Tired of 5e? Pathfinder? Do you have a funky setting but NO system to go with it? We'll help ya, kind stranger.Provide a detailed description of the game ya wanna run, and we'll offer you a system recommendation. Don' just request tho, be a good sport and help Anons who are looking for systems too! And feel free to discuss and debate the merits of different systems too!Happy Father’s Day! Has anyone here ever played with their dad? Previous Thread: >>92947731
I want full on sex
>>93080769Check the ERP thread.
You'd probably get more activity if you didn't lead with the oddly hostile "Are you tired of games that people can play for decades with limitless options for expansion?"You're really starting out on the wrong foot. Even the idea that you need to change system to match a specific idea is kind of silly, since RPGs are inherently adaptable and you'll often find that many niche systems just are severely under-playtested and fall apart without copious amounts of edits/homerules etc.The better posts in the last thread were people looking less for systems, and more for examples of certain kinds of rules, and that makes a whole lot more sense.
There is an old game called Broncosaurus Rex made by Goodman games the same people who made DCC. Its like a really bare bones 3e D&D adaptation. I'm not interested in running it as is and I'm thinking of using its settings with Savage Worlds. Anyone got any other suggestions for a dinosaur-western space opera rule set?
>>93080785Keep squealing, slop hog.
how do D6 and YZE differ?
>>93080785No, he's doing exactly what he should. Fuck off.
>>93080706Are there any good systems for playing as an elemental being, like the ones in picture related? What about non-AtLA systems that handle the elements well in general?
>>93082329change image for help, otherwise request denied
>>93082382Is this better?
>>93080839I’d also like to know this please.
>>93080785What would you suggest that OP say instead?
>>93081917Outing himself as a mindless pop-culturist zombie, to be eliminated and disregarded as the NPC that he is at the first available opportunity? Yes, you are right; he absolutely should do that.
>>93080839You might consider adapting Cadillacs & Dinosaurs to a higher-tech sci-fi setting
>>93080706I asked in the last thread but didn’t really get an answer, what might work for a game set in the workd of the Locked Tomb books, which is in the far future where the solar system is dominated by the Nine Houses, which save for the deserted First House/Earth each have their own necromantic specialities, like the Ninth and bone manipulation? Oh, and there’s eldritch horrors called Resurrection Beasts which are basically the ghosts of planets killed by necromancy.
>>93080706Are there any good rules lite supers games that don't go into full narrative game territory (like Masks)? I don't mind long power lists as long as the power themselves are relatively simple/succinct, but M&M is a little much for my tastes.>>93080785I play DnD on a weekly basis, but the OP is extremely inoffensive and lighthearted. You're allowed to get tired of a system regardless of how long other people have played it. He doesn't even say you NEED to change, that's something you added. Stop being so insecure, it's annoying.
>>93080706Given that season 6 is coming out soon, are there any new systems that could work for a campaign set in the universe of The Dragon Prince? I've heard that the Tales of Xadia system could be better.Also, how does the Cortex system in general rate, is there anything one should remember before using it, and what are its strengths and weaknesses?
>>93091146Is this a shit post? Why would I look at a negatively reviewed system from the 90s? Did you see the word dinosaurs and then look through all your downloaded ttrpgs and see dinosaurs and just thought "these go together". If you have an actual reason as to why Cadillac and Dinosaurs would work Id like to hear it.
>>93080706What would be the best system for a Genshin Impact game?
>>93080706What’s the best system for playing as personifications of 4chan’s boards?
>>93095884I happen to like the GDW "house system" of the 90's. The game has stats for dinosaurs. Because it shares the system from other games you can borrow stuff from Twilight2000 2e to add military hardware and Traveller TNE to add higher tech stuff. Advanced character creation from either can be borrowed as well.You need to look at the bigger picture.
>>93098376BESM Revised 2.0 Omega Red pearl DX
I'd really like to run a Crest of the Stars game (probably an espionage-themed thing set on a planet controlled by the party's enemies) but not sure what to use for it. Things I have experience with>Fate CondensedFun, especially the idea of aspects, but it effectively has no mechanics and often feels like freeform RP with some minor rules to handle combat and other things that don't make sense in plain RP. I run a fucking WWII military/mystery game in Fate, God help me>DnD 5eI really just don't like 5e. I can see it being fun for a dungeon crawl or hex crawl but I and my friends tend toward more investigative/storyfag type stuff so it's just not suited to the task>Fabula UltimaFeels like if Fate had rules but is definitely suited to JRPG type questing. I'm also not sure if its ideas about character classes make sense in a sci-fi setting either unless I rework the fluff pretty hard>Call of CthulhuProbably the best option? I like d100 and the profusion of skills, I like that combat is very deadly and very fast, I like that it seems to want you to roleplay and be inquisitive. The CoC game I played was really fun. The problem is that I see no real use for the insanity mechanic which feels like a core part of CoC's thing
Any recommendations for a system that can run modern day ninjas, alongside clans, martial arts, and ninja magic?
A generic system like Savage Worlds that has the potential for comically-high dice explosions like SW does, but isn't SW.I don't want to necessarily play it but I do want a starting point for a custom system with a similar feel.
>>93102402Any particular reason you haven't considered GURPS?>Lots of SkillsCheck!>Fast and deadly combatCheck!>Built for investigationsCheck!>Built for stealthy Spycraft stuffCheck!The only main weakness is in differentiating between different kinds of social character; you have to dig pretty hard into Disadvantages to differentiate characters that way.
>>93102533OVA RPG is sort of like that; very punchy when rolls are high.
>>93102221Thanks, any particular reason why that system?
>>93102437So, basically Naruto as Urban Fantasy, just to be clear?
>>93080839>dinosaur-western space operaNot sure which shade of western space opera you have in mind, but there's a game called "Predation", by Monte Cook, which is kinda Dino-Riders but with a more varied tech levelhttps://www.montecookgames.com/predation/It's only set on planet Earth though, so not really space opera
>>93080706What’s the best system for playing as a Pokémon, like in the Mystery Dungeon games?
redpill me on gurps. how does social stuff work? what the resolution mechanic?
I want the best spiritual successor to The Riddle of Steel. I want my master swordsman to die to a peasant because they got lucky and skewered my nads with a pitchfork.
>>931080403d6 roll under relevant skill or attribute (probably Int, maybe Per, the occasional Wil or DX)
>>93102677Anime = BESM and I've heard the revised version is the only one worth any attention.If players are allowed to make characters and abilities maybe try a Japanese system called DoubleCross or any other hero based system. If they are playing characters from the game with predetermined abilities and stats then try a rules lite system like Savage Worlds. There is a anime rules lite called OVA, but I've not played it.
>>93095275Tales of Xadia is solid. Cortex in general is your standard narrative system. Instead of a grid-based conflict mini-game like D&D would have, Cortex is more of a dice game. Characters collect metacurrency called "Plot Points" and are expected to gain and spend it pretty much every turn to modify their rolls or results. Spending plot points is how you activate special abilities, increase your roll total, add extra dice to your pool, etc. Managing how you spend your PP is effectively the core of the "tactical" part of the game. It's a very different feel from a more standard grid-based game but it works. The main issue with Cortex is that it was sold off, then sold off again in rapid succession, and Xadia's the only thing that's come out for the system in like the last four years. Almost every other Cortex product is out of print with the exception of the "Cortex Prime" handbook, which isn't a functional game, it's a hacker toolkit. It's pretty hard to sell somebody on playing a system when their only option (up until ToX's release) was to build it themselves out of a hacker toolkit. Still, Xadia's a complete game, and not a bad one. And if you're looking to run a game inside that universe I feel like the ready-made RPG for it is a solid choice. If mushy mapless narrative stuff isn't your style though it's probably a skip.
>>93102437If you like Palladium, the Heroes Unlimited with the Ninjas & Superspies supplement.If you Hero sustem, the 4th edition Champions with the Ninja Hero book.Feng Shui also fits
>>93105177.... uh sure. I already know that theres an d20 naruto rpg and an DND 5e supplement for naruto, so if you have an alternative, feel free to share it.
>>93110309Thanks for the breakdown, I guess I heard wrong. Have you played it yourself?
>>93112017Xadia no, other Cortex games yes. Aside from homebrew stuff (the handbook is actually really good if you already know how Cortex works from another game), I've spent most of my time with Cortex games with Marvel Heroic Roleplaying. Xadia's less action-focused than MHR; it doesn't use the D&D-style initiative, instead when a character wants something they start a "challenge" and go back and forth with the GM until one person can't beat the other's roll. It's a lot faster, and a lot less crunchy (although all the metacurrency stuff is still in play). I tend to prefer the crunch. Whereas MHR character sheets were all about your super powers, Xadia sheets are more about your headspace. In place of powers you have values, which have die ratings attached to them. Acting in accordance with your values means you get to add their dice to your pool, so players who play to their character's values get to add those big juicy dice to their rolls. Xadia also has a lot of different stress (damage) types for a Cortex game, and one of its quirks is that you can only recover stress on other people--nobody gets better on their own. The result is a game where players are kind of forced to explain *why* they're doing something as well as how they're doing it (in order to justify rolling their values) and the characters have a lot of interpersonal interactions during downtime due to having to help each other heal up. It's very a very theatre-kid kind of set-up, which can be a lot of fun, although I've gravitated more towards the dice-game side of Cortex. I like big, text-filled character sheets with all sorts of dice manipulation gimmicks attached to them.I don't think I'm ever going to run it, but if I was a fan of the IP and liked that kind of playstyle I could see it being a good pick.
>>93112247Thanks for the analysis on this. Any other thoughts on Cortex in general, especially homebrewing material for the system, ToX or otherwise?
>>93093560> good rules lite supers gamesIt might still be too narrative for you, but take a look at truth and justice.
>>93108040GURPS has lots of social Advantages and Disadvantages, which can be used to represent a wide variety of types of people. That being said, it's not at all modernist when it comes to Skill checks. You want to convince someone of something? Roll 3d6 equal to or under the relevant Skill, and all applicable modifiers, to succeed; otherwise, you failed.There's none of that modernist alternative axes of resolution stuff, where you gain or lose some indirect progress. But you could easily add some; add 2 more dice, but each a different color from the main 3, and each other. When they match any of the other dice, you get your alternative axis of progress stuff, to that degree of intensity. It's such a trivial thing to add.
>>93080706cyberpunk system that a brain dead gm can teach to even more brain dead players?
>>93113269So, one with simple mechanics, is that what you mean?
>>93080706I was really into Bionicle as a kid, and I recently got interested in it again, so I’m trying to find a group of people to play a Bionicle campaign with. I’m just not sure what system to use. If anyone here has experience with either this Masks of Destiny game or the system by Red Star Games I’ve found, what are the pros and cons of each system, or any other systems that would work well for Bionicle that you would recommend please?
>>93117379Last time i've seen whatever the RSG have made (was it the so-called Red Box? years have passed since), it was generally a poorly-made thing with little understanding of how roleplaying games work, of how bonkles work, and of how would a mixture of these two work.I don't remember if i familiarized myself with MoD.Overall i can see generics (Fate, Cortex, Genesys, even GURPS) working reasonably well, but with different amount of work required to join the proper parts and give numbers to what's missing.Bonkles as a setting are my open gestalt, partly due to how hard i disagree with how they were written, how they are commonly interpreted, and what they should be.
>>93117472>partly due to how hard i disagree with how they were written, how they are commonly interpreted, and what they should be.I would love to hear more about this topic please.Regardless of that, I greatly appreciate the analysis. Any particular books I should look at for the generics?
>>93119006>I would love to hear more about this topic please.On that and deeper analysis - it might be possible, but much later; if the thread is still alive after 14 or so hours, i might do just that.
does anyone remember the names of any games that had a 'build your class from parts' featurelike there's a list of careers (or whatever they were called) and you picked three, slapped them together, and that was your character's progression[obviously not traveler, which also uses the word career, but isn't like this at all]
>>93119295I do remember that this is how it works in: - Iron Kingdoms (the standalone, wargame engine-based version, not the dee und dee 3.5 version); you pick two at chargen, you add two more later - Legend by Rule of Cool; classes have three level-based tracks of abilities each, and you can substitute a track for one from another class, and some races swap a class track for a racial one, too - Double Cross; you pick one to three syndromes of the Regenade Virus your character has (technically, it means either picking one syndrome twice, two once each, or two and a little bit of a third) - Nechronica; you pick two doll classes (or pick one class twice) - other games of role of Japanese origin might feature something similar too
>>93091335Whats the on the grounds interactions like?You mostly gave high level setting information instead of the kind of gameplay you are after.With what you said, some combination of fantasy and sci-fi with the difference between magic and tech is somewhat vague, Id say crossreferencing stars without number (sci fi), and worlds without number (fantasy with some sci fi). gameplay wise mix of OSR and traveler (d20 combat 2d6 skills).
>>93119356thanks, I'm interest in Legend, any opinions on it?time to see if there's a share for it
>>93119025Different anon, but I’d like to hear what you have to say on the subject as well.I checked the Red Star Games website , they currently have the D20 Doronai Nui for Bionicle G1, the D12 Heroes of the Stars for G2, and a G1 wargame named Barranai Nui, which they say that they're continuously updating and refining, so maybe the system you saw, whichever one it was, is better now.
>>93119451dang, it's beyond dead and buried, with just a wiki page and a goodbye page to its name (with the guide pdf)
>>93119295Why do you want to "build a Class from parts" instead of just having a fully custom character that can do whatever it makes sense for them to be able to do, given the available Character Points?
>>93119295Barbarians of lemuria is literally this.
>>93119797Not him, but personally, I don't like getting into the minutia of point buy. if im a soldier, I want to be able to use a sword or a polearm or dig a trench as a function of that instead of having to distribute my points between "common weapons" "Martial weapons" and "engineering" each piecemeal.
>>93119797Because I saw the concept go by in a thread one time and want to try it out for myselfWe've already done some point buy games, and eventually we'll try everything; that's my joy>>93119841thank you, that will be next on my to-read list
>>93119913I personally like BoL cause it hits that golden medium for me of enough crunch to feel structured, but not enough to feel over-technical.There is also abranch called honor+inntrique set in early modern times that has an interesting social mechanic. and the older veresion of BoL had a spell creation system I really liked where you balanced spell requirements with spell magnitude.
>>93119983I remember not being the biggest fan of BoL base combat tho.
>>93119885For reference: https://www.uakron.edu/armyrotc/MS1/10.pdfEven a modern U.S. Army Fireteam, the smallest unit of just 4 men, already has 4 different specializations:Fireteam Leader, usually a Sergeant, a Corporal when necessary, or, when when there's a shortage of NCOs, a Specialist or Private First Class; equipped with an M4 CarbineAutomatic Rifleman; equipped with an M249 LMGGrenadier Rifleman; equipped with an M4 Carbine with an under-slung M320 (or M203) Grenade LauncherThe last member of the fireteam can vary, depending on the type of unit. Usually, it's a fresh grunt from bootcamp that either hasn't had the time to develop a specialization, or has proven themselves to not (or, more hopefully, not yet) be worth given additional training. But, in other circumstances, half of the 2 Fireteams in a Squad get one of the following, and the other half, the other:Designated Marksman, who carries an M14 Rifle and an M4 CarbineAnti-Armor Specialist, who carries an FGM-148 JavelinThis is not merely different characters of the same Class having different Attributes. These are characters with genuinely different Skills as a result of specialized training. It sure seems like an awful lot more than just a few different Feats being picked at character creation, too. But it also seems too narrow to be a set of smaller Classes.Even in the medieval or ancient world, good leaders recognized the value in having men that each had unique skills that varied more than what you can reasonably get from a Class-based system. And, frankly, it's better to have unique heroes that can bring something novel to the game, than stamp everything with the same bog-standard features and pretend the job of character creation is done.
>>93120622I mean, depends on what level of intricacy and minutia you are shooting for I guess.If you are playing a game of mostly modern soldiers and you want a lot of nitty gritty differences, the various specific skill levels might be important: small arms, rifles, engineering, explosives etc. but for easier reference you could instead abstract it to a general soldier type: rifleman, heavy weapons, marksman etc (cause at the end of the day, the general picture is often what's most important). Or you could do something in between, like selecting a few careers that allude to both the particulars and the whole. there is a sliding scale of detail you can mechanize. and you can start from the individual parts (skill based), the whole (class), or somewhere in between (career)I personally prefer starting somewhere in between. A handful of relevant words that aren't so broad as to be impersonal, but not soo specific as to be limiting either. Usually, If I want something like a grenadier in specific, id prefer usually just writing "soldier 2, grenadier 4", rather than "explosives 5, small arms 2, rifles 4, engineer 2, etc". Something I dont like in point buy is a lot of the skills tend too get a bit too specific instead of the more overarching skills most experiences actually consist of. And for careers more specific quirks can be illustrated by adding other careers. like soldier 2 grenadier 4 cook 2, and that cook 2 might mean they can homebrew gunpowder more easily then just any other soldier 2 grenadier 4.I find careers a nice balance between the extremes of skill based and class based. You vary rarely find the same distribution of careers between characters, but its also more easily legible and more intuitively applicable than skill based.
>>93121453>Something I dont like in point buy is a lot of the skills tend too get a bit too specific instead of the more overarching skills most experiences actually consist of.Yeah, that was a thing; mostly an old-school thing. Even GURPS these days is rethinking that. Most modern advice on this tends to suggest that there should be 5 or so actual Gun Skills, and familiarity penalties should apply for unfamiliar aspects of operation, which is mostly bought off by some small amount of training time.Careers can certainly be an interesting middle ground, and it has some simulationist aspects to it that are definitely interesting, too. But I wouldn't go so far as to say that all 4 men on a Fireteam have a different career; the differences there are more Skill-based than anything else.
>>93119429I was trying to give a better sense for the setting. Well, necromancers are typically accompanied by rapier-using warriors called cavaliers, who defend the typically physically weaker necromancers and kill things for them on planets outside of the Houses to release death energy to fuel their spells. The Houses wage war against planets outside of their solar system, eventually "flipping" planets so that they release death energy instead of life energy. Do you want more information? Because there's a wiki that can explain it better than I can.
>>93082489>>93082329Ars Magica, either using Realms of Power: Magic if you're talking about classic animated matter ala fire/earth/ect elementals, or Realms if Power: Faerie if you're talking about a being that represents an element ala Sylph/Nymph/Gnomes. Also, Hedge Magic (or just an elementalist Hermetic) if you want to play someone that calls upon the elements.
>>93122304I meant more the SCALE of interactions. are they Dragon ball z fighting each other blowing up mountains, or are they more conan level exceptional people who are slightly more than realistic in their abilities, and the sorcerers are powerful and can bring on storms and distruction, but require potent resources or preperations to do so.Given the cavilier-necromancer divide, it seems more the later. which in that cause, yah, cross reference worlds with number (who's base premise is a mix of medieval tech with occasional sci-fi and great magical artifacts, dying earth like) and stars without number (much more sci fi)I kinda
>>93122208Im also familiar with Call of Cthulu (d100) and I know once you get a skill past 50, all related skills of that skill family less then 50 get an automatic +10. Like if you have rifles ot 60, your handgun and automatic skills get a +10 boost. Think its called transferable skills or something.> But I wouldn't go so far as to say that all 4 men on a Fireteam have a different career Again I think its all about how zoomed in you want your system to be. You can perfectly adequately simulate pre modern combat with just the distinction between light infantry, heavy infantry, light horse, heavy horse, engineers and command staff, with no accounting for specific weapons or skills. because on a strategic level, those specifics are not relevant compared to their actual tactical role as those unit types. And on the other hand, if the game is super zoomed into the squad level modern foot warfare angle the difference between a grenadier career and a marksman becomes more pronounced comparatively speaking. IN a less "zoomed in" setting, like one in a post apocolypse with mutants and bandits I might wrap up the soldier career and Grenadier career into just 1, either soldier OR Grenadier.
>>93122738>stuff about "scope", and how "zoomed in" the game isI'm looking at this as a TTRPG thread; because, well, it is. Therefore, the ability to construct a Character exactly as a Player perceives them is paramount. And, while simplifying that to the extent it makes sense for that Player is good, leaving no room for further embellishment outside of that simplification is bad.Considering larger scale tactics is certainly an issue, but by no means a simple one. Large units, like Companies and Platoons, need to be able to be unpacked into individuals as the PCs encounter them, and then packed back up as they move off to encounter a different one, as circumstances on the battlefield change. Damage to a unit has to be able to be filtered down to individuals, in the event the PCs eventually show up to save them. If one guy on a Fireteam has enough Naturalist Skill to know that flock of birds taking off means, it shouldn't matter how many other people in that Platoon and Company don't; while it should matter how slowly it gets passed up the chain of command, due to it coming from some minor front-line grunt, it should still happen on a Company level. Larger than that, though, and it gets lost in all the noise. Single soldiers having even seemingly minor abilities can change the outcome of wars. We can't have games about that if we don't put in the effort to model it.
Something like ars magica but for smoothbrains
>>93119006>>93119547Keeping it short: the G1 releases were always sets-first, with all setting material strictly post-hoc; i think that the way all these releases (quite possibly fine if they were standalone) were melded into a supposedly singular setting has been disastrous, and that some arbitrary decisions originating from policies regarding the toys themselves somehow worming into the setting as world facts have been disastrous as well.If i'm brewing any bonkles-inspired game (which i'm not doing due to my opinions on my own skills in making games, as opposed to saying that existing games are poorly made), i'm 1) picking and choosing facts to feature, while ignoring the rest, and 2) ditching the arbitrary elemental restrictions.I've had some experience being active on a certain bonkle forum which is not BZP and participating in some setting brews that have had their passing glories, and i think i might be somewhat notorious in there still.Now about specific books for generics:Cortex (Prime) is, as has been mentioned in the thread, hitting unholy delays in releasing anything that's not the core book and another one, so you might try to make do with core alone; looking into the Cortex Plus books (these can be considered its previous edition) can be helpful, but their classification as Cortex Plus is actually post-hoc; none of them, except for the Hacker's Guide, were labeled this way (Leverage, Firefly, Smallville, Marvel Heroic Roleplaying).Fate is whatever; there are probably too many of them now, and any of them might contain useful pieces.For Genesys, there aren't many yet. If going with more technological interpretations/parts of the world of bonkles, you can try using material from the SW books; the Keyforge setting book can happen to be useful as well (it has somewhat detailed gear construction rules).For GURPS, books can vary wildly depending on what sorts of bonkles at which levels of abstraction we want to run.
>>93124740>always sets-first, with all setting material strictly post-hoca self-correction: mostly sets-first excluding some core concepts and a certain long-running plan
>>93122647Okay, thanks for clarifying. Again, the wiki can explain this better than I could, but some necromancers go further as "lyctors", consuming the soul of their cavalier to use it as an infinite battery of death energy/"Thanergy", as well as gaining their martial skills, allowing them to even fight in space without issue, and deal with the planetary ghosts I mentioned in my original post, which seem to instinctively be drawn to attack said lyctors, forgot to mention that.Oh, and there's also evil spirits from the depths of the twisted river-like dimension that consists of the afterlife, which the lyctors try to force the Resurrection Beasts, which can make minions, into.
my banks are all white, and the people are fucking green wow.
>>93080706What’s the best system for playing as angels in a celestial war?
I'm thinking of running a post-apocalyptic game where the party's larger group (whether a town, repurposed compound, roving fleet of cars, or some other social unit) has its own stat block. Improving and making use of this group would be a key element of the game. I'm thinking of something like the Green Ronin ASOIAF RPG, where the players' noble house has its own stats, but I really don't care for that system. Any recommendations? Pic semi-related.
>>93080706Looking for a system that does Court Intrigue well. Something that either focuses on social interaction almost entirely or isn't crippled by doing so like 5e would be.
>>93124740What exactly would you be picking and choosing in regards to facts, and what do you mean by the elemental restrictions being arbitrary? What was the forum in question, BTW, and do you still have any links to those brews in question?Alright, thanks for the suggestions for the other systems you mentioned, but in regards to GURPS, what do you mean by "levels of abstraction"?
>>93080706So I had an action/horror game set in Planescape. I was planning on running it with Shadow of the Demon Lord, but I realized the game it's too similar that my players would simple prefer to go back to DnD.Any recomendations?
>>93132406>What exactly would you be picking and choosing in regards to facts, and what do you mean by the elemental restrictions being arbitrary?Greatly depends on the mood and goals. If i'm in the mood for old-fashioned magic robots on a magic island against magic darkness, i'll be mostly picking early G1 or G2 material with complete disregard to whatever was written/revealed later, and the Makuta is THE Makuta, and the elements are generally limited to those not belonging to advanced physics, for the lack of a better word; if i'm in the mood for something more grim, it can be a kraata-based adaptive armour deathmatch set up by makutas (multiple ones) with little detailed except for what's necessary for such a deathmatch; it can be a game of skakdi clans and beasthunting on their island, with little else relevant or present; it can even be a Risk-like about the six warlords trying to best each other while currying favor among the makuta factions which provide them with tech and dark designs; it can be an alternative Spherus Magna where no GSR has been built but numerous, much smaller GSR-analogous mech-ships given to the inhabitants roam the land, exploring, carrying cargo, and raiding. Cherrypick, mix and match. If the original sets (the setting) are poorly made, disassemble them, pick the parts you need, and build something you like; no need to use all the parts from all the sets at once.On the restrictions, it's all about the gender split. I'm always ditching that.>What was the forum in question, BTW, and do you still have any links to those brews in question?The forum is RUSBIONICLE, so i don't think the links would be of much help, as you likely aren't well-versed in the language. In addition, i generally think that the brews were of relatively low quality and largely trend-chasing, although enjoyable for a while during that time, when they were more inspirations for builds than anything more ambitious.1/2
>>93132406>>93133602>but in regards to GURPS, what do you mean by "levels of abstraction"?Mostly the way one can stat things and select benchmarks. Compared to a baseline human, a bonkle denizen likely enjoys very significant advantages thanks to its living metal-analogous biology, which would warrant purchasing large amounts of damage resistance and other abilities; this would, however, necessitate the writeups for the many weapons based on /these/ new benchmarks - after all, bonkle weapons should be somewhat effective against bonkle people - and, in the absence of good guidelines for that, likely have massively inflated numbers.However, if one takes some sort of an average/common bonkle denizen and says that /this one/ is actually the 10/10/10/10 benchmark with no advantages, one can reuse all the statted items with almost zero changes. This now means that a human would need a /special/ writeup reflecting that he's /worse and disadvantaged/ compared to our current benchmarks, but if you don't feature humans at all...In addition to that i remember some GURPS book recommending such an approach for settings far removed from humans as benchmarks, I've once been a player in a game of GURPS (ended prematurely due to unrelated events) where the characters were anime girl humanizations of combat vehicles; the GM did something similar. Just change what does a +1 mean from the standpoint of the setting, add a zero or two to carrying capacities in kg, add a zero or two to character weights, and you're set.2/2 until further notice.
>>93132406>>93133602>>93133646(P. S. in hindsight, calling it "levels of abstraction" might've been a poor choice of a term.)
>>93080785Go back to your containment thread, tranny.
>>93133646(P. P. S. and stay away from the way GURPS does magic in its basic set and the first magic-focused book. The spells are poorly balanced and written mostly with GURPS 3E, not 4E, sensibilities in mind.)
>>93120622>It sure seems like an awful lot more than just a few different Feats being picked at character creation, too.Absolutely not, except maybe for the leader. It's the same general skills and class + specialization in varying weapons.
While i'm looking for a more generic toolbox TTRPG im open to other games for a fully homebrew Space-Fantasy type game ala Star-Wars or Starfinder. Stars without Numbers doesn't seem to really suit "Heroic Action" enough and i am looking at systems like HERO or GURPS but also want to see what else is out there. Good Foundry VTT Support is a plus
>>93134511Have you considered Genesys? It has some problems (which may be disregardable depending on one's approach), but it is somewhat generic and has the benefit of the full SW lines being its direct (and compatible) ancestor and the Twilight Imperium books, which can be used for inspiration.If you have considered it and found it wanting, what disadvantages would you mention?
>>93128789Its a fairly abstracted stat block but 1st ed Apocalypse World settlements are defined by Resources, Scarcities and how they engage with local Threats and Clocks. Not difficult to paste onto other systems and have it still work. Heard good things about Mutant Year Zero's settlement building but haven't played or ran it.
>>93134511Probably West end games starwars d6.Literally is star wars and is slightly more on the GURPS side of modularity. it also is compatable with the rest of the d6 systems of west ends games and their successors. also usually tries for the heroic angle.>>93134712genesys seems more naritive driven then what anon was asking for.
>>93135639>genesys seems more naritive driven then what anon was asking for.In what way (and under what definition of the term)? Of what (admittedly little) i've had experience playing it, i saw little to nothing that has been extremely different from the common assumptions. Sure, the dice have more than one axis of results and there is a bit of dice modification/minor fact insertion currency, but that hardly seems to be making the entire game "narrative-driven".
>>93135639I'll second Star Wars d6. As another GURPS player, it's very modular. Like GURPS, though, it's got quite a bit of Skills bloat, so give it a once-over and pare things down so they aren't so redundant.I also agree with avoiding Genesys and FFG Star Wars like the plague. Not because of the narrativism take, you can impose realist and gamist stuff on it if you have to, but because the dice functionally produce a shallow inverted distribution curve, on account of how a Proficiency Die is supposed to be equal to or greater than the two Ability Dice it effectively replaces, but, is, in fact, worse, since you lose so much Advantage in that tradeoff that the Triumph alone that you gain just isn't worth it. Why bother to play a game system that couldn't bother to get its own dice right?
>>93135702Not that anon, but...It's very soft on things like the exactness of positioning and ranges, and the precision with which Skill Difficulty and Results are applied. Which is the sort of thing only a Narrativist game would dare trying to get away with.
>>93135795This is not "narrativist", this is "written to be imprecise and vague while other mechanics want a better level of precision". It's not a narrativist game getting away with stuff like this, it's a common-type game trying to get away with this /by claiming to be "narrative-driven"/, whatever that means.>>93135771>but because the dice functionally produce a shallow inverted distribution curve, on account of how a Proficiency Die is supposed to be equal to or greater than the two Ability Dice it effectively replaces, but, is, in fact, worse, since you lose so much Advantage in that tradeoff that the Triumph alone that you gain just isn't worth it. Why bother to play a game system that couldn't bother to get its own dice right?(now that's a curious observation that can be valuable)
>>93134463Yeah, it's not as simple as you're making it out to be. Take the Grenadier, for instance. He doesn't just fire explosives; he also fires smoke grenades, some of which for signal purposes. Which means he also needs the relevant Skill required to keep track of what this or that smoke signal means in this or that situation. The Leader probably also needs to know that, but the other two don't (they might anyway, but they also might not).The Designated Marksman is probably going to do some long distance Observation-based intelligence gathering stuff, too, which needs its own training. And there's probably stuff I missed on top of that.
>>93135827>This is not "narrativist", this is "written to be imprecise and vague while other mechanics want a better level of precision".The purpose of that vagueness being so the GM and the Players can "interpret" that vagueness however they deem fit; IE, "Narrativist", rather than "Gamist" or "Simulationist".
>>93135841So each of them has a few things they do in addition to regular grunt stuff. In a class based system that's exactly the kind of thing you represent with feats/skills/non-weapon proficiencies/what have you.
>>93135866This alone doesn't warrant calling the entire system that, as many other mechanics of it don't act the same.
>>93123418desu, I went too far into conceptual musings.My main point being you can build characters more top down (dnd archytype, then particular skills) or more bottom up (CoC skill distribution, then general profession).I find it more natural to build characters from somewhere between the two, that's to say starting from a few (around 3-5) defining characteristics rather than starting with 1 overarching characteristic or 40 particular ones. When I think of someone pragmatically, I don't go through a list of say 40 skills and rank them on each, and I also don't just reduce them to just "delivery man", but I pick the few most prominent aspects that are notable.ofc, most non rules-lite systems wont just end at the broad, median, or specific characteristics of a person, but will then go on to fill in the other levels of abstraction. I just find hitting the characteristics that are broad enough to represent the various experiences of life, but narrow enough to indicate a unique qualities appealing.(Like pic related Numenara where you start with 3 characteristics: description, type, and focus)
>>93135888(not to say that it's not even relevant to the definition of the three approaches as per the author of the theory)
>>93135702Im that anonWell, its system is more... fluid? I wouldnt say rules lite, but its based on whats literally called "narrative dice". And its about how you interpreted different degrees of "godness" and badness" rather than a harder "you roll to hit trying to beat a 12 and if you do you deal 3d4 damage."Not saying its bad, but its a different experience then what someone looking for something more gurps-y. It does do a good job at getting at the star wars experience from a different angle that's cinematic tho.>>93134511Traveler is another rpg that has a lot of possible crunch and modularity. but its less essentially heroic, especially earilier versions. I think the 2e mongoose is a little more open to space opera though. I mention it cause traveler has a stupid amount of resources for it and its various editions.
>>93135986>rather than a harder "you roll to hit trying to beat a 12 and if you do you deal 3d4 damage."But... that's what happens under its own mechanics when it's combat. You roll to hit (=get net successes within a dice pool), you deal damage according to weapons+successes rolled, then activate extra features, if any, for advantages."Fluid" and "vague" does not mean "narrative-driven", and analysing an item by its name alone without examining the item itself doesn't work when people call stuff whatever names they want (such as for marketing purposes).
>>93136028I might have confused it with the Fate rpg bit.But I do remember engaging with it, and I dont recall it being GURPS like. maybe damage is more concreate, But I do remember a lot of it concerned player-gm interpretation.
>>93135867Yes, but they're still individual people, too, with their own personal background stuff that might be useful; some of which might be why they were chosen for a particular specialty to begin with. There's only so much that can be represented by a Feat or two. Can a Feat replace one Skill? Sure. Two? Probably. Three? That's pushing it a bit. Five? No. I really think that a Fireteam has degrees of specialization that would really take multiple Feats to pull off, but which are, nevertheless, better reflected as Skills which can be independently improved.
>>93135962>>93135888I don't give a rat's ass about the particulars of some jerk's theory. "Narrativism" is when a description supposedly matters more than cold hard numbers. And Genesys/FFG Star Wars absolutely is that.
>>93136161You're using a term this very jerk has pioneered and developed, yet your definition of it is drastically different from that of his. You're definitely correct in that you don't give a rat's ass about it, however, so there doesn't seem to be any shared ground for discussion anymore.
>>93136140Then play a game like D&D 3.x or Dark Heresy where characters have both feats and skills.Something like a Grenadier knowing how to use various different types of grenades could easily be represented by a single feat. Or you could even just say "Characters with exotic weapon proficiency are assumed to have training in using specialized ammunition for said weapon" whether that's signal grenades for underbarrel grenade launcher or canister shot for the main gun of M1 Abrams.Unless you're playing a game like Only War where the entire system is centered around playing soldiers, that's probably all you need. I mean, you could also say that you need a whole host of classes for various kinds of computer people (programmer, sys admin, pen tester, etc.) and actually every programming language should be its own separate skill (with default rating for unfamiliar languages based on your best skill) with different feat trees depending on whether you're a game programmer, a system programmer or a cracker... but unless you're running a very tightly focused game you're probably better off abstracting all of that into two or at most three different skills and maybe a few feats.
>>93135908Yeah, see, there are absolutely limits to that approach. For instance; let's say you want to play a very self-sufficient Archer fit for wilderness survival in a game system with very broadly scoped skills. Naturally, you buy some Archery and Survival. For whatever reason, you run out of arrows, and need to make more. Does your Archery Skill include Fletching, to make those arrows from the relevant materials? Does your Survival Skill include Knapping, to make broadhead arrowheads from stone? Most games of that sort don't even consider that these questions might come up in play, much less have a way to answer how to resolve them. And a GM might reasonably rule either way, no matter what the Player originally intended.I'm definitely in favor of game systems having a variety of scopes so that Players don't have to hunt for every Skill required to execute a particular general concept, but also don't have to go without some very specialist things that might fit as an add-on, but don't really warrant being part of that general concept to begin with. But I'm absolutely not in favor of game systems that gloss over too much, and leave too many open questions for GMs and Players to find themselves struggling with.
>>93136259Instead of doing all those nitty gritty sub stuff, you could just write "hunter" and make the logical deduction that a hunter has a decent ability to fletch arrows and make broadheads.Maybe if your career was "hunter" and "survivalist", you'd get a even larger bonus. And those skills might apply to something VERY specific like water purification you wouldn't put on your sheet.That way you dont need subskills on your page for arrow making. Something, that unless the setting is very zoomed in on that aspect of wilderness survival, is excessive.
>>93136236>Something like a Grenadier knowing how to use various different types of grenades could easily be represented by a single feat.You are missing the point. The issue isn't a matter of how to fire different colors of smoke grenade. It's a matter of what this color of smoke grenade means as a signal to various organizations across the world. It's about its use as a tool for communication, which is a different Skill entirely.I prefer to play GURPS because of how precisely defined its Skills are, so it's much more absolute about what a Character can and cannot do. I wouldn't settle for 3.5 for this sort of thing (I have neither experience with nor interest in Dark Heresy, no idea there).>Unless you're playing a game like Only War where the entire system is centered around playing soldiers, that's probably all you need.I disagree. If soldiers are a character type in a setting, it needs to treat the sheer variety of what that means with the requisite detail. Why should saving a Knightly Order on a battlefield from a Balrog be any less detailed, just because the game isn't usually about soldiers?>...but unless you're running a very tightly focused game you're probably better off abstracting all of that into two or at most three different skills and maybe a few feats.I disagree. There should abstract levels of detail for expediency, and precise levels of detail for specificity, whenever required. That way, no one is confused about what a Player gets, and what they don't.
>>93136028>... "Fluid" and "vague" does not mean "narrative-driven"...Not inherently, no. It depends on what the design intent of leaving those things "fluid" and "vague" was. And, in the case of Genesys/FFG Star Wars, the intent was to let the GM and Players improvise that on the fly, the way any other game system designed for Narrativist drivel usually does.
>>93136350>And, in the case of Genesys/FFG Star Wars, the intent was to let the GM and Players improvise that on the fly, the way any other game system designed for Narrativist drivel usually does.I have an impression that you use the words "Narrativist drivel" to signify some subset of games with a certain set of features you personally dislike, regardless of the term's meaning in the theory it originated in and for. Does that set of features include improvisation on the fly, and is it really a defining feature of "Narrativist drivel", or merely a coinciding one?
>>93136312>Instead of doing all those nitty gritty sub stuff, you could just write "hunter" and make the logical deduction that a hunter has a decent ability to fletch arrows and make broadheads.The problem is, there's nothing logical about that deduction. It's a very culturally dependent question. Has that culture moved on to almost exclusively smithing arrowheads, or do they still have a tradition of making stone tools? There are plenty of hunters from maybe even a rather small village who might never bother to make their own arrows over their entire lives, because they just buy them from other villagers.The only way you get away with not requiring Skills this specific is to bother to spell out whether "Archery Skill" does or does not include the ability to fletch arrows in its description, and whether "Survival Skill" does or does not include knapping stone tools in its description. So you either include that specificity in a bunch of general-purpose Skills with brobdingnagian descriptions, or you just make each and every one its own unique Skill. But the jerks who implement such general-purpose Skills in their games never bothered with that degree of forethought to begin with, which just about guarantees problems one way or the other at the table.
>>93136374>I have an impression that you use the words "Narrativist drivel" to signify some subset of games with a certain set of features you personally dislike, regardless of the term's meaning in the theory it originated in and for.Oh, you have me completely mistaken. It's not the features it has that I'm infuriated by (other than the distribution of the dice due to the Proficiency die, as mentioned above). It's the lack of features I find a problem, due to its Narrativist nature.Leaving something as complicated as a 3d spatial dogfight up to vague impressions of ranges is just sheer folly. That crap needs a map to work properly, but the game pathologically avoids the required level of detail to actually do any of that. Ground combat is similarly sabotaged.Multiple axes of success and failure are absolutely good concepts, even Narrativist ones like "Advantage" and "Disadvantage". I have no quarrel with that. I'm even considering buying a set of matching dice, but in different colors, to graft that concept onto GURPS (it's not like it's even that hard a concept to implement just about anywhere). I am by no means against using your imagination for the sake of greater immersion and improvisation. What I am against is sabotaging that immersion and improvisation with a lack of precision due to whinging about "muh narrative flow" being interrupted with the information required for Players to make basic circumstance-driven choices.
>>93136393it is if the setting is already laid out somewhat and you have a general sense of what a characteristic may more or less likely imply.You could, and a lot of systems do, then give more specialized Notes for particular expertise. like: "Hunter" "Survivalist" (fletcher)Where a base "Hunter" "Survivalist" might have a modest bonus to the fletching, the fletcher would have a larger one.
>>93136470Alright, now the idea of disliked features/absences is much clearer; it's just that you'd better use another term for these in the future, lest people actually think you're using the term within the bounds of the theory it is from while you are not and argue about completely incomparable categories, needlessly frustrating both sides.
>>93136328>You are missing the point. The issue isn't a matter of how to fire different colors of smoke grenade. It's a matter of what this color of smoke grenade means as a signal to various organizations across the world. It's about its use as a tool for communication, which is a different Skill entirely.I didn't say how to fire, I said how to use. Firing them is exactly the same regardless of the kind of grenade. Using them takes in factors like what a signal grenade means or where to pop a smoke taking windage into account. And yes, it all should be part of the same skill if it's part of the training for the same role. There is absolutely no reason to make the distinction unless you're playing a game where the characters are NOT soldiers and so it's common for characters to have one skill but not the other. And even then the GM going "well, actually you only know how to fire the grenade launcher, you have no idea what signal grenades are for (even though you were sent on a mission where you need to use them)" does not make for a good game 99% of the time.>I disagree. If soldiers are a character type in a setting, it needs to treat the sheer variety of what that means with the requisite detail. Why should saving a Knightly Order on a battlefield from a Balrog be any less detailed, just because the game isn't usually about soldiers?Because the rulebook shouldn't be 10 000 pages of autistic detail covering every possible scenario and kind of game you might want to use the system for. Even GURPS doesn't go into that kind of detail in the corebooks.>I disagree. There should abstract levels of detail for expediency, and precise levels of detail for specificity, whenever required. That way, no one is confused about what a Player gets, and what they don't.Having both is precisely how you make things as confusing as possible.
>>93080785>people can play for decades with limitless options for expansion?"Your very wrong.T. 3.5/pg1e GM and player for over a decade.
>>93136482>It is if the setting is already laid out somewhat and you have a general sense of what a characteristic may more or less likely imply.Any one person can decide that for themselves. The problem is when neither the GM nor the Player realize that the other party might have made the opposite assumption, and it inevitably comes out mid-game, as the Player tries to do something about the dire straits the GM intended to challenge the Player with.When a system does such a specialization, it's a sub-category, rather than an add-on. I'm describing a character that needs "Fletcher" in addition to "Survival", not just the parts of "Survival" that apply to fletching.There's certainly more than one way to skin this cat, but systems that default to more abstract Skills tend to get this completely wrong, even though they don't necessarily have to; mostly because they're too simplistic a system to begin with.
>>93136551>Alright, now the idea of disliked features/absences is much clearer; it's just that you'd better use another term for these in the future, lest people actually think you're using the term within the bounds of the theory it is from while you are not and argue about completely incomparable categories, needlessly frustrating both sides.The only one confused about "Narrativist" gameplay being a design goal that recent games have both aspired to and implemented is you. Genesys/FFG Star Wars absolutely does execute on this design goal, and it's right there to see if you actually bother to pay attention.For clarity, anything that eschews cold hard gameplay for just making up story stuff is Narrativist; and if you don't understand that, that's entirely on you.
>>93136584>Using them takes in factors like what a signal grenade means or where to pop a smoke taking windage into account. And yes, it all should be part of the same skill if it's part of the training for the same role.Yeah, I couldn't disagree more. One's a weapons Skill, the other's a communications Skill. While both things are part of the training of an Army grenadier, they wouldn't necessarily be part of the training of some merc, gangster, "freedom fighter", or adventurer, that only bothered to learn what they need to know to blow shit up. You absolutely need to be able to reflect the difference on the character sheet.>Because the rulebook shouldn't be 10 000 pages of autistic detail covering every possible scenario and kind of game you might want to use the system for. Even GURPS doesn't go into that kind of detail in the corebooks.Actually, we're talking about exactly the same kind of detail as GURPS, just adding a layer of abstraction between Skills and Wildcard Skills, so that basic packages of seemingly relevant Skills can be purchased at once. While a fully trained Army Soldier might take the "Everything about being a Grenadier" package, the rest of them would just buy the grenade launcher Skill, and put the rest of the points toward being a better mook.>Having both is precisely how you make things as confusing as possible.No, that's purely a matter of execution, not of mere inclusion. GURPS Players don't seem all that confused about the difference between regular Skills and Wildcard Skills...
>>93136995>Yeah, I couldn't disagree more. One's a weapons Skill, the other's a communications Skill. While both things are part of the training of an Army grenadier, they wouldn't necessarily be part of the training of some merc, gangster, "freedom fighter", or adventurer, that only bothered to learn what they need to know to blow shit up. You absolutely need to be able to reflect the difference on the character sheet.Not when one "skill" can be learned in 30 minutes. You also don't need a skill separate from cooking to memorize a grocery shopping list. It's the kind of thing that very simply should neither cost resources nor waste space on the character sheet.
>>93136995>>93137224Also, show me the GURPS skill for learning that you need red smoke to call fire support and green smoke to call extraction.
>>93080706What system would work best for a Demon Slayer campaign?
>>93136926>For clarity, anything that eschews cold hard gameplay for just making up story stuff is Narrativist; and if you don't understand that, that's entirely on you.Not according to the author of the term and the GNS theory, which has admittedly been badly retold so many times as to lose all definition among those relying on hearsay.http://www.indie-rpgs.com/_articles/narr_essay.htmlIf you persist in assigning arbitrary definitions to existing terms, that's entirely on you.
>>93113269Altered State (ICRPG setting)Carbon 2185 (5e cyberpunk adaptation and has a strong anime cyberpunk feel)Cy_Borg (Mork Borg cyberpunk adaptation)Neon City Overdrive (a unique d6 pool system that's pretty light weight)Neurocity (2d6 and criminally underappreciated) Neon Blood (d20 system that runs a lot like 5e but not the same. IMO the best modern cyberpunk game available)
>>93133602Yeah, I literally know maybe one word of Russian.Oh yeah, I read a Bionicle crossover fic where the Matoran types are still mainly a certain gender, but you can have, say, female Ko-Matoran, The logic the author gave was that they're part machine already, so their genders are purely mental and it doesn't really matter.Have you ever done any of those scenarios, BTW?>>93133646Thanks for clearing that up.>>93133654Don't worry, we've all fumbled words like that.>>93134263Do you mean literally GURPS Magic, just to be clear?
>>93140670>Do you mean literally GURPS Magic, just to be clear?Ain't OP but you'll be required to police your players with the "GURPS Magic" rules, they aren't bad (they're very simple) but very easily broken. A lot of people consider "Sorcery" better it has the same level of complexity but doesn't give you the gandalf feel.
>>93080706Best system for a Judge Dredd RPG?
>>93140670>Have you ever done any of those scenarios, BTW?haha. ahaha. ahahahahaWell, there were some plans and attempts to make boardgames out of the third and the fourth scenarios and some thoughts of hacking Rogue Trader (not the best choice in hindsight) for the fifth, but they went nowhere. I don't know if i'm motivated enough to do any of these now either, but one can dream, i suppose.>Do you mean literally GURPS Magic, just to be clear?Yep, that one.I've seen people report playing and running a GURPS-based westmarches-type game of Polynesia-inspired fantasy (not that far from the core inspirations of bonkles), and they used the imbuements subsystem from the series of supplements of the same name; this is not necessarily what one would pick for bonkles, but this shows that various implementations can be used.
>>93142117Judge DreddThere's two versions and they are both good.
>>93142457>(not the best choice in hindsight)Not really a 40k guy, why wasn't it the best choice in hindsight? Also, yeah, one can dream.Do you remember where you saw that/still have a link for that?Oh, and by the way, did you take another quick look at the Red Star Games systems? Have they improved since your first take on things?
>>93142767>Not really a 40k guy, why wasn't it the best choice in hindsight?It's too overloaded with 40k baggage and too clumsy otherwise. I didn't know a lot of other systems at the time and picked the first one featuring detailed ship construction.>Do you remember where you saw that/still have a link for that?At Imaginaria, also a Russian-language RPG board. The links can be fetched, but would their contents be of much use?>Oh, and by the way, did you take another quick look at the Red Star Games systems? Have they improved since your first take on things?Not yet, unfortunately; however, i'm going to have a bit of a roleplaying preparation hiatus after the upcoming Monday lancer session, so i might use that time.
>>93137375It's not arbitrary. "Narrativist" means things outside of GNS theory. I don't know why you keep ignoring me when I say that. It's a true statement, no matter how badly you don't want to hear it. "Narrativist" isn't a word that was invented purely for the sake of one schlock Tabletop critic's personal worldview. It has its own meaning in the dictionary that can be looked up on its own. You're just being willfully ignorant in order to make excuses for a game to not be in a bin it was clearly designed to be in based on its included mechanics.
>>93142912>It has its own meaning in the dictionary that can be looked up on its own.Alright, let's see the dictionaries.>Merriam-Webster: no results>Cambridge: no results>Oxford: no results>Free, Farlex: only within writeups on the GNS theory and its related concepts>Dictionary.com: no results>Wiktionary: only the broadest possible definition of "based on or using a narrative">Collins: no results>Longman: no results>WordReference.com: no results>Britannica: no resultsSo, which exact dictionary? Is it outside of those listed?
>>93137242"Forward Observer" for developing a Signal Plan, and working out where to "place" the smoke grenade. Familiarity Penalties may apply for not knowing what typical Signal Plans other nearby allies are likely to use (thereby potentially causing a friendly fire incident)."Explosives: Smoke" for maximizing the effectiveness under current conditions.Can be done with "Soldier", if conditions are simple enough (but not when they aren't).
>>93142994If you need your hand held through the process of how the suffix "ist" changes the meaning of the word "narrative", then you have already proven yourself sufficiently unable to think for yourself that your opinion clearly doesn't matter.
>>93143208Whatever.
>>93132287Try legend of the five rings. There are entire adventure books that are just courtly intrigue. But because it's samurai you can also pepper in things like duels and shit to keep people awake.
>>93142792Cool, see you next thread to talk about that then? Oh, and good luck!
>>93132287Try Exalted perhaps.
>>93080706What's the best system for playing as plant-folk, like a Dryad or Treant?
>>93144553God I want to clang Gali so hard its unreal
Is there anything besides GURPS that gets the following right?1. Meaningful distinctions between Dodge, Block, and Parry2. Meaningful distinctions between Swing and Thrust attacks3. Being able to target specific hit locations4. Well thought out Range Penalties
