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 03-07-2018, 07:29 PM   #671
Jim Kane
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Default Re: The Fantasy Trip

Quote:
Originally Posted by JLV View Post

P.S. What's your point with that little sally?
In order to effectively answer your latest question of me:

One would need to go back and review the content of a topically unrelated post I authored on this same thread - being: post 653 - wherein I referenced Aleister Crowley, the English self-styled Ceremonial Magician (1875-1947), who co-oped the number: 666, from The Book of Revelations:13:18 - on the topic of: Accidentally Summoning a Real Demon in TFT.

666, coincidentally, also being the EXACT number of your unexpected post and question to me.

Additionally, the (in)famous valediction Crowley employed when closing a correspondence was: "Polemically Sent". I found the coincidence and timing of all these things, as I wrote: "Fascinating". When asking you in reply, if you had noticed that your post was numbered as: 666, and I included the aside and reference to: "Polemically-Sent", apparently this was interpreted as a Non-Sequitur.

I trust the above has made everything clear for you.

However, I really must close now and secure the barn, as it seems some friendly-prankster has been diligently - though unsuccessfully - attempting to get my goat.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JLV View Post
P.S. What's your point with that little sally?
PS - Don't call me: "Little Sally".


:-)
Jim Kane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2018, 08:04 PM   #672
Rick_Smith
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Coquitlam B.C.
Default The space between the quick and the dead.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bayarea View Post
Well then basically then -7 means death for a 12 ST character unless he rolls an automatic success roll, that seems a little harsh.
Hi Bayarea, everyone.
In my rules which I outlined before, it is not too hard to save someone at -3 to -4 ST. Beyond that, it gets very difficult.

So in my game, at ST 1 or 0 you risk unconsciousness, From -1 to -4 you risk unconsciousness and will die if you are not treated soon. Much beyond that you will likely die.

So instead of a 1 ST wide gap where you are incapacitated but not dead, there is about a 5 or 6 point gap. This feels about right to me. If you are quite strong, that gap is a bit wider.

GURPS has a VERY wide gap where people can still be living. (I believe that a 10 HT figure must reach -50 to be sure of killing them.) I think that is far too forgiving.

Warm regards, Rick.

Last edited by Rick_Smith; 03-07-2018 at 08:34 PM. Reason: spelling mistake.
Rick_Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2018, 01:54 AM   #673
Skarg
 
Join Date: May 2015
Default Re: The space between the quick and the dead.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick_Smith View Post
GURPS has a VERY wide gap where people can still be living. (I believe that a 10 HT figure must reach -50 to be sure of killing them.) I think that is far too forgiving.
Well, it depends on what weapons and rules you use. There are several things that multiply damage (e.g. hits to the brain or vital organs), and some of us apply the bleeding rules per injury...

I think it's actually a clever way around the fallacy that wounds simply add up to a point where someone dies. Making someone certainly dead immediately by hitting them with many wounds that don't hit anyplace vital, probably should take much more than it takes to just incapacitate someone.

My only biggish gripe is how big the role of HT is in determining how well someone responds to injury (easily adjusted by house rule, of course).

Not that I'm saying TFT ought to go that way, but I think the 1-point margin between unconsciousness and death, while traditional, is also pretty extreme.
Skarg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2018, 11:46 AM   #674
tbone
 
tbone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Default Re: The Fantasy Trip

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Kane View Post
So I ask you once again, "Now that your enemies are fallen and unconscious, but not DEAD-DEAD, what does your party do NOW?"
I have to say, I don't see any problem with giving TFT characters a generous (or at least any) "out of the fight but still alive" zone. It doesn't matter a whit for the original incarnation of Melee as one-shot gladiator-type fights, true but for a continuing campaign, players are sure going to want more than "Oops, zero HP - make a new character!".

And if that means a by-the-rules GM feels the need to give monsters the same benefit, well, I don't see it mattering often (if ever). A defeated monster is actually still alive? Big deal; by the time it heals up, the heroes are 500 leagues and a half dozen play sessions away.

Actually, I think there's a solution that should make everyone happy. If someone hasn't mentioned this already: In classic TFT style, keep the death thing pretty strict. Set a level of negative HP (equal to -ST?) that means "tough luck, you're dead". Maybe set a very small range of negative HP that means "you're out of the fight but you'll survive". But - here's the key - let the range between those two mean "you're still alive but definitely dying."

That should work the way we want for both PCs and monsters. PCs in that zone (and they may visit there a lot) are dying, but that's OK as long as there's a surviving comrade to provide potions, healing magic, or just bandaging after the fight, the downed PC will (probably) survive. That's good for campaign play.

Dying monsters, meanwhile, almost certainty won't survive. Lone monsters have no comrades to provide aid. Bestial/dumb monsters may have comrades, but don't have healing spells or skills. No need to worry about whether the PCs truly finished off the beasts. Just let 'em bleed out and die.

The only exceptions will be monsters with surviving comrades who may be able to effect a rescue. And that could lead to dilemmas: "I don't care how many arrows we stuck into the Orc chieftain; we gotta go back and make sure he's dead!" "No! There's no time! More Orcs are pounding down the doors!" Yeah, that can be a tough call for the players. Which, I think, is exactly the sort of thing we're looking for in the game!
__________________
T. Bone
GURPS stuff and more at the Games Diner:
http://www.gamesdiner.com
Twitter: @Gamesdiner
(Latest goods on the site: Dungeon Fantasy RPG Character: Leonidas of Nemea, Cat-Folk Barbarian. Lion-folk, actually. Just don't make cat jokes. Or make fun of his hair.)
tbone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2018, 11:55 AM   #675
JLV
 
JLV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Far northern California
Default Re: The Fantasy Trip

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Kane View Post
In order to effectively answer your latest question of me:
My second question, you mean?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Kane View Post
One would need to go back and review the content of a topically unrelated post I authored on this same thread - being: post 653 - wherein I referenced Aleister Crowley, the English self-styled Ceremonial Magician (1875-1947), who co-oped the number: 666, from The Book of Revelations:13:18 - on the topic of: Accidentally Summoning a Real Demon in TFT.

666, coincidentally, also being the EXACT number of your unexpected post and question to me.
Actually, I lack the time to go back and search out and study the various comments you or anyone else posts to these threads in order to follow some unapparent linkage between them. My experience here has been that you either need to reference your earlier post, or to explain your reference in your current post in order to avoid misunderstandings.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Kane View Post
Additionally, the (in)famous valediction Crowley employed when closing a correspondence was: "Polemically Sent". I found the coincidence and timing of all these things, as I wrote: "Fascinating". When asking you in reply, if you had noticed that your post was numbered as: 666, and I included the aside and reference to: "Polemically-Sent", apparently this was interpreted as a Non-Sequitur.
Ah. There's part of the problem. "Polemically" means "hostile" (look it up), which led me to believe that you were accusing me of being hostile by simply asking ONE question. I still suspect you were, given the sarcasm and snark of your response, but your word choice based on some obscure thing Crowley wrote definitely contributed to the nature of my response. If I overreacted to yet another unjustified seeming accusation, I apologize.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Kane View Post
I trust the above has made everything clear for you.
Hardly. You failed to respond the vast bulk of my reply, so agreeing that this "made everything clear" would clearly be wrong. However it does clarify your obscure "P.S.", so there's that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Kane View Post
However, I really must close now and secure the barn, as it seems some friendly-prankster has been diligently - though unsuccessfully - attempting to get my goat.
There you go again, accusing me of something I never desired or tried to do. It would be nice if you stopped attributing motives to me that simply aren't true.
JLV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2018, 05:50 PM   #676
Bayarea
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Default Re: The Fantasy Trip

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Kane View Post
You make a good proposition and very good supporting argument.

Food-for-Thought:

As one who has LONG play-tested this "unconscious at 0, dead when ST goes fully negative" adapted for TFT - having lifted it from 1st. Ed. Hero System; Peterson/MacDonald, 1981 - there is a counter-balance effect on the TFT game; which is not present in the game-system that rule was specifically designed for.

Consider this:

At the end of a battle In The Labyrinth, what does your party do NOW?

Does the party now spike or barricade the doors and begin hacking to pieces all the fallen enemies you have just bested?

After all, they are not "fully dead" yet, so you might want to begin head-chopping after the battle as S.O.P. from now on; which is great for Barbarians, BUT what if someone or you play one of the Chivalrous Hero types?

Same thing goes for "Just slit their throats,.. nice as quick!"

Okay, but did your Leader send Sir Goody-2-Shoes outside to "watch the tunnel" while this operation was in progress? Is he out there alone, all by himself?

Oh, you have TWO Sir-Goody-2-Shoes in your party to protect each other out in the tunnel? Well, that means double-duty for the 2 "fixers" left in your party, and the whole operation just ate up some extra turns due to being short-handed,... and what if some THING uninvited shows up in the murder-room while your party is split?

Uh oh.

You might simply set their bodies ablaze with some Molotail Oil; but that's going to make a lot of smoke and smell - never a good thing to have when sneaking around in the underground with few natural air-channels to the surface-world above. And don't forget to mark-off those used Molotails on your Character Sheets; that way they won't be there when you need them most.

Hmm,...

"Leave 'em for the Slimes!" You say? Okay, but what if their buddies and THEIR Physicker finds these dying guys before the slimes do, and then, starts pumping them full of Healing Potions?

That labyrinth tunnel-complex is going to become VERY FULL of a very hostile and ever-growing mob of healed enemies - on the search for YOU.

No, you HAVE to kill them, FULLY.

Also, if your GM is NOT the type who readily announces: "Okay, the Ogre's ST was 20, and now he is at ST minus 13.": How would you know when it is safe to leave heavily wounded enemies behind for "dead" (which is RARELY a good idea in a confined combat environment).

How would you know if those enemies are dead, or "just dying"?

Again, you HAVE to kill them - FULLY.

Return to paragraph #2: "What does your party do NOW?"

I am sure you see the potential dilemma in changing this rule. It works great provided your GM is only giving it to YOUR SIDE, and does not play the labyrinth as a living, reactive entity onto itself, and treats the enemies as puppets, not NPC's.

Either way, the dynamic change to the GAME - beyond the direct benefit to a player-character - means a party would now have to take TIME, and make NOISE, and expend RESOURCES to fully slaughter all enemies who did not escape.

Sure, you say again, you can just slit ALL their swarthy throats, but that still takes extra time by using an extra turn(s),... and if your GM is a good one, he is marking-off EVERY turn, and advancing the Labyrinth and it's occupants one turn closer to you as they react to the noise from your underground battle.

Need to finish-off 4 fallen enemies, AND heal your party?

Well, that's a lot of TIME, and before you know it,.. DING, DONG, TROLLS AT THE DOOR, and they aren't delivering from Domino's!

Time constriction plays a large role in TFT:ITL. Time is a RESOURCE, which works AGAINST a party in the labyrinth; much like in a Casino, the more you hang-around, the faster the Law-of-Large-Numbers and the Diminishing Returns of a Negative-Expectation game will eat you up!

Also, doing things like chopping up your foes not only makes extra NOISE, but extends the DURATION of noise when in the labyrinth, which is like ringing a dinner-bell for the Trolls.

TIME, NOISE, RESOURCES, YOUR ST, YOUR ENEMIES ST, FOOD, WATER, AIR - it's all part of a bigger system; change one of those and you may imbalance the game in way not foreseen when tested on a Melee map ONLY, or only in your head.

In sum: All that extra life-extension the "Unconscious at 0, Dead at fully negative ST" rule creates, also has other affects on the TFT game as a whole; because it applies to everyone and every thing - or it SHOULD.

So I ask you once again, "Now that your enemies are fallen and unconscious, but not DEAD-DEAD, what does your party do NOW?"

Hmmm?
The whole point is if there is no aid, then you eventually die. So if we "kill" a bunch of Orcs as long as reinforcements don't arrive soon they are really dead.

If the Orc chief is rescued like in the Hobbit Movie then we have a powerful villain to prod the PC's with. No need to hack them up.

Now if we are fighting Tollenkar and take him down maybe we slit his throat just to be sure, or more likely take his body to the Duke to prove our value. What an adventure that could be, especially if some of the party is also wounded.
Bayarea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2018, 06:11 PM   #677
Bayarea
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Default Re: The Fantasy Trip

Everyone has been talking about ways to get more talents, adjusting some of the talents make sense. For example Fencing is too high compared to Thrown Weapons (+2DX and ready weapon same turn)3 IQ vs 2 IQ. But I don't think that will solve all the problems, nor is what I am suggesting going to solve all the problems this is just food for thought.

I would want to go with a KISS approach, so that knocks out mIQ and Rick's Superscripts these work but they aren't my cup o'tea. If we were to do something like give one 2 Pt talent for free, up to the beginning character's IQ. In other words a 10 IQ character would have 12 pts to play with. He wouldn't have to use all his IQ either I often save points for when I get another IQ point.

This coupled with a steeper Exp grade at 40 attributes would limit bloat, and give enough talents to make individualized characters.

Is this perfect? No of course not. Though it does allow for additional talents without having to rewrite most of the rules.

Last edited by Bayarea; 03-08-2018 at 06:12 PM. Reason: bad typist
Bayarea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2018, 10:22 PM   #678
Rick_Smith
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Coquitlam B.C.
Default Two simple ways to get more talents.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bayarea View Post
Everyone has been talking about ways to get more talents, adjusting some of the talents make sense. ...

I would want to go with a KISS approach, so that knocks out mIQ and Rick's Superscripts these work but they aren't my cup o'tea. If we were to do something like give one 2 Pt talent for free, up to the beginning character's IQ. In other words a 10 IQ character would have 12 pts to play with. He wouldn't have to use all his IQ either I often save points for when I get another IQ point. ...

Is this perfect? No of course not. Though it does allow for additional talents without having to rewrite most of the rules.
Hi Bayarea, everyone.
My system works well in my campaign, and in the campaigns by people using my rules, but I can't see Steve using it in the new TFT.

What I suggested was simply reduce the cost of most talents. That is as simple as it gets. New players look up Mimic and instead of it costing 3 mIQ, it costs 1. Instead of Knife costing 1 mIQ, it costs 1/2. No new rules or anything to remember at all.

Alternately, change the talents to be an INCLUDES relationship rather than a REQUIRES relationship. So right now you have to buy thief and then buy Master Thief (Master Thief REQUIRES you to already have Thief). You could make it that Thief costs 2 mIQ, but Master Thief costs 3 mIQ, but INCLUDES Thief for free. So spending 3 mIQ (and having a 12+ IQ) would give you both talents.

Right now there is a very simple relationship: if you have 12 IQ then you get 12 memory to go with it. I would rather take one of the above two systems, than require people to remember that if you have a 12 IQ, then you have 14 mIQ.

Warm regards, Rick

Last edited by Rick_Smith; 03-08-2018 at 10:33 PM. Reason: Fixed grammar.
Rick_Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2018, 10:55 PM   #679
Bayarea
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Default Re: Two simple ways to get more talents.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick_Smith View Post
Hi Bayarea, everyone.
My system works well in my campaign, and in the campaigns by people using my rules, but I can't see Steve using it in the new TFT.

What I suggested was simply reduce the cost of most talents. That is as simple as it gets. New players look up Mimic and instead of it costing 3 mIQ, it costs 1. Instead of Knife costing 1 mIQ, it costs 1/2. No new rules or anything to remember at all.

Alternately, change the talents to be an INCLUDES relationship rather than a REQUIRES relationship. So right now you have to buy thief and then buy Master Thief (Master Thief REQUIRES you to already have Thief). You could make it that Thief costs 2 mIQ, but Master Thief costs 3 mIQ, but INCLUDES Thief for free. So spending 3 mIQ (and having a 12+ IQ) would give you both talents.

Right now there is a very simple relationship: if you have 12 IQ then you get 12 memory to go with it. I would rather take one of the above two systems, than require people to remember that if you have a 12 IQ, then you have 14 mIQ.

Warm regards, Rick
Hi Rick I always read your rules with enthusiasm, as you say your rules work for your campaign. To put them into the TFT most of the rules would have to be rewritten, fST for berserking and other things, all the Talents for IQ superscripts and all the combat for sDX are just some examples. So as you say it is unlikely to have that level of rewrite.

Obviously changing the talents cost is another option, however I don't think the talents are 2x too expensive. Also this means relearning every talent cost I have most of them memorized and I suspect other do too. So if you change a few like Mimic, Fencing and Monster Follower that's not a big deal. I just don't think enough talents are overpriced to justify reducing them all.

Obviously my solution doesn't work for you, but it was just an idea that might be a little bit easier than changing every talent. Maybe doing something as simple as making Sword, Polearm and Ax/Mace 1 IQ each might do the trick, as I don't think getting enough talents with experience is the problem. Again I am just throwing an idea out there, personally I am okay if the talents don't change much, i was just looking at something that won't require a big rewrite.

Last edited by Bayarea; 03-08-2018 at 10:58 PM.
Bayarea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2018, 12:25 AM   #680
Rick_Smith
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Coquitlam B.C.
Default Re: Two simple ways to get more talents.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bayarea View Post
Hi Rick I always read your rules with enthusiasm, as you say your rules work for your campaign. To put them into the TFT most of the rules would have to be rewritten, fST for berserking and other things, all the Talents for IQ superscripts and all the combat for sDX are just some examples. So as you say it is unlikely to have that level of rewrite.

Obviously changing the talents cost is another option, however I don't think the talents are 2x too expensive. Also this means relearning every talent cost I have most of them memorized and I suspect other do too. So if you change a few like Mimic, Fencing and Monster Follower that's not a big deal. I just don't think enough talents are overpriced to justify reducing them all. ...
Hi Bayarea, everyone.
Actually my superscript rules don't require rewriting everything. The half page of rules and half page of examples pretty much do it.

I show costs that are paid in fatigue ST as fST, but that can be done without the superscript rules at all. It just shows costs more clearly.

I've added a lot of new talents, and I think Steve should as well. Someone pointed out that most jobs in TFT had two levels of talents. Thief and Master Thief. Sword and Fencing. Bow and Missile Weapons, etc. But I like to have more skills to distinguish beginners from true masters.

Anyway, I've played a long time with talents being cheaper and it has not harmed play. I'm used to people having twice as many talents as the base game.

Looking at two of my examples, Knife going from 1 memory to 1/2 a memory is a 50% drop in price but Master Thief (3), INCLUDING Thief (2), reduces 4 memory to 3, or 75% of the current cost. I certainly don't think any harm would be done to TFT if the talents cost 3/4 to 1/2 of their current price. In fact it would be a great good: heroes would be less overshadowed by wizards and Conan could have a decent number of talents at reasonable IQ for him.

Of course, the cost is that you would have to learn new memory prices.

8-O

Warm regards, Rick.
Rick_Smith 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 01:04 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.