A
Anonymous
Guest
AnotherDilbert said:[You jest
I'm not actually. Rulebook is badly broken.
AnotherDilbert said:[You jest
No role playing or board game I have seen have ever tried to exactly define what a die or a die roll is. Nor have they tried to define the exact meaning of the word 'is'.Moppy said:I'm not actually. Rulebook is badly broken.
AnotherDilbert said:No role playing or board game I have seen have ever tried to exactly define what a die or a die roll is. Nor have they tried to define the exact meaning of the word 'is'.Moppy said:I'm not actually. Rulebook is badly broken.
If you consider that badly broken, I'm afraid most games are badly broken, including Monopoly. That doesn't stop people from playing them.
I can see that a casino, with massive amounts of money riding on dice rolls, have to specify exactly how it should be done.
Not any ruleset I have seen, but I haven't been looking for decades.Moppy said:Most miniatures games have some regulation that covers dice and rolling.
It may not live up to your standards, but it has been sold and played for many decades, and still seems to be widely available. At a guess more people have played Monopoly than all RPGs and wargames together.Moppy said:Monopoly is a terrible design. The game duration is overly long, there's little player agency, and if it was designed now it would too complex for the general market and too bad for the hobby market.
AnotherDilbert said:Not any ruleset I have seen, but I haven't been looking for decades.Moppy said:Most miniatures games have some regulation that covers dice and rolling.
I'm not sure I would want to play in a gaming culture that has to have specific rules about not cheating with dice...
It may not live up to your standards, but it has been sold and played for many decades, and still seems to be widely available. At a guess more people have played Monopoly than all RPGs and wargames together.Moppy said:Monopoly is a terrible design. The game duration is overly long, there's little player agency, and if it was designed now it would too complex for the general market and too bad for the hobby market.
Linwood said:Not to drive this thread further into the (off-topic) weeds, but what about electronic random number generators? Dice-rolling towers?
Moppy said:Do you actually enjoy monopoly?
That particular description is cartoon physics at its best and is totally at odds with how plasma and fusion weapons have been described in earlier editions. Scrap it and go back to a more sensible description such as the one in original LBB:4...AnotherDilbert said:But that is not consistent with how a Fusion weapon is supposed to work;
Core, Equipment, Heavy Weapons, p126:
The ultimate personal firearm, the Fusion Gun, Man Portable is more like a piece of artillery. It includes a gravity suspension system to reduce its inertia, and fires what amounts to a directed nuclear explosion. Those without radiation protection who are nearby when a FGMP is fired will suffer a potentially lethal dose of radiation.
You could spin it to maintain cohesion but that would not preserve the conditions necessary for fusion. The fusing plasma is inside the weapon, the plasma leaving the weapon is no longer undergoing fusionThe released plasma bolt is still bounded in space and time, else it could not damage a target at range, hence pressure/heat is still extremely high, theoretically allowing fusion to continue.
It wouldn't and nor should it be according to previous canon.If the plasma bolt is no longer fusing, why would it be a Radiation weapon at all?
Sigtrygg said:That particular description is cartoon physics at its best...
and is totally at odds with how plasma and fusion weapons have been described in earlier editions. Scrap it and go back to a more sensible description such as the one in original LBB:4...
AnotherDilbert said:It never stops amazing me what people find unacceptable.
Moppy said:It's irrelevant, because I will always hit, because Mongoose neglected to specifiy the procedure for rolling the dice (can I place them and them roll them manually to side I need?) nor do they even specify how the dice must be constructed or numbered. I believe the only requirement is that they have six sides.
Now before we say this is stupid and who even does that, casinos do.
Moppy said:Monopoly is a terrible design. The game duration is overly long, there's little player agency, and if it was designed now it would too complex for the general market and too bad for the hobby market.
Moppy said:Also Mongoose's website and forums actually work (even if this is http and not https); I still can't create an account on COTI as they still ban gmail for "reasons". Also Mongoose censorship is high (the forum has a 4 letter word filter) but COTI is full on Space China.
AnotherDilbert said:MgT2 has much worse examples of cartoon physics, e.g. tachyon cannons.
PsiTraveller said:Matt! Thanks for chiming in. To expand the one paragraph written on radiation damage, do you want to give an answer as to whether or not the firer takes radiation damage?
msprange said:Put another way, and I am quoting another games designer here (of the World Famous variety):
"If we have a rule where we can write one paragraph and eliminate 90% of misunderstandings or write four paragraphs and eliminate them all... we will write one paragraph."
msprange said:Player agency in Monopoly comes not from the board but the interactions between players. In any event, Monopoly does exactly what it was intended to do (though people do seem to take the wrong lessons from it, I am guessing much to the chagrin of the designer!) and it has stood the test of time.
msprange said:Note sure a 4 letter word filter counts as high censorship.
* mutters * As a private company we cannot censor anything, only limit what happens in our own space * mutters *
Moppy said:That makes good sense, but then there's also a good reason to have a regularly updated FAQ, or a second reference book with more detail. I've seen that in some recent boardgames that have a 4-page how to play, and a 32+ page reference book to look things up if needed.
Moppy said:I can't believe multiple people are defending monopoly.
Moppy said:If the main argument is "it's good with friends" then pretty much anything social can be, and the game design is mostly irrelevant.
Moppy said:Are you defending the game design, or the ritual of playing it once every year?
Moppy said:As a game developer, would you release that now, if it didn't already exist? How many would you expect to sell, and how many "walk away" would BGG give it?
Moppy said:It affects the way I write, which makes it annoying to write. It also reminds me of how the internet has transformed the from the open, deregulated space it started out as, and turned into walled gardens and monarchies. I do limit my participation with this section of the internet.
Moppy said:I was going to write something else, but I think the "mutters" implies some kind of ambiguity so I'll leave it.
msprange said:One of the aims we have with our games (which Traveller is not best suited to when first starting out, but becomes so the more you play) is to make them 'invisible' during play. If you can play a game without thinking about the rules, then you have that social situation you mention. As soon as you have to break into the rulebook, the game comes crashing to a stop.
The example I like to use here is Warhammer Fantasy Battle 8th edition versus Age of Sigmar. 8th used to come to a sudden halt on a regular basis (normally during the movement phase...), but with Age of Sigmar you could go months without so much as sniffing a rulebook. In terms of immersion and modelling mighty heroes doing cool things on the tabletop, Sigmar was the superior game...
msprange said:Moppy said:It affects the way I write, which makes it annoying to write. It also reminds me of how the internet has transformed the from the open, deregulated space it started out as, and turned into walled gardens and monarchies. I do limit my participation with this section of the internet.
Well, that is only natural, surely? We all tend to limit how and what we say in front of others. It is just polite...
msprange said:Nothing untoward intended, I was just remarking that a company cannot engage in censorship. Bit of semantics, I apologise.