The Fantasy Trip

[theRedEft]

Fascinating to read this discussion. I am not the TFT expert I was in middle school, but I will dare suggest something anyway.

On differentiating high-points characters from one another: maybe with the inclusion of fST a cap could be set on the ST of wizards but not on fST, so magic-related endurance can keep increasing with experience without Merlin and Gandalf being able to beat Conan at arm wrestling.

Not sure whether non-wizards would need a corresponding disadvantage to balance that.

[larsdangly]

Originally Posted by Steve Jackson

I'm in agreement with the observation that the needs of basic MELEE/WIZARD are different from the needs of a campaign game.

Perhaps, but I think something as fundamental as the mechanics for damage, injury, recovery and death should be consistent across all components of a line of related games. That is, Melee/Wizard might present a subset of such rules in the interests of simplicity, but it would muddy the waters if it presented rules that were inconsistent with whatever ends up in ITL (or its equivalent).

[Chris Goodwin]

Originally Posted by larsdangly

Perhaps, but I think something as fundamental as the mechanics for damage, injury, recovery and death should be consistent across all components of a line of related games. That is, Melee/Wizard might present a subset of such rules in the interests of simplicity, but it would muddy the waters if it presented rules that were inconsistent with whatever ends up in ITL (or its equivalent).

That's IMO one of the places the rules should vary between an arena battle game and a roleplaying campaign. Like I said above, these are two different games that share a system; both of them are perfectly valid, but even within a discussion thread we need to make sure of which one we're assuming and which one we're discussing.

Specifically, injury/death/recovery is one of the areas where the two games can differ because they have different needs. IMO, that's okay, but that also should be spelled out in the rules.

My suggestion is that in a roleplaying campaign, the GM decides, but the default would be that 0 ST = dying and potentially savable. It should also be set and remain the same for a campaign, in the event GMs trade off. In a one-off battle, or even a campaign of arena battles, with heavy PvP fighting, the group as a whole should decide, but the default for these is that 0 ST = dead. We should also remember that we're adults; if someone feels strongly about a character, or someone brings a roleplaying character into a PvP campaign without realizing it, go easy on them; keep it fun for everyone.

The rule of thumb should be: in a group with no GM, everyone needs to be playing with the same rules and same set of assumptions; in a group with a GM, the GM sets the assumptions and should make sure everyone knows them.

[tbeard1999]

Originally Posted by Rick_Smith

Hi JLV, everyone.

One thing I've done is add "Weapons of Vitiation", which when they wound you CURSE your wound. Any wound done by such a weapon is likely to get infected and NO magical healing of any type will work on the wound. Including healing potions.

Weapons of Vitiation are fairly common, and people who use them are much hated. I have a few other things (e.g. manticores and basilisks) that make magically un-healable wounds. Cursed wounds are dramatic.

JLV, rather than making a general limit on every wound which requires paperwork, just make the most bad-ass wounds resistant. GM's who hate healing magic or healing potions can remove them from the game, or make cursed wounds more common, or both. But I know from experience, that if TFT has NO healing magic, inexperienced GM's will make spells where for 1 fST a wizard can heal 1d+2 points of damage.

I would rather TFT has well balanced, well considered, healing spells than no healing spells.

Warm regards, Rick.

Hey Rick. I imported Broo into my campaign from Runequest. I highly recommend it. PCs HATE fighting Broo.

[BobP]

Originally Posted by JLV

Dare I hope for a "Designer's Edition" of the rules (like DE Ogre)?

This is exactly what I hope: An all-in-one box set, as SJ originally envisioned it. Incorporate all the Designer's Errata. Maybe swing in some of the cool Talents and Handicaps published in FG/SG... clarify some of the more troublesome rules (looking at you, pole weapons)... give it a rocking layout...

... and call it a day.

Bob Portnell
Sparks, NV
First TFT Game: 1 Apr 1981 (no foolin')

[DouglasCole]

Is there a 1-4 page summary of the basic TFT rules mechanics? I've got more than a passing familiarity with GURPS and of course D&D, but TFT passed me by at the time.

[JLV]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

Is there a 1-4 page summary of the basic TFT rules mechanics? I've got more than a passing familiarity with GURPS and of course D&D, but TFT passed me by at the time.

Well, there's a suggestion for Steve -- "quick-start rules!"

Though arguably, Melee and Wizard WERE quick-start rules...

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by JLV

Well, there's a suggestion for Steve -- "quick-start rules!"

Though arguably, Melee and Wizard WERE quick-start rules...

I'm mostly looking for a basic understanding of the core mechanics.

For GURPS, as an example, there are several basics. for just combat:

1. Roll 3d6 under an adjusted target number (a skill check), there may be another 3d6 roll under a different adjustment for defense, followed by an effect roll based on Nd6, bigger is more ouchie. (Typical Combat Process)

2. Roll 3d6 under your skill, so does your foe, highest margin wins (Quick Contest), or binary one must succeed the other must fail (Regular Contest).

3. Out of combat, there are also reaction rolls, which are very nearly a "damage roll for emotions," in that it's a roll where higher is stronger effect (like damage) and is one of the few "roll high" mechanics based on 3d6


DnD is basically "roll 1d20 plus a bonus vs a target number" for 5e and the recent editions, and effect rolls are "roll polyhedral dice" in many cases.

I'm wondering how the basic combat mechanics work with TFT.

[JLV]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

I'm mostly looking for a basic understanding of the core mechanics.

For GURPS, as an example, there are several basics. for just combat:

1. Roll 3d6 under an adjusted target number (a skill check), there may be another 3d6 roll under a different adjustment for defense, followed by an effect roll based on Nd6, bigger is more ouchie. (Typical Combat Process)

2. Roll 3d6 under your skill, so does your foe, highest margin wins (Quick Contest), or binary one must succeed the other must fail (Regular Contest).

3. Out of combat, there are also reaction rolls, which are very nearly a "damage roll for emotions," in that it's a roll where higher is stronger effect (like damage) and is one of the few "roll high" mechanics based on 3d6


DnD is basically "roll 1d20 plus a bonus vs a target number" for 5e and the recent editions, and effect rolls are "roll polyhedral dice" in many cases.

I'm wondering how the basic combat mechanics work with TFT.

Actually, your description of the mechanics in GURPS is perfectly suitable for TFT. Fundamentally, if you can play GURPS, you already know how to play TFT. The only differences really are that TFT is much less crunchy, doesn't use "advantages/disadvantages," doesn't differentiate damage types (cutting, bashing, or whatever), and when you build a character you are given some distribution -- depending on character race -- of 24 points (give or take a few) as minimums in the three Attributes -- ST, DX, IQ -- plus 8 extra attribute points to distribute as you see fit among the three attributes.

"HT" is solely a GURPS thing at this time -- and was a logical extension of TFT when it was added back in the day; there was a LOT of discussion about adding a "HT" or "CN" attribute to TFT over among the TFT players because of the argument that ST is separate from the ability to take damage.

In 1977-1980, Melee, Wizard, and then the TFT group of rules were actually very innovative and cutting edge -- no one had ever done that before (let players decide where they were weak or strong), plus there were no classes, and skills (or "talents" as they are called in TFT) allowed you to tailor your character in any way you wanted; again a vast separation from the D&D-ish "classes" paradigm that was exclusively used back then! Nowadays, it's old hat, of course...a LOT of games do it that way. But TFT was the first!

GURPS, while using a lot of new mechanics compared to TFT is pretty clearly related to TFT -- if not its son or grandson, at least a nephew!

(Edited to add: Actually, arguably, if you only were allowed to make one change to TFT that would profoundly affect almost every issue that's been brought up with TFT's rules in this forum, adding the GURPS "HT" attribute would do it (and would probably be my choice). It would enormously slow Attribute Bloat, it would resolve all the fST issues and clearly allow you to differentiate damage from ST related issues, it would smooth play for things like poisons and diseases, affect saving rolls for things like drowning or suffocating, enable a clear-cut encumbrance rule that doesn't get confusing due to wounds; in short it would fundamentally change the system, with only a single additional rule. Of course, it might create new issues, but that's another thread... ;-) )

[David L Pulver]

Originally Posted by Steve Jackson

I wonder if perhaps the "roll more dice for more difficulty" mechanic should be done away with entirely, in favor of stat penalties.

When you roll 4 dice the result is very often going to be within a few points of 14.

When you roll 5d, the significant majority of results will be from 16 to 19. The bell curve gets way steeper and most uncertainty is lost. Larger numbers of dice are more predictable yet.

Stat penalties, on the other hand, keep the familiar 3d bell curve the same and move its center point. Much less predictable.

I think this would be a very good rules change. The 4d or 5d modifiers seemed to steep, and also required remembering a different set of automatic success/failure points. A simple -N to DX or IQ to do something difficult doesn't create that huge jump of 3-4 points in probability.

It should also encourage keeping stats at reasonable levels, rather than bloating to superhuman levels.