homerjsinnott
Mongoose
I asume Victoria's secret was Prince Albert (look it up).
homerjsinnott said:The problem with 'tricks' tied to character traits is that players can and frequently do choose the trick for its trick, rather than something that fits their characters personality.
Heck, it's putting me off. The game goes right back to pre-pendragon days when a character is solely defined by stats and skills. Nothing in the game system helps define personality, quirks, drives, fears and the like.
The problem with 'tricks' tied to character traits is that players can and frequently do choose the trick for its trick, rather than something that fits their characters personality.
gamesmeister said:I might be wrong, but when you say 'tricks', I think you're talking about slightly different things there, where you're referring to Flaws and suchlike seen in WoD games (which give you bonuses or hindrances to your character in actual game terms), whereas I think Adept is talking more about the behavioural tendencies seen in games like Pendragon i.e. Civilised/Uncouth, Brave/Cowardly, etc. which are more descriptive.
Like I say though, I could well be wrong
Haven't seen the book of 20 questions, will have to take a look.
frogspawner said:Other games have tables to generate family relations, inborn special abilities/disabilities, hair/eye/skin colour, star-signs, and even out-and-out personality traits, that can be lifted easily. All of which can help inspire adventures and role-playing (as opposed to "roll-playing").
MRQ has made the great innovation of improvement/hero points which, hopefully, will be used to reward good role-play (not just victory in combat, which brings its own rewards - e.g. survival!). But is that good enough?
frogspawner said:Stag variety, or Ladybirds?
WHY, do we need tables for that? Can't people flesh out their characters themselves? Rolled starsigns & personality traits??? "No, You can't do that, it doesn't fit with your personality trait!" That's so AD&D... All characters played for more than a few sessions usually gets a pretty marked personality, without need for tables.
I agree, maybe you could give them some extra skill point to spend if their background indicated it, or give them a handfull of usefull contacts and friends from old.Exubae said:Kind of agree, but it would be nice to have some sort of mechanic to help reward players for creating cool back stories.
That reeks of AD&D alignements, which I can't see how can be done without taking away a lot of freedom from the players. I strongly prefer to let the players develope their character the way they see fit.It would have been cool to have provided a list of personality traits, each trait given a method of both gaining and lossing HP through play... but you have to be careful not to straight jacket players.
That would need a wellmade background story, which is good, but would take quite some extra time. Which is why some reward, like skill points or contacts would be in order.I would have like to see a way of mapping/keeping track of relationships:
to clan, to family, parents, pet ferret.
The physical is simpler to stat and vital for play. Giving emotions and personality own stats or percentages would just be limiting. That's my thoughts at least. The few times I've played AD&D, I've always played Chaotic neutral, so I could ignore their stupid alignement system and play like I wanted.Not sure if its a problem, but RQ has always been Physical orientated, most the stats are physical, most of the skills are physical (thankfully there are social and intellect based skills)... just a thought.
Trifletraxor said:frogspawner said:Other games have tables to generate family relations, inborn special abilities/disabilities, hair/eye/skin colour, star-signs, and even out-and-out personality traits...
WHY, do we need tables for that? Can't people flesh out their characters themselves? Rolled starsigns & personality traits??? "No, You can't do that, it doesn't fit with your personality trait!" That's so AD&D... All characters played for more than a few sessions usually gets a pretty marked personality, without need for tables.
MRQ has made the great innovation of improvement/hero points which, hopefully, will be used to reward good role-play (not just victory in combat, which brings its own rewards - e.g. survival!). But is that good enough?
Hero Points a great innovation? AD&D also have something similar, called XP...
gamesmeister said:I might be wrong, but when you say 'tricks', I think you're talking about slightly different things there, where you're referring to Flaws and suchlike seen in WoD games (which give you bonuses or hindrances to your character in actual game terms), whereas I think Adept is talking more about the behavioural tendencies seen in games like Pendragon i.e. Civilised/Uncouth, Brave/Cowardly, etc. which are more descriptive.
Like I say though, I could well be wrong
Haven't seen the book of 20 questions, will have to take a look.
Still, I like the idea of a character back story... and XP/HP as a carrot to get my players to put together some interesting history is way to encourage them.Good roleplaying is its own reward. Why do we want or need to give XP/HP for it as well?
duncan_disorderly said:(IE if you want to play a pacifistic character then there is nothing to stop you doing so in MRQ or D&D. Why should a character get extra skill points just because they are a paciifst?)