 |
| |
|
|
cyclotron7
|
 |
Drowning in Schnitzel
Jan 2001
time: 21:30
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Urban Ranger
Yes and no. The problem with AD&D (and Rolemaster to a lesser extent) is characters gain experience by killing. A player is not rewarded to be a good roleplayer by the book, a player is rewarded to be a combat monster. This flaw cannot be fixed unless the GM heavily modifies the rules. Compare this with DragonQuest or Champions where you get rewarded for being a good rp'er. |
This is, I think, untrue. While it is true much of the experience is based around challenge ratings, challenge ratings can be assigned to non-combat situations as I have often done, and the DMG does support story awards and such. I don't find it in any way difficult to use CRs and story awards to convey any amount of experience I deem necessary for any challenge, combat or not. It requires no rule modification to use story awards, and a very small one to make plots have CRs.
quote:
A lesser problem that could be contained is the prevalence of magical items - many of those items are very powerful. This can be avoided by limiting the number and power of magical items. |
Again, that is something that can be easily done. The randomization tables are meant to help the DM, as the books say, not to mandate a certain treasure hoard at all times. I use them to give me ideas and to roll some treasures, but I always customize and remove items that I deem too powerful. That's not a modification of the rules, that's the clear job of the DM.
quote:
When all the Orcs are evil, your character is free to kill them, right? |
No. There are a few problems with this behavior.
First, orcs are not outsiders, so (unlike demons or slaadi,etc) are not defined as always evil. I believe the monstrous manual either says "usually evil" or "often evil," I don't remember.
Second, even if the orc is evil, most of the good players I have played with base more on actions than nebulous alignment. There are many ways to play any alighnment, so it must be assumed that orcs play many variations of the evil alignment. Not all evil creatures fit into the "grrr, I'm evil, so I hate all life" category.
Third, even orcs are other beings and even if you don't respect that morally it's generally a very bad choice to go all jihad on their ass whenever you see one, for the sake of not being a wanton butcher and for the sake of the plotline. They might know something, or have something that is needed.
quote:
My experience is otherwise. As I pointed out before, there are virtually no noncombat skills in AD&D before, while the list of skills in 3rd edition is sill very incomplete, with some skills too generic and some others too restrictive. |
I find that I can do considerable things with the craft and profession skills, and the rest I can adjucate as I see fit with little difficulty. I view the system as very flexible, and thus I like it as it works equally well for many types of campaigns. The other advantage is that, as probably the biggest pnp game ever in terms of people, there are considerable resources available from both WotC and especially from other players for my gaming use.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jon Miller
|
|
in ADnD games I have played combat has usually been the smallest source of XP
Jon Miller
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Straybow
|
 |
SG(2)… gone but not forgotten
Jan 1970
time: 23:30
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by LDiCesare
I don't like D&D for the stereotypical characters. It's hard to create your own.
That's why I like Rolemaster a lot. You can have a fighting mage. Of course he will be inept at fighting, but he can do stuff which a magic user is not expected to, and the critical tables are fun. |
Can be done easily enough in AD&D: class switching is allowed with hit points retained as long as the character has a 15 in the requisite stat(s) for the new class. Once you achieve a higher level in your new class than in the previous class you can freely mix the skills.
If you want a fighting mage start as a fighter (no minimum stats apply), and switch at a low level so that you will quickly gain full access to your weapons and armor.
Your roleplaying backstory: Apprenticed to a mage but after father died you could not continue studies. You returned to the farm until younger siblings could handle things, intending to resume apprenticeship later. While there, the local lord levied you to fight the band of orcs that had invaded the territory. You survived and became handy with the sword despite your bookish inclinations.
quote:
My favourite game was actually a little known fame called 'Malefices', in which our GM hid so many of the rules that it was all down to roleplaying. When you roll the dice and have no idea what the effect will be, it can be really fun. |
 That can be done with almost any game, by various means. Simplest: player and GM roll, with GM comparing his (hidden) roll to yours as a modifier of some sort. You know "high is better," for example but you don't know the exact value anymore.
Second method: GM has each character roll and record results ahead of time. GM can use the prerecorded value to invoke results of events the character should not be forewarned of by a request for a savings throw etc.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
ajbera
|
 |
of the Cookieville Minimum Security Orphanarium
Apr 1999
time: 05:30
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Straybow
There was another RPG (can't recall the name) contemporary with original D&D and AD&D 1st that had a really nasty set of critical hit/critical fumble descriptions.
I recall one was something like,  "Your opponent's sword tip breaks off in your elbow. Your arm is paralyzed. You are writhing on the ground in pain, completely defenseless."
Edit: I think that was Empire of the Petal Throne (should've noticed Stuie's post). |
Could've been the Rolemaster series of products... they had extensive critical hit tables for all sorts of damage - piercing, slashing, crushing, cold, fire, lightning, etc. Very graphic and very fun. Too bad the Rolemaster series in general is disgustingly elaborate and complex.
Best pen and paper RPGs would have to be the White Wolf series (World of Darkness, consisting of Vampire, Werewof, Mage ( ), Wraith, and Changeling, and the Trinity series, consisting of Adventure! (1920s-era stuff), Aberrant (superheroes! ), and Trinity (future)) or Chaosium's products, particularly Call of Cthulhu.
The White Wolf games have the best settings and backgrounds, bar none (particularly World of Darkness). In fact, I'm trying to get a group together to play either Aberrant or Dark Ages Vampire/Mage. But the Chaosium games had the best game system - straightforward, percentile-based, and easily lethal. No hundreds of hit points here; make certain your parry and dodge skills are up to snuff if you want to survive battle. Superb, and still the best PnP game system I've seen.
PC RPGs? Hmmm... Planescape: Torment is brilliant (even if I didn't finish it). My favorite, however, is Morrowind. Bethesda did an absolutely fantastic job of fashioning a huge world with an immensely rich background, and making it 1st -person boosts the immersiveness (for me, anyway). Can't wait to see the 4th game in the series.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
JCG
|
 |
between a rock and a hard place
Feb 2002
time: 00:30
|
|
Consolewise...Final Fantasy IV, if only for nostalgia value (music/designs/cliched plot/etc.). Really. Few if any realistic merits outside of that.
If you take that one out, it has to be FF VI, which was twice as good overall, despite the fact that the ending portion of the game seemed a bit rushed (little to no plot in the WoR). Still, the world was big and complex, the music/art was top notch (though Chrono Trigger's better on that regard, yeah), and you could become insanely powerful through magic/espers too.
Below those..FF VII, Chrono Trigger, Xenogears, Shin Megami Tensei (translated), Suikoden 2, etc.
PC-wise...Fallout 1/2 (relatively original theme, freedom + good graphics, sound and skill system don't hurt) and/or Ultima VII part 1 (almost total freedom of action/morality, outside of the main storyline...part 2 has lots of improvements, but the world wasn't quite as big and seemed to lack a few of the little touches...it's basically the same game though).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
LDiCesare
|
|
La Ferté sous Jouarre France
Jan 2001
time: 05:30
|
|
quote:
Can be done easily enough in AD&D: class switching is allowed with hit points retained as long as the character has a 15 in the requisite stat(s) for the new class. Once you achieve a higher level in your new class than in the previous class you can freely mix the skills. |
Nope.
You couldn't get up in levels afterwards, and there is just NO class or combination thereof that fits some of the characters I want. Systems based on skills (Chaosium, Rolemaster to a lesser extent) are much much better for that. In Ad&D you needed 15 minimum in the old class stat and 17 in the new if I remember correctly. Plus you had to be human. Too many limits. Getting a 15 is not that easy in the first place unless, as amost everyone does, you cheat the rolls.
Plus I hate the alignment stuff in D&D, which artificially binds you to moral codes that may not make sense for your character. You'll end up chaotic neutral if you can't find anywhere your morals go because that's the only alignment that alows you to do whatever you like.
Pendragon had a much nicer alignment system: It wasn't about a small set of good/Evil lawful/chaotic, but presented a whole set of qualities (ranging from courage to chastity), but it still ended up limiting the way you could control your character, which is something I don't like.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:30.
Apolyton Time is 00:30. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
06-09-2003 01:20
For the vast majority of creatures hit dice are determined almost entirely by size. Only for supernatural creatures is this not so… and for rare humanoid characters who possess hit dice multiple times their "level 0" species norm.
ACK!
|