File: f2a00925-51d4-4a9f-beef-b(...).gif (152 KB, 400x299)

152 KB GIF

White Hack or Black Hack?

>>96575810
Brown Hack Superpower 2030, clearly.

>>96575810
Blackhack has no DM rolling so that's kinda a deal breaker for me.

>>96575810
They're not really opposites. Which is unfortunate, beacuse they should be. White hack should be super forgiving and really easy to GM, Black hack should be super deadly and a total pain in the ass.
Instead, they're just... different.
>>96575838
Does it really matter who does the rolling?

>>96574870
>All you mentioned was a setting that didn't solve your main issue, worlds are still too big to deal with them and the play remains the same.
The basic idea is that if you wipe out almost all humans, then you can have (say) 3 points of interest on a planet, and then you can very easily use some simple structure - beacons, scans, whatever - to direct players to those points of interest, with an understanding that the rest of the planet is uninteresting wasteland and wilderness. If there are hundreds of millions of people on the planet, you need some other assumed structure to try to direct players to the content.

Think of like, Noveria in Mass Effect: there's the empty frosty wilderness, the port, the Rachni-infested area, and (theoretically) a handful of science outposts. Much more easily to turn into a TTRPG supplement than something on the scale of modern Earth.

I offered a Mothership open table for tonight and only two people signed up. Someone might pop in at the last minute and I plan to run it anyway, but do you have any advice in case it's just two players?
I usually let them fuck around and get hurt before explaining that most enemies have a chance to one or two shot a player, but I feel I need to put on the kid gloves for such a small group.

>>96575979
Two players is unironically my favorite sized group and I miss it so much. All my best two people groups have had one or more people invite a plus one and fucked things up because the plus one is always just baggage.

>>96575810
White hack, I guess. I did really like Black Sword Hack, and it lets the GM roll a bit which is a plus because I agree with >>96575838
>>96575950
Rolling is fun, I like rolling. I never understood the people who want to reduce it to a minimum.

>>96575950
>Does it really matter who does the rolling?
Games are not just mental, they're visceral. Rolling the dice is borderline ritual.

>>96576003
But I don't know this people, they might suck.
A couple weeks ago I had 6 players and it was a blast, I could jump from one to the next and use them to rush each other. Way more exciting.
2 players feels kinda intimate. Should I go for that tone? Any tips?

>>96575810
what are their differences even?

>>96576091
Two players means you can focus on building up a dynamic between them. The reason I like 2-person groups so much is that they end up becoming foils for each other, and foils are really helpful in allowing characters to form and present their identities. It also just generally means each character gets way more time to shine than in a larger group, and there's also less arguing/discussions, so you really don't need to rush as much and still get lots of stuff done.

I really wouldn't stress on anything other than making sure you balance attention on both players, and maybe encourage some comradery. It's really a gamble either way whether they're any good and whether they work well together, so there's no point worrying about that.

>>96576121
The main difference that makes people pay White Hack is the magic system, it's like the selling point. But there are differences in the minutia: WH has modifiers for some rolls and saves by class while BH is entirely roll under, WH has ascending armor while BH has them work as extra HP. I don't recall if WH uses depleating die for amunition or if that's BH only.

>>96576196
Never played either, but I'm gonna say White Hack.

>>96576263
Great.

Now you can die on that hill.

>>96576292
Why? He could go bat for the Green hack or the Blue Hack or Macchiato Monsters, I can't even tell the difference between those.
And then you have The Rad Hack, The Pink Hack, The Indie Hack, The Mecha Hack. Some of those are not even similar to B/X.

>>96576356
Still waiting on the Good Hack.

>>96576191
Both campaigns I ran for two people ended with one player betraying the other.
Not saying it's inevitable, but if the campaign goes long enough...

>>96576449
The Good Hack sounds like a christian take on whitehack.
>Hello, have you heard of the The Good Hack?

>>96576505
I've run one shots for more people that ended in betrayal.
If anything, it's a kinda badass way to end a one shot.

File: AaronBurr.jpg (122 KB, 800x531)

122 KB JPG

>>96576577
>it's a kinda badass way to end a one shot.
And halfway to a good pun.

>>96576196
My favorite hack is Blue.
No wait, ye-

>>96573524
Colonizing Mars is a neccesary proof of concept. If we can't colonize a planet within proverbial arm's reach that is relatively tame as far as how dangerous planets could be (compared to Venus, for example), there's really no way we'll have any success with planets that are light years away.

>>96576981
Don't bother anon, he's a 'Whitey on the moon' type by the sound of it.
'How dare you attempt to achieve or reach anything higher, don't you know you need to care about my bullshit? Humanity cannot advance until after I'm satisfied that my personal hobbyhorse is ridden enough.'

>>96575647
just came in to say that's a cool mouse

>>96576981
The reason we cannot have success with planets that are light years away is that FTL is not real. If FTL is real, then we can have much easier success by picking planets that haven't had their entire atmosphere boiled off, and already have near-Earth conditions (biosphere, ~1g, ~1atm, free atmospheric O2, etc).

>>96576356
Man I fucking love Macchiato Monsters. Ran one of my groups favorite campaigns in that.

File: 1581170996432.jpg (1.41 MB, 2985x1548)

1.41 MB JPG

>>96577429
I prefer my mice a little more weeb.

>>96577711
>If FTL is real, then we can have much easier success by picking planets that haven't had their entire atmosphere boiled off
There is zero evidence to suggest it would be easier to adapt to entirely foreign biospheres than recreating the same chemical processes on Earth.

>>96578378
There is plenty of evidence, actually. Mainly, we don't have to eat the stuff in the native biosphere, we can just gengineer things that can turn local detritus into something edible to humans - if it's even necessary to do so before planting crops.

The thing that has zero evidence is that industrially mining an entire atmosphere out of the surface of Mars is somehow a necessary precondition to doing this.

>>96578398
>we don't have to eat the stuff in the native biosphere
This is the possibly the smallest non-issue. Because not only can you not eat it, you may not be able to even breathe vaguely near them without dying or causing an ecological catastrophe that makes the place unlivable.
>But i'll just genetically engineer it out!
No, you won't. Your lacking understanding of that topic makes it amount to "we can magically change the properties of any living thing as if we were omnipotent", but it doesn't work that way and there's no evidence that even some omnipotent magical "gene" altering that works for us would work anywhere or on anything else.

And obviously if we have access to omnipotent magic, colonizing mars would be hilariously easy.

>>96578398
What we really just need is atomic level alchemy, something we've really only scratched the surface of in the last two hundred years. We're already transforming elements into other elements, albeit in horrifying, dangerous and impractical ways where the best we're getting out of it is some energy and the worst we're getting out of it is incredibly deadly materials which will persist for hundreds of thousands or even millions of years.

Once we get to the point where we can say something like "Hey, lets take these heavier elements and convert them into lots and lots of the (safe) gas we need alongside lots and lots of energy", then we'll be able to radically transform Mars while also mining tons of cryptocurrency in the process.

>>96578480
It really depends on how aspects of that work out. If you can just transmute any element into other elements with no practical limits on scale and without energy requirements being a problem it's basically just post-scarcity. This is also probably impossible and the real requirements would be too prohibitive to be useful for concerns of mass.

>>96578554
With Fission, or splitting heavier elements into lighter elements, energy is released. With Fusion, fusing lighter elements into heavier elements, funnily enough, energy is also released. While modern methods require lots of energy input to get going, with fusion in particular having some insane requirements, in the end the process can be a net positive as far as energy is concerned.

>concerns of mass.
That's really all there is to it, once the technology is refined. Changing one element into another means we need material. The good news is that Mars has a lot of it no one's using for anything else. And, if we really need a lot, there's a belt nearby with a good amount of asteroids.

>This is also probably impossible
Difficult, but nowhere near impossible, and certainly more possible than FTL. The technology is still very much in its infancy, with practical Fission and Fusion only having been discovered within the last century, and the best we've managed to do as far as elemental transformation is create unwanted byproducts while focusing on capturing the energy released.

We're still in the incandescent lightbulb stage, where we were not creating true "light" bulbs, but heat bulbs that happened to also generate light. But, we are moving forward, and likely within two hundred years we'll be performing "safe" and stable transformations of one element into a desirable other element.

We've already turned lead atoms into gold atoms for a fraction of a second using particle accelerators. The principle of the matter is possible, it's figuring out how to do it in a useful way that's the tricky part. Thankfully, considering near-post-scarcity is behind that door, there's a strong incentive to work towards it.

>>96578802
>in the end the process can be a net positive as far as energy is concerned.
We have no idea if this is true for fusion yet but with fission it's debatable. Nuclear energy in particular has a very poor return on investment, though it's obfuscated by its advocates as much as possible (And by the fact that it's still useful for weapons production).

>>96578814
>We have no idea if this is true for fusion yet
The sun exists.

What we don't know is when fusion energy technology will be commercially viable. We know that it's potentially possible, it's just we haven't figured out the whole "get more energy out than you put in" problem yet.

They keep saying within the next twenty years every twenty years, so not likely within our lifetimes, but still, it's a coming.

>>96578851
>The sun exists.
And it took far more energy to create the sun than the sun will output.

>What we don't know is when fusion energy technology will be commercially viable
I really doubt it will be. We've been chasing after working fusion for 80+ years now in the hopes of revitalizing the economy.

>>96576505
A long time ago, I had a long campaign end somewhat abruptly with one player betraying the other. It was about fifteen years ago, with one of them stealing an airplane and leaving the other on an island.
A few months back, one of the two brought up that game to reminisce a bit, and eventually we got to the elephant in the room: the ultimate betrayal. The weirdest thing happened though, with both of them convinced that they had been the one who had flown off.
The more they argued, the less certain I was that I had remembered the event correctly, and when it finally came to them asking me which of them was right, I told them I could check my notes and we could know for certain.
The problem was that since it had been such a blow out of a final game, I never wrote down what had happened in that last event, and when I showed them the document, they immediately renewed their argument. From their arguing, it seems like both of them had been planning to betray the other for quite some time, so it really was just a question of who did it first.
By that point though, I knew for certain which of them had been the betrayer, but since it became very clear that both of them had staked a lot of their ego on having been the one to come out on top, I thought it would be best if they were both allowed to believe whatever they wanted but without complete certainty.

>>96576505
>>96579642
Excellent. Adversarial play is based and has been based since Braunstein, OD&D, and Gygax's AD&D.

>>96575647
If I used Fate to run a dungeon crawl, is that NSR?

File: arrested-development-michael.gif (833 KB, 167x167)

833 KB GIF

>>96581015

File: 61242426.jpg (314 KB, 1613x2475)

314 KB JPG

>>96577827
It's an unfortunate name.

>>96581015
No. Fate is older and its own thing.
There are NSR games that take aspects from Fate tho, like Ultraviolet Grasslands.

File: YG8Pam.png (15 KB, 600x600)

15 KB PNG

I've been running some MoSh trifolds from the Triptech game jam. I'm starting to notice I'm a very bad judge for quality, some that caught my interest were criticized to hell for very reasonable issues:
https://itch.io/jam/triptech-game-jam-052025/rate/3569343
https://itch.io/jam/triptech-game-jam-052025/rate/3586743
So I went for a couple that I liked and had better reviews, and they had very glarrying issues once I started running it (mainly being really hard to connect the initial pitch with an ending, strong starts and generic closers)
https://itch.io/jam/triptech-game-jam-052025/rate/3581912
https://itch.io/jam/triptech-game-jam-052025/rate/3580740

It's still pretty interesting seeing how inexperienced designers (game designers and graphic designers) fit an adventure to a format. I feel like I'm learning something through them.

File: MP1Baw.png (14 KB, 300x300)

14 KB PNG

>>96582520
These look like they wanted to go hard on the AESTHETICS.

>>96582598
the whole event seems to have been a mixed bag. But they had one month to come up with something and get it ready, obviously people more into illustration will focus on that. Right now I'm trying to actually run them to see how they go, but in general if you find a pamphlet you'd never play but inspires you to make something new that's great.

>>96583376
I'm kinda intrigued just by what people did to try and get their stuff to stand out.
I'm calling it the MorkBorgitis.

>>96583405
are you one of those people who think a google doc is more than acceptable?

File: _l0U44.png (349 KB, 824x586)

349 KB PNG

>>96583405
>MorkBorgitis.
>pic related
what?

>>96583536
Tell me Mork Borg's success didn't come from its bold graphic design.

>>96583739
It did. I don't see how that relates to this stuff or why you think it's a disease it created. There are 2e books that I find harder to read than MB.

>>96583562
>>96583786
Alright, alright. It's not a disease.
MorkBorgalicious.

>>96583405
I call it fuddfilter

>>96581015
Yes. Don't let the purists try and dictate the thread scope. If you want it to be nusr and run it with those vibes it is nusr.

>>96583927
Honestly, not a bad attitude, especially if you look at more archetypical nusr games in the process and bring elements of those games in.

I actually really like F.U.D.G.E dice. The rest of Fate is hard to combine with the NuSR style though, but no sense discouraging anyone from giving it the ol' college try.

>>96583927
It's not puritanism, FATE is it's own thing. There's no point having a general for whatever you feel like, make a facebook group or something if you want that.

>>96583954
you could just play Troika.
If anything, Troika is the NSR Fate.

what do we call all these new school griddy grid games, children of 4e like Tactiquest, Icon, 13th Age, Strike, Lancer, Gubat Banwa , Draw Steel and Dagger Fart?

These are not OSR games but this is a place that cares about the hobby on a meta level and its cultural movements. TTTRPGs? T3RPGS?

>>96583976
Games are flexible and adaptable, and the NuSR spirit is not just clinging to the old but bringing in new ideas.
No one's advocating anarchy, just a bit of freedom.

>>96583999
4e clones, 4e derivatives, 4e heartbreakers, etc.

I don't think Daggerheart is a 4e-derivative.

>>96583976
>>96583985
>trokia is the nu purity spiral
what a time to be alive

>>96583999
13th Age came over a decade ago, if it took stuff from 4e it was closer to something taking inspiration on 5e right now.
The others are just tactical ttrpgs, I think that was a term that already existed.

But out of those I've only played Lancer and I felt it was much closer to 5e than 4e, I didn't get deep enough for long customization so it might make a difference at that stage.

>>96584054
There's a difference between purity spirals and keeping different things separated. FATE is a narrative first game, and that's just not NSR. If someone likes FATE and they give ItO or White Hack a chance they're not gonna find what they want.

On the other hand, the Trophy games are much closer to a modernized FATE that takes away the remnants of D&D to focus on a narrative game. Those aren't NSR neither. It's just a different bag.

Where does the idea of reducing rolls to the bare minimum come from?
I think rolling is fun and I always saw the OSR advice of reducing rolls more in line with not rolling to open a door, basic decent GMing advice more than an ideal goal of a game where you don't need to roll. There are diceless games and the experience is completely different, if someone wants that it's all cool and I'd give it a shot to get a different experience but I don't think rolling dice is the bad part or something that makes games worse.

>>96583954
>the rest of Fate is hard to combine with the NuSR style though, but no sense discouraging anyone from giving it the ol' college try
Makes sense to me.
>>96584070
If dungeon world would work there's no reason narrativist games wouldn't also work.

>>96584088
DW is a PbtA, it's in its own bag. If you want more in that direction you'll find it in others of that genre more than NSR.

>>96584083
I think it's a principle to help refine the rules, rather than a strict law. Rolls are fun, but if you have too many rolls, they can slow down the game. Trying to aim for the minimum amount of rolls is essentially shaving the game down to its most important essentials.

It's really easy to just add more rolls to a game, and most GMs can do that without the system telling them how to. What's hard is reducing the amount of rolls without making the game worse.

>>96584083
>Where does the idea of reducing rolls to the bare minimum come from?
It depends on what you mean by reducing rolls to the bare minimum?

I'd say the main NSR design principle is "if you are going to roll, try to make it the minimum number of rolls," and it's a reaction to the huge slowdown that can occur whenever you have to make lots of rolls to resolve a single action. More rolls often means slower play without added depth.

>>96584083
>Where does the idea of reducing rolls to the bare minimum come from?
Nowhere? The only person who thinks minimizing rolls is necessarily a good thing is the same type of seething pus filled boil that gets steamed over ACKS every other day.

>>96584055
13th age exerted alot of influence over this new crop of games and shares a designer of 4e, there is alot more of a link than vague mechanical homage.

Lancer is explicitly more 4e than 5e. Small amounts of movement, overcharge mimicking action surge, stablizing your mech works like the self heal second wind/rally mechanic from 4e, releasing with almost no rules for outside of combat and crunchy combat rules, mechs having the same role system as 4e ( but without role actions, and controllers/artillerys divided into two roles after the role kind of failed in 4e). If you flood the game with custom content ( collecting all the rare catalogs) Lancer evolves even more into its own thing. The Mech genre is a very good excuse to bring a large variety of character sheets to the table which is a very good thing for a T3rpg. Games like 3.5 and SotDL exist to sell tons of supplements but fantasy campaigns do not lend well to playing very much of that content. One negative thing about lancer is that the heat system is pretty cool and while functional I don't think it succeeded on its design goals.

I like the character creation rules for Ultra Violet Grasslands

>>96584202
>I'd say the main NSR design principle
I'd say it's a general game design principle, not just for NSR. It comes down to the basic idea that if a roll isn't neccesary, by definition it's unnecessary.

>>96584410
>It comes down to the basic idea that if a roll isn't neccesary, by definition it's unnecessary.
Games themselves aren't "necessary", what matters is whether a mechanic makes something more fun. It's usually more fun for both the GM and the players to have the option to determine results randomly.

>>96584425
I actually think many players prefer intelligent over random results. In particular, the idea that a GM needs to be constantly rolling random things or they're not being fair or impartial really concerns me, because in my experience it comes from GMs who really struggle with having their players trust them and their judgements/rulings.
Random can be fun, but to say it's usually more fun brings up a lot of memories of rolling on random treasure tables. I've rolled a lot on random treasure tables, and I mean a LOT, and I can't even think of a single time I wasn't hit with either mild or major disappointment at some dud result. Maybe I just have persistent bad luck in the particular category, maybe my expectations are always too high, or maybe most treasure charts are filled primarily with chaff. Either way, I tend to curate my own much tighter treasure charts now.
I think the right mix of rolling and not rolling is important, alongside whether something should be calculated, decided, or random, and having too strong a preference for one or the other can be a huge weakness. Knowing what should be a flat decision and what should be a roll is pretty important for both GMs and designers, and those kind of decisions can make or break a game.

>>96584626
I strongly disagree. Players hate having predetermined results because it feels like railroading, and it often results in exactly that, with the GM planning things out and telling a story rather than making a game. Fiat is the thing that you should aim to minimize. For every game the dice might fuck over, there are a hundred, EASILY, that fiat has killed all fun in because the players realized they're just in some faggots novel.

>>96575647
Interested about mousritter but not sure how the system works if it is deadly. Players trying to solve everything without fight and if it fails they run and try again?

>>96584652
>Players hate having predetermined results because it feels like railroading,
There's an old friend of mine you've reminded me of. Even when playing competitive board/card games, he started doing things like grabbing a die and randomly determining who he would attack, and often even saying something along the lines of "Look, you can't be mad at me for attacking you, it's nothing personal, I was just following the outcome of the die."
The reason he would do this is actually because before, when he would make these sort of decisions himself, he would make them personal and people would genuinely get upset with him. He was one of those "you attacked me once, so now I no longer care if I win, I'm just going to try and ruin you" kinds of player. He ended up having to rely on the die because the group had lost faith in him.
Players who always think they're GM is railroading them unless they see dice being rolled just don't trust their GM.

>>96584817
>Players who always think they're GM is railroading them unless they see dice being rolled just don't trust their GM.
Well that's just most players then. We all suspect it when the GM is just ignoring the dice and doing what he wants.
And frankly, everytime I've seen a DM rely on fiat, this is what actually happens and they start deciding to force things to go the way they want.

>>96584265
nah, it's something I see now and then. I'm not talking about a boogieman trying to take our rolls away. I mean people who think that way for their own personal games. And I'm asking in general because I'm not gonna chase them for playing a certain way, I'm just curious about how people see it.

>>96584846
>nah, it's something I see now and then
Outside of here? Sure, there are people who think that. I meant on this board.

>>96584325
OK
WAIT
DON'T LEAVE
Which version of SEAcat am I supposed to use? UVG has a divition between skills and traits (or something like that) that makes no sense to me, Uranium Butterflies and Our Golden Youth reduce this to a single space but that means you get less slots and there's no premade character sheet (not the worst thing ever, I can extract the jpg and take the time to make it form fillable, but if there's no official one I get the feeling it's not meant to be used). I like the division of attacks between physical, psychological and social, the idea of losing HP because someone slandered you is great, but is it playable? Is it only in UB because it got dropped in later releases or is it supposed to be an optional extra?
Do I use the isekai character creation test with UVG? Can that result in any type of race? Or is it for stand alone settings?

Actually, just a general guideline of what to do between the three books would help me a ton.

>>96584728
pretty much, but it's fairly deadly, meaning that it's deadly for the enemies too if you're careful and stack the deck (and get lucly). But if you're playing you should focus on exploration and weird interactions that happen because you're a tiny mouse over stuff you could do in a basic ItO like stricter combat.

>>96584817
I kinda feel about your friend.
I'm not vindictive, but I've been the ocassional target of a DM I had. It was very random, if I called him out a while later he'd recognize he was doing it and apologize, but next time he had a shitty week he'd take it out on me. Very toxic, a human issue and not a game issue at all.
I think that I prefer doing things randomly to avoid doing that to other people. If there's a clear motive to act I respond accordingly (a character is an easy target, he's getting the NPCs mad, he's the only one in range or some tactical reason), but if it's not an informed choice then it's gonna be random anyway.

I do sincerely enjoy making it a coin toss and asking one of the players to pick. It's forcing them to take responsability on something that was always going to be random. I don't know, I find that fun.

>>96584855
I was asking outside of any particular discussion that might have happened, and I don't think it's wrong in itself if someone does. I just see now and then people saying that when things are working right the system gets out of the way and there's no need to roll, as if rolling was a bad thing we put up with. And that's just an alien feeling to me.

>>96584829
>Well that's just most players then. We all suspect it when the GM is just ignoring the dice and doing what he wants.

It's actually kinda funny, because my best group has some guys I've played with since we were little kids, and way back when there were times we played where we didn't have any dice, so I just "rolled" for them by calling out whatever was the first number that came to my head within that range. They trusted me to be impartial even when it was almost certainly impossible for me to be. Some of the games they best and most fondly remember were me running these mental dice games.
I wouldn't pull that kind of stunt as an adult, but it's that same level of trust that I always want them to have in me. The game will be fun and fair, with proper challenges and the ability to make real decisions and all that other good stuff. It's a bit harder to have that trust with adults who are naturally more cynical, but you can't even begin to cultivate any trust by saying "You can't trust me at all, you can only trust the dice."

>>96584925
>I'm not vindictive, but I've been the occasional target of a DM I had. It was very random, if I called him out a while later he'd recognize he was doing it and apologize, but next time he had a shitty week he'd take it out on me. Very toxic, a human issue and not a game issue at all.
I've known many GMs like that, and it's incredibly frustrating when I run games with players who only have known GM's like that, because you have to build up trust from a difficult position that is nobody's fault but that GM's.

>I think that I prefer doing things randomly to avoid doing that to other people. If there's a clear motive to act I respond accordingly. but if it's not an informed choice then it's gonna be random anyway.
For some of my groups, I often just give the players supernatural insight. I'll just go ahead and reveal the enemy's decision-making process, something along the lines of "Out of you two who are closest to him, who is wearing the better armor?", with the players understanding that whoever's armor seems worse is going to be attacked. I trust the players to be honest about the matter, and not just describe their characters as having immaculate armor they polish every hour just to avoid being the one attacked. Sometimes, particularly for low intelligence enemies, the question is incredibly basic like "Which of you in that line is standing the furthest in front?", which essentially amounts to "Who wants to get hit?," and these are great because it often encourages a sense of gallantry and camaraderie, even if it's kind of obvious the answer is probably going to be whoever has the best armor/most health/etc.
With more seasoned groups, I can convey the enemy's thought decision-making process often just by telling them who is being attacked and they can infer the reasons for themselves. I don't like leaving these sort of things to chance, because I want my players to always believe the enemies are thinking.

>>96584070
I'm hesitant to use the term "narrative" to describe Fate, because that's kind of an outdated term.

Its individual components (more meta-considerations/planning, collaborating on world building, outright literary terminology) definitely put it in that old category, but I'm not sure we really should use the GNS model anymore.

>>96585088
Solid point.
I might steal that player input on the target idea now and then, sounds fun. Like I said, I think it adds a fun layer of responsibility on their own demise even if it's a bit meta.
I don't love every Warden advice from MoSh, but one I took and kept for other games is informing them of the consecuences of their actions. That way they consent to things that are probably worse than I would had ruled before, but it's more fun for them too because they are making the choice to risk it.

>>96585431
FATE was THE narrative system before we had modern stuff like PbtA or Trophy Gold/Dark/etc
It feels super trad in comparison, and I know some people prefer it because it's more of a middle ground, but for almost a decade it was the most popular narrative focused game. Amber is older but no one had that book, Fiasco came out 6 years later but I have the impression that it took ages to spread.

File: 78323168_133495371398906_(...).png (172 KB, 350x533)

172 KB PNG

This are my go to games
Scifi: MoSh
Fanasy: Black Sword Hack
Urban: Liminal Horror
Cyberpunk: Cy_Borg
Any genre I could add to the repertoir? Any alternative you think works better than those?

>>96583999
13th age specifically doesn't have a grid, it's built from the ground up to be theater of the mind.

>>96584652
NTA, but This is really interesting to me because you're approaching it from the exact opposite side of the table that I'm approaching it from. When I talk about only rolling as much as necessary, I mean it from the players side of things. If they come up with good plan, they don't need to roll. If they're in a position where time and danger aren't a factor, they just pick the lock. If they manage to sneak up on the sleeping guard, they can just kill him. It's far more often me saying "oh, yeah, because of your background/homework/current job/social standing, you just get the thing."

There are some situations that I'm not going to roll for because of the current game state, but a lot of times you roll to determine what that game state is.

>>96586085
I was the first anon asking about this, and I always though the OSR spirit of reducing rolls refered to what you say, avoiding needless rolls. But then you have people really happy about how they rolled only a handful of times in a session and at that point you're taking away something that's fun.

>>96586109
>But then you have people really happy about how they rolled only a handful of times in a session
I cannot speak for the people that you've seen saying this, but for me, when I say something along those lines it's because it's the kind of session where everyone is really locked in, it's roleplay heavy, there's a lot of social shit and maybe planning and stuff. I'm also a fan of sessions like that because usually it isn't super prep heavy on my end, if they are following up on leads, catching up on private projects etc. it's a different kind of sessions and it feels cool in a different way, which is why it's spoken of fondly.

>>96586109
>But then you have people really happy about how they rolled only a handful of times in a session and at that point you're taking away something that's fun.
There's been a few games in my life where everyone got so caught up in the game that the GM just stopped asking for rolls. I have to say these were good games, because everyone was having almost too much fun and completely forgot about the whole "system" business.

Every game can't (and shouldn't) be like that, but getting that perfect flow where there's no slowdown and everything is intuitive to the point of almost being reflexive tends to leave you with a sense of "That game was great" rather than "I wish I had rolled more."

>>96584866
Let me start by asking are you a player or a GM?

File: image-11.png (2.52 MB, 1478x986)

2.52 MB PNG

Ran a one shot of Squamous last night. Great fun. Surprisingly no one died even after the Occultist summoned another fucking Gug (who went of to meet the Gug already in the scenario.)

File: Gug.png (920 KB, 1000x966)

920 KB PNG

>>96587598
>Occultist summoned another fucking Gug
Why would anyone want to summon a gug.

File: tumblr_772a90d15eb17d3023(...).jpg (289 KB, 1280x1280)

289 KB JPG

>>96587342
GNm I'd be the one trying to make people play UVG.

>>96587652
To had a gug time

>>96587953
watch the 'man alone' video on character creation

>>96584116
Freebooters on the Frontier is very nusr and pbta.
A majority of the adventures for Trokia and morkborg convert quite easily to pbta if the MC is capable.

File: 7499ea598992f20f0cc318f0b(...).jpg (94 KB, 736x644)

94 KB JPG

>>96587652
Youre gonna love this. The first Gug was summoned by Mike Largo, a farmer who was attempting to save his farm by communing with Yog-Sothoth. He fucked up and ended up dragging in parts of the Dreamland in our reality hence the first Gug.

The party finds a Zoog chewing on a bird. Instead of kicking or shooting the damn thing he whips out his Summon Horror spell to deal with it. We rolled a d10 for the possible minor horrors and by golly he rolled another gug.

Said gug went to go get busy with the other resulting in my favorite line of the session

>"Oh dear God we interrupted them mid coitus!"

Also

>"Would you quit asking people about piercing veils? You're gonna get us run out of town."

>>96584083
Cargo culting on the osr ultralight thought experiments of the mid 2010s. No one told them it wasn't suppose to be a full game.

>>96587598
>>96588163
>the Occultist summoned another fucking Gug
Emphasis on 'fucking' I guess.

File: Ding_Ding_Gug.png (22 KB, 461x517)

22 KB PNG

>>96587953
>>96587652

>>96588162
>A majority of the adventures for Trokia and morkborg convert quite easily to pbta if the MC is capable.
but you're playing them differently, playing a PbtA right should feel different than playing a trad game.

File: KRAAN_has_spoken.png (55 KB, 346x490)

55 KB PNG

>>96588244
Ironically I did also make this.

Tickles me pink to see my scribbles and warms my heart the Expedition threads are still going strong.

Found a scribble from my DCC Dying Earth campaign as well

>>96588482
Nope. Played in the original Dungeon World playtests. We ran U1 and it worked quite well as an exploration and creative problem solving dungeon crawl.

>>96578851
>They keep saying within the next twenty years every twenty years, so not likely within our lifetimes, but still, it's a coming.
If it hasn't happened yet anon, it never will because fusion is not a matter of scale, but of breakthroughs. And with how we've thrown everything we have into solving it, there is no magic breakthrough: It doesn't work.

File: ITER_Tokamak_and_Plant_Sy(...).jpg (3.36 MB, 3000x1468)

3.36 MB JPG

>>96588594
Breakthroughs keep happening, but the problem is just how insanely expensive the research is and the scale of the investments required. There isn't even a single country that could fund the research by themselves, it's requiring international cooperation from just about anyone who can throw money at it.

It's not something you can just make a kickstarter for.

>>96588693
>Breakthroughs keep happening
They literally do not. We haven't had developments in energy production in decades, and in terms of efficient returns in nearly a century.
>But its just expensive!
Research is not a video game metric you can throw money at to increase and does not progress purely by allocation of wealth. Sometimes, something is simply not possible.

>>96588727
didn't china make a new reactor that was cheaper or safer or better in some way? Or was that retarded headlines for people who aren't in the know? like when they say there discover life in a new planet but it's actually that they have an albedo that could maybe mean they have a similar atmosphere and it's been known for decades.

>>96588791
China, The US, the Soviets, everyone and their mother seems to have done so, there's news like that every 5-10 years. But none of it seems to change the viability of Nuclear energy, so it's evidently not cheap enough (Safety has never been a concern in economics)
Besides, a breakthrough has to be more than improvements. An economically viable fusion reactor would be a breakthrough, for example, because it would be a completely new form of energy production that actually works. Or just a nuclear reactor that had the same returns as coal or natural gas.

>>96588727
Bro, we literally just had net-positive fusion reactions for the first time in 2022. They aren't commercially viable, sure, but they're real and there is real progress.

Oh, sorry, I forgot, anon on 4chan knows better about what is physically possible than every single scientist working on them - not just what's viable in the next thirty years, but for all of human history to come for the next several hundred years. My bad.

>96584265
Wow this guy is a moody piece of cancer.

>>96588727
>Sometimes, something is simply not possible.
We're already doing some pretty wild shit thanks to huge advances in superconducting materials. The fun part of tech is that a breakthrough in one area can lead to lots of breakthroughs in others.

if someone wants to add to the pastebin reply w your recommendation

File: 1b88ef6139d4de45536e9adf9(...).gif (483 KB, 500x296)

483 KB GIF

>>96588482
Recently I got Brindlewood Bay, and after the initial shock, kinda seems like it wouldn't be hard to run Mork Borg this way.

Combat is already player-facing, with the GM only rolling for damage. Since you're just exchanging numbers in a somewhat abstract way, you could add as much narrative chrome as you want. The biggest switch would happen on the GM's side and shouldn't even be noticeable to the players - introducing complications on partial successes and failures from a codified list, instead of just making them up on the spot. I mean, people were already doing that, just not always consciously.

Heck, you could even make it more FUDGE-like. You could give bonuses to rolls if a player describes their use of the environment well, or let them spend Omens to "Munchausen" things into existence that they don't have in their inventory or that aren't present in the scene. Ask players to chime in when describing new locations or to share what they fear will happen on a failed roll, incorporating their input at your discretion.

The only unsolvable difference seems to be scale. Mork Borg's actions are granular and specific, while PbtA's mechanics can zoom in or out to fit any scope.

>>96588567
Nice. I don't even remember where I got it from. I have a likely implanted memory of there being a gif if it dinging the bell.

>>96589296
>The only unsolvable difference seems to be scale. Mork Borg's actions are granular and specific, while PbtA's mechanics can zoom in or out to fit any scope.
That's always at the MC's discretion so shouldn't be an issue. There's portable moves about returning to town or hexcrawling in a few of them, Perilous Wilds is a bit I've been considering how to use to run UVG with 1st ed apocalypse world or DW and a few of the more eccentric playbooks.

>>96589296
>The only unsolvable difference seems to be scale. Mork Borg's actions are granular and specific, while PbtA's mechanics can zoom in or out to fit any scope.
That's the big difference for me
Playing a PbtA at the granularity of a trad game is incredibly boring, it's not engaging, but it's not supposed to be played that way. Most rolls define whole scenes and it's supposed to go beyond player input into player creation.

The other aspects are fine, I use them in NSR games, it's more of a style thing than mechanical. I recall some 5e dude like Colville recommending you do that, at this point it's part of modern play.

>>96588836
The economic factors effecting nuclear power aren't a question of efficiency, it's because of the pants-on-head retarded way we run everything in the states.