplaying game)?!

I guess, i found it an interesting concept that lead to very few interesting situations, my players werent very interested in it either. it was dropped. Good design is something that can be seen in results, you can theorize all you want tho.

AGAIN, GURPS is not well designed but simply much better designed than D&D. There are a bunch of very common reasons why the typical RPGer who played AD&D would have no interest in exploring or learning other systems and how well or poorly designed the games are is of little consequence to most players. Like it or not (A)D&D was first out of the gate and, like McDonalds became the unimpeachable king in it's market. it does not matter one iota whether there are restaurants serving better or quicker/more convenient food than McD's. Many will never even know of such and are not interested in investigating the matter.

But it does, i have fun with it and so do my players, thats what it was intended to do, anything else you may point up is literally irrelevant crap when you realize this.

No, it does not and this is confirmed by D&D's own designers for the most part. Of course you would have to read a LOT of articles, interviews, etc. from White Dwarf and Dragon and half a dozen other RPG magazines to get the full grasp of this but I fully understand if you cannot be doing such and only mention it here as a matter of fact statement which you are free to disregard since you do not know of it. Hell White Dwarf used to keep track of those 'RPG awards' that used to happen every year and (A)D&D never won anything (voted on by game designers as well as the general public IIRC) but BRP system won a fuck-ton of 'Best Design' awards every fucking year it seemed.

BTW I had a lot of fun playing AD&D back in the day as well. That is why I say RPGs are like sex. Even when bad they are still pretty fun.

Anyway, fun arguing your nonpoints with you but im sort of done with you. I get it, you hate the system, i just think your points are all invalid when it comes to actually playing PnP.

Yeah you really should take leave of this. If you can't answer points or concede points made then you are not going to do well in debate.

 

[Lhynn]

Amazing how you can be so deluded as to think you are actually "winning" this argument. All the points youve made have been argued ten times over, and on top of that you just keep bringing shit up that has nothing to do with the issue at hand. Not worth arguing with you imho.

PS: seriously, are we bringing up typos now?

 

[JamesDixon]

Amazing how you can be so deluded as to think you are actually "winning" this argument. All the points youve made have been argued ten times over, and on top of that you just keep bringing shit up that has nothing to do with the issue at hand. Not worth arguing with you imho.

PS: seriously, are we bringing up typos no?

Please accept my poor man's brofist.