Recent Chat Activity (Main Lobby)
Join Chat

Loading Chat Log...

Prefer not to see ads? Become a Community Supporter.

Blog Comments

  1. falinxelote's Avatar
    I like the idea of explaining alignment like that personally. I usually operate from the standpoint that every creature believes it is good and its enemies are evil. Morality is a personal thing not a universal concept. Only psychopaths do what they consider evil intentionally. So I often run monsters similarly, Dragons are often apathetic of short lived thieving races, Goblins are narcissistic and believe the world should be theirs, Orcs follow a path of violence through a viking type mentality honor in battle and the afterlife is accessible only through death in combat, and the only exception is creatures like demons which are souls tormented and tortured into evil. I have similar stuff for many races.
    As for Drow they simply have devalued life. They kill because it is necessary in the underdark and they have been doing so for so long that they forgot that each life has value. They torture and maim like the Aztec, as offerings to their god, to insure good crops, healthy children, or victory in battle. They attack the surface out of jealousy and a twisted belief that the surface is weak and should be made strong. To them attacking the surface elves is leading the weak, misguided portions of their race back to strength.
    I follow the alignments but I create societal reasons for them. That also means a Drow not raised of Drow would not be drawn to evil just like a high elf raised by Drow would be just like the Drow.
    Updated 02-03-2014 at 06:46 PM by falinxelote
  2. nijineko's Avatar
    my default campaign standard is that "always x alignment" entries are ignored, unless an individual and/or unique creature has, due to past actions and choices, deliberately become a paragon of that way of being. and due to other campaign standards that concept applies all the up and down the power curve with no exceptions. the end result is that all things can choose who and what they are, though there are certain points of no return which any given creature can theoretically choose themselves past; thus there are a few creatures in my campaigns that are completely evil or purely good.
  3. fmitchell's Avatar
    Again I'm split. On the one hand, the idea of questing for runes, I mean numenera, answers the "what do players do" pretty neatly without "kill the monsters grab the loot". Notably, numenera are "plot coupons": dig up this old junk, maybe jerry-rig something to escape the current predicament, and haul the rest off to trade for *shins*, goods, and whuffie. The magi-tech setting also allows a mix of medieval fantasy, post-apocalypse, and science fiction. (Like Monte Cook I'm also a fan of The Book of the New Sun; I tend more toward Jack Vance's Planet of Adventure and other sword-and-planet series than the Dying Earth, though.)

    On the other hand, hundreds of pages of detailed setting made my eyes glaze over. I would have preferred a few pages of adventure seeds, micro-settings, and random weirdness tables. Also, the amount of invented lingo seems hokey, verging on "Call A Rabbit a Smeerp".
    Updated 01-23-2014 at 06:16 AM by fmitchell
  4. Farcaster's Avatar
    What were your thoughts about the setting itself?
  5. Ryklu's Avatar
    I think this is a very good understanding of a singular component of alignment. If a setting, campaign, or adventure dealt only with a given alignment (neutral, in this instance), the other alignments fade into the background as a subtle hum of activity while the primary alignment is explored. I like this idea, and I think it holds a great deal of promise in accommodating adventures and groups of characters.
  6. Sneaksta's Avatar
    fate system.... Dresden Files RPG with some tweaks?
  7. SDJThorin's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Blond Gamer Girl
    Sounds like Rifts.....
    I thought the same thing... although any Palladium system is a tough one to start... too many tables and such...

    I had a tendency to use the ideas I got from Rifts and use the CP2020 system to run the game... Now that I've found the Fate 3.0 system, I'm constantly equating ideas to that LOL
  8. Blond Gamer Girl's Avatar
    Sounds like Rifts.....
  9. fmitchell's Avatar
    Thanks for the suggestion. Alas, I can't even settle on a genre. Swords & sorcery? Hard SF? Space Opera? Modern horror/dark fantasy? Rattling through time and space? One day I'm keen on one idea, the next day I'm on (or back) to another.

    One weird idea is John Wick's The Flux. Essentially it's a framework for moving player characters between universes and game systems without losing their previous characters. Of course, that's assuming I can get a game beyond two sessions in the first place.
  10. Blond Gamer Girl's Avatar
    Hmmm....don't know if this will help or not but here's a method I use. Forget the system for a moment and write down all your ideas (type actually). Come back the next day(s) after leaving it for a bit and expound on the idea(s) that take your fancy. Come back a few times and do the same but don't force the idea just use the one that again takes your fancy. After a few visits see which one you worked on most and then match it to a system, a system you and your group like.

    MAKE A DECISION AND STICK TO IT - Many people fear making a decision and don't have the fortitude to stick to it if they fear/get criticism. That's some RL management tools.

    Hope that helps.
  11. kalin's Avatar
    I want to see a d10 system. I already have the ideas for my RPGame system, based on a d10. But I want to see what you come up with. Thanx
  12. Farcaster's Avatar
    Sorry to hear that, Frank. :/
  13. yukonhorror's Avatar
    Just thought of something. You could use 3.5 D&D. Each character starts out as a factotum (from dungeonscape). Based off what they do, what they spend their "points" on, etc... dictates how their characters evolve. Sort of take away the multiclassing restrictions, and either you decide, the usage decides, or the player decides how the characters evolve. Evolving could be adding a level from another class (maybe a specific level not just a 1st level addition to best fit the evolution [i.e. the next level be what you get as a 5th level druid {wild shape, 3rd level spell, etc...}, even if you don't have any levels in druid]). Or add powers from monsters like aura of menace from hound archon.

    That I would have fun playing. Mainly because I would want to know where my character goes next in terms of evolution. Ideas....

    Another thing is sort of they find power crystals (or something) like in final fantasy V, that would give them access to new powers that don't have a good evolution (rage, powers from tome of battle, hexes from hexblade, etc...).

    Also evolution could be dictated by not just actions done by the characters, but done "to" the characters. An over-abundance of being hit with fireballs, the player gets fire resistance. Constantly being charmed, the player can either resis charm or manipulate charms in some nifty way. I think there was a 3.5 source book that handled this, but I can't remember which. It was specifically with spells though, but could take ideas from it. It was acquired through feats.

    Feats could be your way of "evolving" too. More I think about it, the more fun this sounds.
    Updated 04-13-2009 at 06:30 PM by yukonhorror
  14. kirksmithicus's Avatar
    Reminds me of an old Graphic Novel that was about a bunch of genetically engineered soldiers. The main character's name was Friday (as in a Friday Job) he was more adaptable than the others and changed faster than all of his identical brothers. Still the other soldiers did learn from their own separate experiences but not to the same degree.

    I think it would be easy to do. Only you have to convince the players to go for it. You just start out with one 1st level character, after the group goes up a level they (the PC's) can all choose to modify how they see fit. It might help to have a system that rewards actual skill use, but other than that, I don't think it would be to hard.
  15. ronpyatt's Avatar
    Fudge-On-The-Fly starts your character sheet with only a name, sometimes general description, and a bunch of blanks to be filled in as the the game moves forward. Each player makes a choice for their character and fills in the blanks whenever the need arises. Once chosen the choice sticks. (Morgo summoned his spirit guide to point the way. His first of many shamanic abilities.)

    Character creation is done as soon as you have a name (if you require one).
    My group always found this style of play fun.
  16. TAROT's Avatar
    Pendragon characters start out fairly similar. You're a knight. You have a horse, a sword and a squire. It is much more the personality traits that distinguish beginning characters.

    IIRC, when you attempt a skill, make a check beside it. Annually (Winter) roll for each skill that has a check mark, if you roll (d20) higher than the current skill level, advance by one.
  17. yukonhorror's Avatar
    it is a lot like how you level up in the japanese final fantasy II
  18. wizarddog's Avatar
    Reminds me of the classic 1e adventures that had the players start as 0 levels and whatever they did in the adventure that would determind their class at the end. So if someone tried to cast a spell they may end up a wizard, or grab a weapon to fight, a fighter, or try and unlock a door, a thief.

    I think a skill based system like in Runequest would be ideal for suchb a game. But you could do a 3e Modern with the understanding that classes would have to be introduces.
  19. kirksmithicus's Avatar
    It sounds like a very interesting and fun game. I'd join up with the Ashen Hand any day.