Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > The Fantasy Trip

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-03-2018, 10:32 PM   #61
Andrew Hackard
Munchkin Line Editor
 
Andrew Hackard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Austin, TX
Default Re: The Fantasy Trip

Howdy, TFT fans! I just moved eight posts from the DI discussion thread over here because they were pretty crunchy and more suited to this forum than that one. I didn't want folks being confused when a new subdiscussion materialized out of nowhere!
__________________
Andrew Hackard, Munchkin Line Editor
If you have a question that isn't getting answered, we have a thread for that.

Let people like what they like. Don't be a gamer hater.

#PlayMunchkin on social media: Twitter || Facebook || Instagram || YouTube
Follow us on Kickstarter: Steve Jackson Games and Warehouse 23
Andrew Hackard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2018, 06:21 AM   #62
pyratejohn
 
pyratejohn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Columbia, Maryland
Default Re: December 26, 2017: The Fantasy Trip Returns Home

Quote:
Originally Posted by JLV View Post
Actually, that's kind of what I was thinking of if a player opted to "DEFEND" instead of attack -- his defense adds to the attacker's dice roll (maybe +2?) -- so if the attacker has an AdjDX of 12, he now needs to roll a "10" or less to make it. Something simple, but that increases the defender's chance of survival long enough for his friend to move up and attack the enemy too...
I have a house rule I call "Spirited Defense." The defender is not allowed to do a shift, and must have done a "Defend" on its previous turn. This increases the attacker's difficulty to from 4d to 5d.
__________________
Happily RPGing since 1976.
My Gaming and Reenacting Site (under construction)
pyratejohn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2018, 12:22 PM   #63
Carnifex
 
Carnifex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Harker Heights Texas
Default Re: The Fantasy Trip

I am not convinced adding parry or similar rule would add much to the game. I think it would serve mostly to slow things down. Having said that, I would not mind seeing it as an optional rule in the appendix or perhaps a nice write up in the Pyramid.
Carnifex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2018, 12:58 PM   #64
JLV
 
JLV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Arizona
Default Re: The Fantasy Trip

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carnifex View Post
I am not convinced adding parry or similar rule would add much to the game. I think it would serve mostly to slow things down. Having said that, I would not mind seeing it as an optional rule in the appendix or perhaps a nice write up in the Pyramid.
It's entirely possible you are right, but I know a lot of people have added it in over the years (oddly enough, I'm not one of them; but I definitely see the philosophical justification for doing so). I don't think it would "slow things down" (the player simply states "I defend" instead of rolling to attack, and the attacker takes some kind of adjustment to his "to hit" roll); so I can't see quite why you think it would, but I'm always willing to listen to the other side of the debate, so if you could explain it to me, I'd be very appreciative! (NOT being sarcastic here -- I am genuinely interested in your thoughts on this!)

Regardless, this seems "controversial" enough so that maybe a Pyramid write-up would be the way to go...

Last edited by JLV; 01-04-2018 at 01:03 PM.
JLV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2018, 01:35 PM   #65
Carnifex
 
Carnifex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Harker Heights Texas
Default Re: The Fantasy Trip

Quote:
Originally Posted by JLV View Post
so I can't see quite why you think it would, but I'm always willing to listen to the other side of the debate, so if you could explain it to me, I'd be very appreciative! (NOT being sarcastic here -- I am genuinely interested in your thoughts on this!)
would be the way to go...
I am not really objecting to adding a defense action, I am just not convinced that it would add to the enjoyment of the game. Anything that makes a character harder to hit is by definition going to slow the game down and might add a level of frustration. I believe defense has already been abstracted nicely into Strength (Hit Points) and Armor (Damage Resistance).

My main concern is, I don't want TFT to become GURPS Mini. Update the presentation, fix the things that really need fixing, but otherwise, I'd prefer it be left as close to the original rules as possible.

Yes, I freely admit I am a Grognard.
Carnifex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2018, 01:47 PM   #66
JLV
 
JLV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Arizona
Default Re: The Fantasy Trip

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carnifex View Post
I am not really objecting to adding a defense action, I am just not convinced that it would add to the enjoyment of the game. Anything that makes a character harder to hit is by definition going to slow the game down and might add a level of frustration. I believe defense has already been abstracted nicely into Strength (Hit Points) and Armor (Damage Resistance).

My main concern is, I don't want TFT to become GURPS Mini. Update the presentation, fix the things that really need fixing, but otherwise, I'd prefer it be left as close to the original rules as possible.
Okay, thanks. I totally get that. And I could definitely live with it that way (like I said, I've never introduced a "parry" action in my games, but I understand the position of those who want to). Whatever Steve goes with on this one is just fine by me.

And I agree; I want TFT to be TFT. If I want to play GURPS, it's all right there on my shelves! (But I usually play TFT in preference to GURPS as it is right now, which tells you where I'll come down on this issue when the chips are down.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carnifex View Post
Yes, I freely admit I am a Grognard.
You and me both! Been playing since 1977 in High School!
JLV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2018, 02:00 PM   #67
Carnifex
 
Carnifex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Harker Heights Texas
Default Re: The Fantasy Trip

As a side note to this discussion, I was just reading the Two Weapons talent and it allows for a parry action that acts as a shield and absorbs 2 points of damage.
Carnifex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2018, 02:06 PM   #68
JLV
 
JLV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Arizona
Default Re: The Fantasy Trip

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carnifex View Post
As a side note to this discussion, I was just reading the Two Weapons talent and it allows for a parry action that acts as a shield and absorbs 2 points of damage.
I think the original impetus for this entire discussion years and years ago is the contention that you don't have to be adept with two weapons in order to parry someone -- that a fundamental element in any sword style of fighting is defending yourself; it's one of the very first things you're taught in fencing class, for example. Therefore, why doesn't EVERYONE get the opportunity to parry?

Again, not saying whether it's a good idea in game terms or not, but simply pointing out the logic of the original argument...

You know, this also raises the question of armor and it's use. According to the folks I know in the SCA, armor use does NOT simply consist of wearing it (with the possible exception of cloth), but also involves some skill in USING it in a fight -- in fact, it changes an individual's fighting style considerably, or so I'm told (I have no personal experience in this area). Which raised the question in my mind if there should also be an ARMOR talent -- which allows the user to make the best use of his armor in a fight; perhaps people without the talent would stop one less hit, or suffer one more point of negative DX adjustment...and CLOTH armor would be unaffected by this talent. Anyone have any information or thoughts on this?

Last edited by JLV; 01-04-2018 at 02:11 PM.
JLV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2018, 02:14 PM   #69
Carnifex
 
Carnifex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Harker Heights Texas
Default Re: The Fantasy Trip

Quote:
Originally Posted by JLV View Post
I think the original impetus for this entire discussion years and years ago is the contention that you don't have to be adept with two weapons in order to parry someone -- that a fundamental element in any sword style of fighting is defending yourself; it's one of the very first things you're taught in fencing class, for example. Therefore, why doesn't EVERYONE get the opportunity to parry?

Again, not saying whether it's a good idea in game terms or not, but simply pointing out the logic of the original argument...
As I said, I think this has been nicely abstracted in the rules already. Perhaps a good approach is, rather than adding a new rule, expand the rule that is already there.
Carnifex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2018, 02:22 PM   #70
JLV
 
JLV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Arizona
Default Re: The Fantasy Trip

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carnifex View Post
As I said, I think this has been nicely abstracted in the rules already. Perhaps a good approach is, rather than adding a new rule, expand the rule that is already there.
Which, I think, was the major counter-argument. It went, as I recall, something along the lines of: "The TWO WEAPONS talent means that you are considerably MORE adept at fighting with your chosen weapon than the "casual" swordsman or axeman is; which is why, when defending yourself with TWO weapons you get a significant bonus to your defense; the normal person's ability to parry is taken into account in the basic combat rules." And in that case, even adding a "parry" capability to the normal weapons talent (SWORD or CLUB/AXE) would be overkill.

Which is primarily the reason I never took the step of adding the rule one way or another -- it put a heavier burden on the player (and remember, I most commonly introduce completely new players to RPGing with TFT), without materially adding anything to the outcome... "Handwavium" is your friend with totally new players...

To my mind, the most valid issue in this whole discussion is what happens when a player decides to go completely on the defensive -- that is, purely protecting himself and not taking the chances inherent in launching any kind of attack? THAT is the only circumstance in which I can see a "DEFEND" option as having any real validity -- and it makes perfect sense in that case. Someone roleplaying a cowardly back-stabbing thief, for example, might clearly choose to opt for that kind of fighting style so that the "heroes" in the party can do the killing for him and at little or no risk to him. Of course, he loses out on a lot of combat experience points, but he probably gets some extra XP for good role-playing...

Last edited by JLV; 01-04-2018 at 02:30 PM.
JLV is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
in the labyrinth, melee, roleplaying, the fantasy trip, wizard

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:52 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.