GURPS Dungeon Fantasy Denizens: Barbarians

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by Kromm

Well, movie Conan is closer to a hack 'n' slash/dungeon crawl barbarian, while novel Conan is a traditional sword-and-sorcery hero. The first is a better fit to DF than the second.

I agree wholeheartedly.

I also tend to really dislike DF... sorry Kromm. Not my cuppa... I just get all berserk about how Conan is represented.

DF has lots of rules for superhuman ST and resistance and combat ability, but essentially nothing for empire-building thief-kings and generals.

Oh aye, DF is very much meant for over the top cinematics and action. Which I appreciate... it's just also still not the tone I'm aiming for.

I want something between DF and Banestorm. I tend to have to write them myself, which is fine. i draw from DF, Action, MH, etc... find the right mix.

[Joe]

Originally Posted by evileeyore

I want something between DF and Banestorm.

You're not alone there - I'm in that boat too. In fact, just from my very casual, nonscientific observations, I get the sense that a lot of people who play DF are actually looking for an easy, plug-and-play way to run more or less traditional RPG fantasy in GURPS, in a more serious way than the DF series envisions.

My suspicion is that the undertone in DF that keeps saying "of course these conventions are silly; we're not taking them very seriously" is more an obstacle to the series' popularity than an aid to it. I suspect that only a relatively small proportion of players really want to play a whole campaign in an ironic mode.

There is also the danger of the series coming off as if it's mocking those who take Fantasy of that kind seriously: as if it's saying "Yes, you can do this in GURPS, but really, mature people can only do it while holding their noses". I don't actually think any of the authors really think this way, but sometimes the tone of the writing might seem to be leaning in that direction.

[RyanW]

Originally Posted by Joe

My suspicion is that the undertone in DF that keeps saying "of course these conventions are silly; we're not taking them very seriously" is more an obstacle to the series' popularity than an aid to it. I suspect that only a relatively small proportion of players really want to play a whole campaign in an ironic mode.

That's one thing that keeps me off of it, but really I've just tired of the whole "Fantasy == TL3 combat crawl with zap-pow wizards"

I'm stuck deciding between two settings for my next campaign: 7th Anglo-Saxon England and a 1920s-esque fantasy world. The first may have no magic at all, the second definitely will, but the only system I'm looking at for either is Path/Book.

[malloyd]

Originally Posted by Joe

There is also the danger of the series coming off as if it's mocking those who take Fantasy of that kind seriously: as if it's saying "Yes, you can do this in GURPS, but really, mature people can only do it while holding their noses". I don't actually think any of the authors really think this way, but sometimes the tone of the writing might seem to be leaning in that direction.

Honestly, I think if you get that from the writing, you brought it there yourself. The genre has always been a bit silly - there are in-jokes in stuff going all the way back to Blackmoor, and are there aren't all that many FRP lines that have made as much money as Munchkin. If a little silliness turns you off, you aren't playing in the core of the genre.

[Joe]

Originally Posted by malloyd

Honestly, I think if you get that from the writing, you brought it there yourself. The genre has always been a bit silly - there are in-jokes in stuff going all the way back to Blackmoor, and are there aren't all that many FRP lines that have made as much money as Munchkin. If a little silliness turns you off, you aren't playing in the core of the genre.

Fair point. I guess all I'm trying to say is that not everyone wants that much silly in their campaign - and also to share my suspicion that a fair proportion of DF players play it with less irony than the tone of the line sometimes seems to suggest one should.

[Peaches]

I may be in the minority, but I actually like the cheese-ball approach that DF takes; the half-naked muscular and oiled barbarians with a smashy two-handed axe and the wizards that throw lightning bolts and fireballs all willy nilly keeps my ADHD attention span on the game.

As much as I enjoy fast and loose hack'n'slash, I do enjoy slight deviation from it; everyone has languages besides just "Common", races have cultures besides "Town" and "Dungeon", and there's some greater significance to the dungeon crawl like a five man attack on a castle to defeat the Dark Lord™ and save the princess... or something more to going in a dungeon besides collecting meat bags of EXP and loot. The PCs aren't just Murder Hobos, but their dungeon crawling also serves a greater purpose, be that collecting artifacts from the deepest depths of dungeons so they can have enough power to face off with the Dark Lord™ or whatever else the GM cooks up.

[Tyneras]

Originally Posted by Peaches

I may be in the minority, but I actually like the cheese-ball approach that DF takes; the half-naked muscular and oiled barbarians with a smashy two-handed axe and the wizards that throw lightning bolts and fireballs all willy nilly keeps my ADHD attention span on the game.

As much as I enjoy fast and loose hack'n'slash, I do enjoy slight deviation from it; everyone has languages besides just "Common", races have cultures besides "Town" and "Dungeon", and there's some greater significance to the dungeon crawl like a five man attack on a castle to defeat the Dark Lord™ and save the princess... or something more to going in a dungeon besides collecting meat bags of EXP and loot. The PCs aren't just Murder Hobos, but their dungeon crawling also serves a greater purpose, be that collecting artifacts from the deepest depths of dungeons so they can have enough power to face off with the Dark Lord™ or whatever else the GM cooks up.

Honestly, I can take the entire DF series, RAW, and run both silly cheeseball and deadly serious games with them without changing anything.

It's all in presentation and having your players on board with you. Maybe the naked barbarian has the spirits on his side for this show of boldness, or maybe he's just lucky, or maybe the enemy is having a run of distracting nosebleeds looking at those oiled muscles.

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by Joe

You're not alone there - I'm in that boat too. In fact, just from my very casual, nonscientific observations, I get the sense that a lot of people who play DF are actually looking for an easy, plug-and-play way to run more or less traditional RPG fantasy in GURPS, in a more serious way than the DF series envisions.

That's why I pick up the DF line and then lift from it what I find useful.

Like the ENTIRETY of the Wilderness book. I swear that book came out at exactly the right moment for me, just as I was gearing up to do a fantasy wilderness crawl, it was like the GURPS deities had heard my prayers.

[Joe]

Originally Posted by evileeyore

...the Wilderness book. I swear that book came out at exactly the right moment for me, just as I was gearing up to do a fantasy wilderness crawl, it was like the GURPS deities had heard my prayers.

They do that sometimes. The DF Denizens: Barbarians book has been a bit that way for me - just what I was looking for, at just the right moment. Praise Kromm and Crom!

(And Peter D'ell Orto... but that doesn't really fit the joke... Sorry Peter :) )

[Polydamas]

Originally Posted by Joe

You're not alone there - I'm in that boat too. In fact, just from my very casual, nonscientific observations, I get the sense that a lot of people who play DF are actually looking for an easy, plug-and-play way to run more or less traditional RPG fantasy in GURPS, in a more serious way than the DF series envisions.

Although "traditional RPG fantasy" is a big ... convention hall. It has always had room for both high fantasy and low fantasy, and for relatively restrained and relatively baroque character abilities, and for different levels of engagement with the world, and for different levels of seriousness (the 1e books had actual cartoons printed in them ...). Even in 1e, when a Fighter or Rogue just got really good at fighting and sneaking as they increased in level, and it was very hard to survive to second level let alone reach ninth, a high level Monk or Magic User could do some funky things, and GMs could always fudge things to let characters survive long enough to have some real power. Kromm just sets each of these dials in a direction which is not my cup of tea, and I tend to use D&D for dungeon fantasy anyways. But I still own one or two DF books to mine for rules ideas.