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 03-17-2018, 03:27 AM   #31
Jim Kane
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Default Re: The Immovable Foundation-Stone on which TFT Characters are Built

Quote:
Originally Posted by JLV View Post
Erm...just for the record, it's "JLV"... ;-)
Right, sorry there JLV,

miJ
Jim Kane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2018, 07:02 AM   #32
tbeard1999
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Tyler, Texas
Default Re: The Immovable Foundation-Stone on which TFT Characters are Built

Quote:
Originally Posted by JLV View Post
Erm...just for the record, it's "JLV"... ;-)
Uh, .38, .39, whatever it took.

(Classical Reference).
tbeard1999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2018, 07:47 AM   #33
Jim Kane
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Default Re: The Immovable Foundation-Stone on which TFT Characters are Built

Quote:
Originally Posted by tbeard1999 View Post
Uh, .38, .39, whatever it took.

(Classical Reference).
Hey now! I resemble that comment! LOL!
Jim Kane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2018, 12:59 PM   #34
tbeard1999
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Tyler, Texas
Default Re: The Immovable Foundation-Stone on which TFT Characters are Built

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Kane View Post
Speaking of Law School, did you ever notice how "lawerly" TFT reads compares to other rules-sets?
If you mean that the rules were written pretty concisely and specifically (by 1981 RPG standards) I agree. However, I'd give the prize for legalistic writing to SPI's Dragonquest.
tbeard1999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2018, 05:08 PM   #35
Jim Kane
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Default Re: The Immovable Foundation-Stone on which TFT Characters are Built

Quote:
Originally Posted by tbeard1999 View Post
If you mean that the rules were written pretty concisely and specifically (by 1981 RPG standards) I agree. However, I'd give the prize for legalistic writing to SPI's Dragonquest.
Yes, concise and specific. That is exactly how I mean it. There is a particular mind-set with which the concepts of law are written in an attempt to avoid ambiguity as much as possible, while addressing consequence as a residual effect of action and inaction accounted for. I think that, in addition to SJ's writing-style, is a large part of why the rules-set is a pleasure to read for the mind AND the mind's-eye.

Last edited by Jim Kane; 03-18-2018 at 01:47 PM.
Jim Kane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2018, 12:22 AM   #36
JLV
 
JLV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Far northern California
Default Re: The Immovable Foundation-Stone on which TFT Characters are Built

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Kane View Post
Right, sorry there JLV,

miJ
I see what you did there! ;-)
JLV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2018, 12:28 AM   #37
JLV
 
JLV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Far northern California
Default Re: The Immovable Foundation-Stone on which TFT Characters are Built

Quote:
Originally Posted by tbeard1999 View Post
If you mean that the rules were written pretty concisely and specifically (by 1981 RPG standards) I agree. However, I'd give the prize for legalistic writing to SPI's Dragonquest.
Yes, but they were a wargame company, and used a very rigid standard rules set (I remember them talking about having the rules basically loaded on a computer, and you could just select what kind of Zone of Control (for example) you wanted (from "rigid" to almost none) and the rule would automatically be downloaded onto the page...in fact, if you ever saw Strategy I, they basically did it that way in that game). Their system was a probable over-reaction to the sort of infamous rules writing that included such gems as "Supply -- pick any supply rule," that appeared in one wargame back in the day...

They tended to be thorough and legalistic in their writing because of all the "rules lawyers" out there who contributed to things like the "warring clubs" era back in the early 60's -- a history of which Simonsen and Dunnigan were all too well aware. Plus, it tended to cut down the amount of time the staff spent answering rules questions mailed in by all of us gamers.

They were actually experimenting with more effective rules writing in places like Ares and S&T at just about the time they went tango uniform thanks to Jim Dunnigan's poor business skills.
JLV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2018, 01:02 AM   #38
Jim Kane
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Default Re: The Immovable Foundation-Stone on which TFT Characters are Built

Quote:
Originally Posted by JLV View Post
Yes, but they were a wargame company, and used a very rigid standard rules set (I remember them talking about having the rules basically loaded on a computer, and you could just select what kind of Zone of Control (for example) you wanted (from "rigid" to almost none) and the rule would automatically be downloaded onto the page...in fact, if you ever saw Strategy I, they basically did it that way in that game). Their system was a probable over-reaction to the sort of infamous rules writing that included such gems as "Supply -- pick any supply rule," that appeared in one wargame back in the day...

They tended to be thorough and legalistic in their writing because of all the "rules lawyers" out there who contributed to things like the "warring clubs" era back in the early 60's -- a history of which Simonsen and Dunnigan were all too well aware. Plus, it tended to cut down the amount of time the staff spent answering rules questions mailed in by all of us gamers.

They were actually experimenting with more effective rules writing in places like Ares and S&T at just about the time they went tango uniform thanks to Jim Dunnigan's poor business skills.
Well see, you are hitting it right on the head. There is a HUGE difference between rules written in LEAGALESE, and what SJ does; which is informing the rules with a style that has a Lawerly-logic imbued into it for clarity, specificity, and contingency accounted for in it's content and presentation.
Jim Kane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2018, 11:13 AM   #39
vitruvian
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Default Re: The Immovable Foundation-Stone on which TFT Characters are Built

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Kane View Post
Actually, the point-and-purpose of the dialog is to determine the philosophy behind the Desinger's Premise - expressed algebraically - from a perspective of game-design; so that postulated modifications to the rules-set can be evaluated to determine if they are in-concert with that same philosophy; all in an effort to preserve consistency of form, function, flow, fun, and feel.

Obviously one cannot do that, unless and until, that philosophical design question is answered.

In short, it's not a rules discussion - as your answer attempts to relate it with - but rather, it's a discussion of game-design premises and philosophies; and that might explain why you failed to understand why there is the existence of "so much weight" on the algebraic formula in question and under examination.

I hope I was able to make things clearer for you.

PS - Your Member Name is quite apropos to the topic we are "dissecting", eh? Also, consider this: Many times a man and woman get into a car, which "never really had any purpose other than" to take them to the drive-in movies,... BUT they come back with a baby, nonetheless. Consequence is often NOT the result of original intent, BUT it must must be dealt with AND defined - for the simple fact the "IT" exists.
Okay, but even in terms of the starting philosophy, since ITL is part of TFT and ITL includes experience, attribute increases, and races with a different starting sum of attributes, I would say that your algebraic formulae are just one special case within a plethora of available options, and it's not actually the case that ST + DX always equals 24 or ST + DX + IQ always equals 32. Therefore, they are neither immovable nor the foundation stone of TFT, but simply a means to balance the game mechanical effects defined for ST, DX, and eventually IQ.

And my point about your multiple ways of denoting them being algebraically equivalent still stands, too... ;-)
vitruvian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2018, 11:14 AM   #40
vitruvian
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Default Re: The Immovable Foundation-Stone on which TFT Characters are Built

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Kane View Post
Okay, so if you want to considering adding a 4th attribute, first understand how the rules are expressed as the current 3 attributes of ST, DX, IQ = 32. I think most you might want to now how an engine works before they start modifying it, yes?

Well the premise is the Algebraic Engine which drives the TFT character creation. So we need to discover which engine you are going to modify.

Mathematically 3Attributes@32 could be expressed in three ways, it depends on if you think Wizard is an expansion to the Melee rules, or if Wizard restated Melee/Wizard, or if it was the Melee premise which was expanded, jsut as though IQ was there all along. Here how they look for what they really are:


The letters being variable values:

TFT as Melee Premise only [(a+b)=(b+a)] = 24

Now, here comes the addition of the IQ Attribute with Wizard/IQ

TFT as Melee Premise/Wizard expanding {[(a+b)+c]=[c+(b+a)]}=32 ?

or, is it,

TFT as Wizard Restates the WHOLE Premise [(a+b+c)=(c+b+a)]=32 ?

or, is it, {[(a)+(b)+(c)]=[(c)+(b)+(a)]}=32; like 3 independent reels on a slot machine that gives you a total pay-out?

So before you state a premise for 4 Attributes, you should know the which premise of 3 attributes you understand first; logical?

If NO, then just do whatever you want and simply slap that 4th Att on your character anywhere you like, and don't even worry about how it changes the math and the game; being the foundation of the design. Just have at it and have fun.

If YES, the first step you would need to do is to decide which of the three expressions of Melee/Wizard states how YOU understand the 3 ATT TFT premise when taken from a ST DX @24 premise and into a ST DX IQ @32 premise.

We will take it from there when you have decided if Melee is the base with IQ added on top to expand to 3 Atts, or, is it now a whole new base including both together.

Jim
ITL is part of TFT as well, so it's not always 24 or 32.
vitruvian is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 08:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.