Empires of the Hyborian age What happened to it???

[zozotroll]

Flatscan, nice pic, but man does it hose posts. I hate that long strung out crap.

 

[flatscan]

Flatscan, nice pic, but man does it hose posts. I hate that long strung out crap.

Heh, sorry. Didn't mean to inconvenience anyone. In a few more posts it'll go on to the next page and you won't sweat it. :-D

 

[PrinceYyrkoon]

Yeah, Im familiar with the situation as regards D20 and OGL licence. I meant stratchingg it, in that the 4th edition isnt, neccessarily bad, but just so...different. The only connection to history is the use of a 20 sided die. It doesnt mean its a bad game. And, even though it doesnt actually ban you from 'role play', it certainly, actively, discourages it. You can mould a game to suit obviously, but its not a smooth fit when you try to do it with 4th. And, yes, Ive played it, its alright, I wouldnt recognise it as 'D&D' though, without the big logo on the front.

No more so than 1e D&D and AD&D discouraged you from doing so. As in the old days of gaming the reason there aren't "rules" for RP is because they're not necessary. For some reason ppl forget that old school D&D and AD&D didn't have page after page out-lining RP because it wasn't necessary. But it did have page after page of rules for combat because that's what was needed to drive the "game" portion. But we're getting off topic. ;-)

I think we went off topic on page 3!

I actually dont mind the skill rolling for possibly roleplaying situations, I started out playing wargames and appreciate structure. It certainly makes a change from all those 'fluffy' 'storytelling' systems which Im not personally keen on. I had a good time playing 4th, I would hesitate to GM it, or use it for a long campaign. It seems best played occasionally, which is unfortunate, as its too complex for casual gamers possibly.

Coming slightly back on topic,

Let me ask you, do you find Conan combat takes a lot of time at reasonably high levels? Ive used it 3 or 4 times, and Ive neglected, or just plain forgot, modifiers, feat bonuses, conditional modifiers, etc.. Im thinking Im reasonably competent at GMing, (30 years off and on!), but I still think I may get smoother with the system, but, seriously, its a lot to take into account. I honestly find this a barrier to enjoyment, maybe for the players too.

 

[zozotroll]

A lot of time compared to what? I find MRQ faster, RQ3 much slower. And Rolemaster, which I also used to play extensively very much slower than that.




I live RPed with a group once(and only once) that used rock paper scussers to settle combat. Vary fast, but not really to my likeing.

 

[zozotroll]

On most boards, if you make 3 pages on topic you are doing well. Gamers tend to be a somewhat flacky bunch.

 

[flatscan]

Let me ask you, do you find Conan combat takes a lot of time at reasonably high levels? Ive used it 3 or 4 times, and Ive neglected, or just plain forgot, modifiers, feat bonuses, conditional modifiers, etc.. Im thinking Im reasonably competent at GMing, (30 years off and on!), but I still think I may get smoother with the system, but, seriously, its a lot to take into account. I honestly find this a barrier to enjoyment, maybe for the players too.

Not really. Currently 3 of the PCs in my game are 7th level and one is 6th level. Things like 2-handed weapons + Power Attack and Massive Damage saves at 20 HP keep the game running pretty quick. If the PCs weren't able to kill opponents in single combat rounds due to these things then yeah, we'd proly get bored with combat lasting round after round. Or if I didn't take Vincent's advice to not scale encounters to the parties level, yeah, it could easily get out of hand. But as is, low-level, unarmored Picts, die with one sword-stroke from the PCs. Mainly the only high-level opponents are usually the big bads.

Also, during game prep I outline 3 or 4 tactics for my bad guys to use. This way, everything is detailed on a spreadsheet I can glance during gameplay. Also, I run initiative using 3x5 index cards with HP and status effects written on the card to keep things straight.

 

[PrinceYyrkoon]

You know i find this whole debate that D20 is dead and or that complex games are dead and rules lite games are the new things.

I seem to remember in the 90's people saying the same things. DnD is dead, rules lite games ala White Wolf and others games where the new way.

Yet arguably the best selling RPG of all time came after that in form of DnD 3.Xe. It was not a simple game and it brought the dead DnD back.

For the record I am actually not a big fan of D20, it works. But not a big fan.

As for the core of the debate that has completely derailed this topic. Well it really comes down to this. Right now mongoose knows how well Conan D20 sales, they have no idea how Conad RQ might sell. So unless the current version sales are on a steady decline it would be a risky business move to abandon for another system.

Plus there is evidence to support that D20 ala DnD3e is still popular. Paizo is making their own version of the game and the preorders have exceded their expectations. This based on them knowing they had 50K DL's of their beta rules for free.

Anyways not going to debate it. I just thought it was funny to see the same debate a decade later about the same thing more or less.

I dont think Ive been partizan in the way Ive talked about this. And, actually, White Wolf stuff HAS been a raging success, (not for me though). I saw a vid where Monte Cook said that D&D WAS dead at some point, it certainly was suffering due to White Wolfs products and customers wandering off towards MMOs.

I think, regardless of what rules systems are still around, the 80s were the high point of complexity, and are well known for it. You had so many hefty rules heavy games during that time, Rolemaster just being one of them. After this excess, I think there was a desire to streamline things, and this was seen as a move to keep roleplayers from wandering off. There was this idea that roleplaying should be roleplaying rather than rollplaying. I think Ars Magica was a considered step towards this, and Tunnels & Trolls saw a resurgence at that point.

No one seems to know what the future for paper rpgs is. Will it always be there? Is it just the remnants of the original roleplayers and their sons who play? Will MMOs finally see off the hobby? Do people really have less time to play these things? Do we have to make everything rules-lite?

I think a good selling paper rpg used to mean around 100,000 to 150,000 copies sold. Today, its going to be fraction of that, even a tenth of that. The market is diminishing, and, if youre not WoC, you have to think carefully about what it is your small customer base wants.

 

[PrinceYyrkoon]

Let me ask you, do you find Conan combat takes a lot of time at reasonably high levels? Ive used it 3 or 4 times, and Ive neglected, or just plain forgot, modifiers, feat bonuses, conditional modifiers, etc.. Im thinking Im reasonably competent at GMing, (30 years off and on!), but I still think I may get smoother with the system, but, seriously, its a lot to take into account. I honestly find this a barrier to enjoyment, maybe for the players too.

Not really. Currently 3 of the PCs in my game are 7th level and one is 6th level. Things like 2-handed weapons + Power Attack and Massive Damage saves at 20 HP keep the game running pretty quick. If the PCs weren't able to kill opponents in single combat rounds due to these things then yeah, we'd proly get bored with combat lasting round after round. Or if I didn't take Vincent's advice to not scale encounters to the parties level, yeah, it could easily get out of hand. But as is, low-level, unarmored Picts, die with one sword-stroke from the PCs. Mainly the only high-level opponents are usually the big bads.

Also, during game prep I outline 3 or 4 tactics for my bad guys to use. This way, everything is detailed on a spreadsheet I can glance during gameplay. Also, I run initiative using 3x5 index cards with HP and status effects written on the card to keep things straight.

This is interesting. This is reminiscent of the modern 'mook' rules, isnt it? And you get the same effect in Savage Worlds too, with extras henchmen and Wild Cards. I like the way that 4th edition gives tactical abilies to monsters too, by way of reusable and non reusable abilies.

 

[zozotroll]

I have as many young players as I ever did. i have mostly played with people in the army for the last 30 years, and today I have as many people in a group as I can handle, until they get shipped out. But then a new crew shows up. And they are largely interested in rules heavy games, as you cant use complex tactics in a simple system. But of course this is a narrow group, but they come from all over the USA.

 

[PrinceYyrkoon]

Yup, part of me likes to sink my teeth into real complexity sometimes, Ive GMed Rolemaster, among others. Rolemaster isnt that much of a monster once you get your head around it. Do yer average players like simplicity, do you think?

 

[flatscan]

This is interesting. This is reminiscent of the modern 'mook' rules, isnt it? And you get the same effect in Savage Worlds too, with extras henchmen and Wild Cards. I like the way that 4th edition gives tactical abilies to monsters too, by way of reusable and non reusable abilies.

Yeah, in some ways I've been using "minions" for years now. I liked Vincent's rationale about most "soldiers" being around 3rd level at the highest, except for officers and such. I've been running that way for years now and it keeps things from bogging down as well as rewards players for the achievements their characters have made throughout their career. If you're truly interested in seeing what my games are like go here and check out some of the Adventure Logs from my game.

 

[zozotroll]

I dont think Rolemaster rules are a problem. It is with atk chart, then crit chart, and if its a magic weapon then special effect chart.

Actualy, I think most of my players are headed to more complex games. they are used to working with complex systems on the job, so a complex game does not bug them. Slow does. It doesnt matter how many rules are in a gmae, but how many of them you need to use.

 

[PrinceYyrkoon]

This is interesting. This is reminiscent of the modern 'mook' rules, isnt it? And you get the same effect in Savage Worlds too, with extras henchmen and Wild Cards. I like the way that 4th edition gives tactical abilies to monsters too, by way of reusable and non reusable abilies.

Yeah, in some ways I've been using "minions" for years now. I liked Vincent's rationale about most "soldiers" being around 3rd level at the highest, except for officers and such. I've been running that way for years now and it keeps things from bogging down as well as rewards players for the achievements their characters have made throughout their career. If you're truly interested in seeing what my games are like go here and check out some of the Adventure Logs from my game.

Will do, thanks.

One thing I absolutely hate whilst GMing is the dreaded bookeeping. Unavoidable in parts, but I hate having to keep track of 3 or 4 players' 3 or 4 vital statistics. Anything that allows me to avoid that is going to be appreciated.

Theres this idea that its GMs rather than players who crave simplicity, and its not neccessarily true, its just that bookeeping stuff thats to be avoided.

 

[zozotroll]

I find as long as players have something to do, then they stay in the game. For this reason I now normaly have everybody have 2 pcs. This started in rolemaster where a single crit ended it for somebody, that way they had a second PC to play.

I noticed though, that if I made them have 2 diffeerent sort of PCs, then while there where times when one did little, as long as the other was busy, they stayed happy.

My current RQ game is a pirates thing with lots of fantasy thrown in. I made sure everyone had both a ship PC and a land PC. So far it has worked well.

 

[PrinceYyrkoon]

I dont think Rolemaster rules are a problem. It is with atk chart, then crit chart, and if its a magic weapon then special effect chart.

Actualy, I think most of my players are headed to more complex games. they are used to working with complex systems on the job, so a complex game does not bug them. Slow does. It doesnt matter how many rules are in a gmae, but how many of them you need to use.

The most important aspect is the GM in an rpg. He is the conduit, everything goes through him. It doesnt matter about the complexity to the players if the GM is a good one. If he knows the rules like the back of his hand, everything flows smoothly and quickly. The advantage of games like Savage Worlds is that they allow average GMs a shorcut to greatness, by being light on crunch. I think its a laudible aim, if you can achieve it in your game design. Then you have to question why some rules still have all this added complexity, when other rulesets can do without it. Is that the difference between good and bad game design? Is complexity neccessary? Or desired?

I suppose, now, there is choice. You can do it the easy way or the involved way. Chocolate or vanilla. The ideal situation for Conan would be to have a choice of engine, as long as it doesnt impact on the cover price.

 

[flatscan]

My current RQ game is a pirates thing with lots of fantasy thrown in. I made sure everyone had both a ship PC and a land PC. So far it has worked well.

I can't wait until the adventure in the Westermarck is finished and the PCs start buccaneering. Some of my favorite Conan tales were when he was a pirate. Can't wait until my group gets to try its hand at this. :-D

 

[PrinceYyrkoon]

I find as long as players have something to do, then they stay in the game. For this reason I now normaly have everybody have 2 pcs. This started in rolemaster where a single crit ended it for somebody, that way they had a second PC to play.

I noticed though, that if I made them have 2 diffeerent sort of PCs, then while there where times when one did little, as long as the other was busy, they stayed happy.

My current RQ game is a pirates thing with lots of fantasy thrown in. I made sure everyone had both a ship PC and a land PC. So far it has worked well.

Yeah, strangely, I always get players to roll up two characters at a time. RQ is frustratingly deadly. With Rolemaster, it takes such a long time to roll up characters its not possible during a game, you have to be prepared in that case too, or be prepared to fudge it.

 

[zozotroll]

My current RQ game is a pirates thing with lots of fantasy thrown in. I made sure everyone had both a ship PC and a land PC. So far it has worked well.

I can't wait until the adventure in the Westermarck is finished and the PCs start buccaneering. Some of my favorite Conan tales were when he was a pirate. Can't wait until my group gets to try its hand at this. :-D

If you have not ran pirates before, a couple things t for. The game is about the players, but unless you are careful any sea games becomes about the ship. If that happens, it can go down quick. Also, ships tend to have more paperwork involvewd. You need crew, and they need to be fed and payed and all that.

And, after the 5th or 6th ship to ship action, they can get repitiitious. Thats why we are looking to run a Conan game a time or two a month.

 

[rabindranath72]

Yeah, strangely, I always get players to roll up two characters at a time. RQ is frustratingly deadly. With Rolemaster, it takes such a long time to roll up characters its not possible during a game, you have to be prepared in that case too, or be prepared to fudge it.

...And that's why you want to play Conan with the Mentzer D&D rules! Last time we played, TPK, and after 10 minutes we were all rocking again! 8)

 

[PrinceYyrkoon]

Yeah, strangely, I always get players to roll up two characters at a time. RQ is frustratingly deadly. With Rolemaster, it takes such a long time to roll up characters its not possible during a game, you have to be prepared in that case too, or be prepared to fudge it.

...And that's why you want to play Conan with the Mentzer D&D rules! Last time we played, TPK, and after 10 minutes we were all rocking again! 8)

Sounds great!