Back Already - Wheee!

[active_apathy]

Right. Now, for the record, I feel like I may have injected unwarranted drama into your LJ-lives. Oops. I, for one, am happy to be able to Intarweb so soon.

So, I should have two days of news for you. Just my luck that I'd be in a drug-induced sleep for the most exciting part of yesterday, in which a number of masked persons attacked me with pointy objects in a rather cold room.

So, instead, I get to talk about the rest. They kept me in overnight, which means that I spent $5 for the privelege of watching TV and convinced my visiting parents to buy me a new hairbrush and a copy of American Gods, which is a lovely and interesting tale. I'd give you a little summary, but we all know what Thoth thinks of maps. Still! Enjoyable. Between it and Smoke and Mirrors, I'm rather looking forward to Neverwhere, probably after a brief stopover with Sourcery.

But on with the tale. I think my eyes are now sensitive to a thousand different shades of white, and I don't think I've ever had the misfortune of drinking quite so much slightly warm tea. I've been poked and prodded inappropirately by people getting paid for the privelege, and pushed around altogether too much for my liking.

So, now, why am I typing this so soon when I said there'd be at least another day or two before I'd be able to? That, dear friends, fans and stalkers, is a result of the surgeon's decision not to perform the procedure that I'd actually consented to. Instead, a far less invasive version with the same results was favoured instead. The benefits? I get all my friends back sooner, I still have a stack of books to read at my leisure, and there's not one stitch to be taken out.

And that's about it for that, really, unless you want the intimate details of them losing my notes, my chart, and then both at the same time.

But that's enough about me for the moment. What have you all been up to? LJ-Stalkers, this question includes you - is there anything you've posted that you think I should read? A new comm you think I should join? Just point the way with linky goodness, and I'll see to it.

Comments

[salith.livejournal.com]

And I'm working on the final one from the box.
Still sorting out my 3.5 version, since I wasn't happy how it was being done on-line... especially the factions.

[active-apathy.livejournal.com]

To be perfectly honest, I'm plainly dissatisfied with the way that 3.x itself is done. I'd love to find the motivation to actually write out, in nice, readable words, my redesigned d20 system. I know how it works, how to make it work, but I need to figure out how to get it into words so that it can be used instead of just imagined.

[palmer-kun.livejournal.com]

Ooooo... game design? *perks up*

I'm in the midst of writing a d20 Supers game myself right now...

What about d20 is dissatisfying to you?

[active-apathy.livejournal.com]

Off the top of my head, they'd be:

• I don't particularly like simulationist systems
• The rigidity of classes irritates me
• The pages of classes and PrCs reeks of a poor underlying design
• It's overly accommodating to powergamers
• There's a lack of, or penalty for, story-focused character traits
• There's a bit of a culture of meaningless bonuses

[palmer-kun.livejournal.com]

1: Ahhh, good old GNS Theory :)
I see d20 as being predominantly Gamist rather than Simulationist... it's an excellent game system, but not very good at simulating anything beyond, well, d20

2: That's an eternal problem with classed systems. Classed and classless both have their advantages and flaws. The gamist nature of d20 makes classes well suited to it.

3: Depends on what kind of design you're talking about. Overall I find the design quality on 3.x to be vastly superior to 2nd Ed and older. And better than many other games on the market as well.

4: In the hands of a suitable powergamer, ANY system can be twinked to death. It's also a design feature - the game is meant to be high-powered and epic over-the-top in action and flavour, and without powergaming elements, it just wouldn't work.

5: Story focussed character traits? What exactly do you mean by these, and how do they fit (or not fit) into systems?

6: It ties in with the heavily mechanistic nature of the system, as well as it's design philosophy. Bonuses are easier to handle than penalties (it's a proven fact that people can do mental addition at least 2-3 times faster than mental suntraction) and thus fit the design philosophy better.

So... given all this... what is a game system you DO like, and why?

[active-apathy.livejournal.com]

3: In some ways, it's a more elegant system than 2e. By no means is it as good as some of the other offerings out there, but it does suit the majority of D&Ders. Where it all falls apart is in some of the later settings; d20 will never feel right for, say, Planescape.

5: There's not a lot of point to a character who isn't specifically built for adventuring and killing stuff, in most d20 games. This may just be my perception of it.

6: It does indeed, but the millionth +2 is really pretty useless. I'd rather scrape up one or two tiny bonuses that mean something than have a thousand of them shoved at the roll from every angle. Just because it is *easier* doesn't mean that it should be used as an excuse to roll a d20 with a +124 to whatever it is.

I rather like FATE, Pace, StickGuy, Resus, BRP and SR. Especially FATE, which I love for its expressiveness, simplicity and love of the story.

[palmer-kun.livejournal.com]

3: One of the only systems less elegant than 2e is Palladium, IMNSHO. d20 has NOTHING on Palladium for sheer abusive powergaming.

5: I find that it all comes out in how you play the game. The system shapes some aspects of the game, sure, but the group is the ultimate arbiter.

The last D&D game I played in, we went five straight sessions without touching the dice, at all. Got experience, did all that jazz.
No dice. Didn't need them. We had plenty of story-driving character traits and other stuff. They simply weren't part of the system, nor do I really feel they should have been. Things handled by the system should be mechanical in nature as much as possible. Story elements to a character should be just that - story, not mechanics.

6: At higher levels, the bonuses can start to get out of hand, but there's not too much than can be done about that. Either you have big modifiers, or big base numbers... and in d20, many of those base numbers are expressed as modifiers anyways (skills, base attack bonus, etc).

...

Go figure you would name a bunch of games I've never heard of.