PDA

View Full Version : The Playground: Variations, Versions, and Future Work



Pages : [1] 2 3 4

Jade_Tarem
2012-09-22, 08:52 AM
Hello everyone, and welcome to our game. I realize the title of thread is a tad confusing, but "The Playground" refers to a rules system I think is very special. The Playground rules allow you to play what you want to play. Almost anything can work. Really. You can play almost anything. This isn't a game where you play as an adventurer and wait for the Game Master to tell you what happens - you write your own tales cooperatively and sometimes competitively with the other players.

The spoilers below hold a great deal of information, but please don't be put off - most of the sections below cover very specific rules clarifications that have been an issue in the past - the basic rules are fairly simple. Moreover, the mods and veteran players are ready and willing to help people learn the way the game works, so please don't hesitate to submit a concept even if you're unsure how everything fits together. Below, we have the rules for the game, the advice of two of our Moderators (not necessary reading, but recommended), as well as a links to a past game.



The Basics

Play usually centers around a city of adventure placed on an otherwise blank slate, and a basic technology level is determined to establish what can be assumed to be part of the system without a need for Story Elements (more on that later). Aside from that, there are but three important things to keep in mind for the setting:

Players earn three sorts of currencies or tickets which they get to use to influence the game. First, and generally the most appealing, are Advantages. Advantages are anything good for a character you control. Being able to use a kind of magic, being really good looking or incredibly strong, being wealthy, commanding soldiers or a horde of goblins... these are all Advantages. This keeps player characters, whatever they are, roughly as powerful or as cool as each other. It's hard to compare some character concepts, but Advantages let us say, "This character has X number of good things going for them."

Story Elements are another form of currency. These let you add something static to the setting, any one thing. These create NPCs, places, exotic plants or animals, monsters, etc.

Plot Tickets change the setting or put events in motion. You use them to make something happen that your character(s) wouldn't have control over. Plot Tickets also let you create Adventure Sites which let you play Game Master controlling NPCs and fate to lead other players on an Adventure of your creation.

Character Creation

All charaters begin with X Advantages, Y Story Elements, and Z Plot Tickets, subject to change based on the setting and iteration of the game.

All applications should be submitted in this format:

Full Name, Titles in Descending Importance
Age:
Affiliations:

Physical Description:

Personality:

History:

Advantages: (itemized and detailed)

While we intend to be inclusive of concepts, writing ability will play a part in the selection process. We will of course make allowances for people whose first language isn't English, but please try and be effective and evocative in your descriptions. Ideally, your application should be long enough to cover everything important, but short enough to keep us interested. Keep in mind that a massive wall of text detailing you full lineage could hurt more than it helps.

The Rules


The Rules

While the game is principally free-form, there are rules to govern how powerful characters can be as well as ways to resolve disputes and avoid role playing gridlock. First, any boon, anything that makes a character special is called an Advantage. Your character, being a cut above the common Joe, naturally begins with a few Advantages and you gain more over time. Second, when players can’t agree on how a scene should play out (or would prefer to keep things random) things are decided with a die roll and each appropriate Advantages grant a bonus to each player’s roll. Third, when there’s a dispute over what Advantages are and aren’t applicable, Moderators can decide. Moderators are only there to decide what is and isn’t appropriate for the game and may ask you to edit your posts if you’ve written something your character couldn’t have done either as the product of blatant metagame knowledge or a truly impossible feat.

1. Players own all game currency (advantages, plot tickets).
2. The creation of a Player Character (PC) is free. Players may grant advantages to any PC they control by spending one from their budget.
3. Players gain 1 advantage at the first of each month and 1 at the end of every chapter. Once per chapter, players may be awarded 1 advantage for participation or excellent roleplaying. Bonus advantages may be rewarded to all players for holidays or during particularly lengthy chapters.
4. In addition to the regular players, TheDarkDM will be playing a character whose responsibility it will be to evoke conflict and provide antagonism. To reflect this increased responsibility and the likelihood of becoming a target, he will be allocated a larger starting advantage pool.
5. Moderators decided by consensus when a chapter ends.
6. Players gain 3 Story Elements per chapter. Unused story elements are saved between chapters.
7. Players gain 1 Plot Ticket per chapter. Plot Tickets do NOT carry over between chapters.
8. Moderators are charged with arbitration in the event of player disputes, clarifying rules and monitoring the appropriateness of play and story elements. Story elements will be rejected if they are inappropriate (see below) or conflict with existing cannon. Players may be asked to edit IC posts in the event their character has done something given impossible knowledge or has acted outside the extent of their advantages.

No WAAAGH! – You may not import distinct elements from well known sources. This means no chocobos, no Warhammer Orks, and no alchemists capable of reassembling matter with a clap of their hands. Mods have the power to veto any creation that resembles too closely any part of another setting. The exception to this rule is anything considered standard or iconic fantasy, for example, orcs as described in D&D’s Monster Manual. You may certainly draw inspiration from existing sources, just don’t blatantly rip off something. Riding giant birds into battle is fine, just as long as they’re not yellow!

No Renaming the Rose – Do not create things to be kitschy or subversive. You may certainly create a noble race of orcs with a mystical heritage, but do not make your orcs fair skinned, pointy eared forest dwellers.

It Shall Have a Common Name – If you create something and give it a fantastical sounding name, ensure that it also has a common name that is easy to remember. (For example, “Eladrin” is a fine name, but “High Elves” can’t be misspelled or forgotten.)

Word of Mod – Anything deemed offensive, too silly or just “not cool” can be vetoed by the Moderators. This is especially true for anything that would countermand existing elements in the setting.


Advantages

Advantages are graded as Common (+1), Uncommon (+2), Rare (+3), Exceptional (+5), Legendary (+7) and Special (No Bonus). The grade of an advantage is decided upon before it enters play and is based on a number of factors balancing how powerful the advantage is versus how often it is likely to be used. Advantages that have a variety of applications and are likely to be used often are probably Common while advantages with a limited purpose are Rare. Uncommon is somewhere in between. Exceptional and Legendary advantages are usually not only limited in purpose, but also in availability. Specifically, advantages related to large items, vehicles, mounts and followers are usually 1 grade higher than normal; location based advantages are 2 grades higher. Special advantages are reserved for a talent or ability that, while certainly useful, doesn't provide a mechanical bonus in a conflict.

Common -
Advantages at this grade see frequent use and have such a wide variety of applications that it's hard to consider them all. Rough attributes or descriptors are often Common as are many professions. Common advantages can be used in both combat and noncombat situations. Examples: Strength (+1 to climbing, jumping, melee combat...) Charisma (+1 to bluff, inspire, convince...) Rogue (+1 to sneaking, stabbing, stealing...)

Uncommon -
Advantages of this grade are more specific than Common advantages, but still likely to see frequent use. Importantly, advantages that only have applications in combat are Uncommon. Talents and sets of skills are usually Uncommon. Examples: Sword Expertise (+2 to using bladed weapons in combat), a Magic Dagger (+2 when used in combat), Thievery (+2 to sneaking, stealing, disarming traps, but NOT to combat), Education (+2 all knowledge), Charm (+2 in social situations when you employ humor or flattery).

Rare -
Rare advantages have only one purpose. Combat advantages that only effect a certain kind of target or provide protection against a single element are Rare. Single skills are usually Rare. Examples: A magic dagger enchanted to kill trolls (+3 combat against trolls, +0 against other targets), Fire Resistance (+3 combat if your opponent uses fire against you), Beauty (+3 in social situations when you employ your good looks against characters who find your gender appealing), Stealth (+3 when hiding or sneaking), Arcana (+3 knowledge for magical matters).

Exceptional -
Exceptional advantages are typically skills or knowledge sets so specific that it's useless outsides of its domain. Examples: Sleight of Hand (+5 stealing small objects), Botany (+5 knowledge of plants), Cooking (+5 culinary knowledge and preparation).

Legendary -
Scarcely anything qualifies as legendary. This grade is typically reserved for upgraded advantages which would normally be of a lower grade (see Items etc).

Special -
Special advantages do not provide any mechanical bonus, but rather allow a character's other advantages to be used in unusual ways. The ability to summon a magical sword to your hand, regardless of where you are would be a Special grade advantage since it allows you to employ your sword advantage when it might otherwise be denied.

Advantage Categories
Some advantage are more useful than others owing not only to how likely they are to come up in play, but also because of their convenience. A magic dagger is more convenient to have on your person than a magic battleaxe, thus the axe is slightly more powerful.

Personal -
Personal advantages are the norm and represent anything intrinsic to a Player Character (PC) and any highly portable or unassuming items or animal companions. While personal items (like a ring) can be stolen or lost, they can also be traded or loaned to other PCs.

Items -
Items that are small, easily concealed or worn inconspicuously on one's person are graded the same as any other personal advantage. Magic rings, daggers, and dress swords fall under this first category. Large, cumbersome or conspicuous items are one bonus grade higher than equivalent personal advantages. Large weapons and heavy armor fall under this second category, so a huge battle axe that would normally be a combat-only Uncommon advantage (+2) would instead be +3. You may trade, loan and steal items with/from other characters.

Followers -
Followers are groups of NPCs loyal to or under the employ of a PC. Unlike PCs, they do not have "plot armor" and can be more easily manipulated and eliminated. Followers are typically minions, guards, crew, or employees. Followers may be unable or unwilling to assist a PC everywhere, so advantages related to followers are one grade higher than personal advantages. Examples: Whereas PC swordsman with the Sword Expertise advantage would have an Uncommon (+2) bonus in combat, a group of followers with the same advantage would a Rare (+3) bonus in combat.

Vehicles/Beasts/War Machine -
Vehicles and large animals or monsters are limited by their size and mobility. Because they can't go everywhere a PC could go, advantages tied to a vehicle or beast are considered one grade higher, just like followers. An advantage is likely in this category if it is too large to fit through a doorway or if its presence would be disturbing, disruptive or flatly illegal, or if the thing simply cannot move on or through normal terrain. Small animal companions and familiars are considered Personal.

Locations -
Locations are simply never portable. One needs to be in or on the location and able to use its facilities to gain the related bonus. Location based advantages are TWO grades higher than normal. Examples: A Library might function like the Education (Uncommon) advantage, but since it's a location, it would be graded as Exceptional and grant a +5 bonus to anyone doing research within. A castle might have the Defense advantage and bestow an Exceptional (+5) bonus to defenders within its walls against outside attacks (Note: If two characters fought one another within the castle, neither would receive a bonus to combat).

Advantage Rank
You can take the same advantage multiple times and doing so increases an advantage's Rank. You can have up to 3 ranks in an advantage normally; 4 ranks and beyond requires permission from the Moderators. While the mechanical bonus of successive ranks progresses linearly (an uncommon advantage would grant a +2 bonus at rank 1, +4 at rank 2, +6 at rank 3...) the in-game effect varies. For example, a character with a rank in Strength is roughly twice as strong (in terms of weight lifted) as an average human adult and 2 ranks makes him twice as strong again. But, a single rank of intelligence doesn't give a character an IQ of 200. Most ranks progress an advantage by a single standard deviation. As a rule of thumb, if average means you're better than 100 out of 200 people, then 1 rank means you're better than 150 of them and better than 175 of them at 2 ranks.



Story Elements

Use Story Elements to create people, places, races, items, materials, ideas, trends and historical events. Balance the impact or significance of what you’re creating with your level of detail and expansiveness. For example, creating an entire noble family and giving them names, appearances, personalities and a brief history is fine. However, if you created a character that is a cultural icon or immensely powerful, you’d want to make sure that’s all your story element covers. As a rule of thumb, you can be as general or specific as you like when creating a story element, just don’t go off on tangents and detail things not within the purview of your current element.

Examples of Good Story Elements:

• A law that makes it illegal to carry a sword in the city without a permit
• A social trend where it’s unfashionable to wear black clothing to a formal event
• A race of yellow furred scavenger creatures that prowl the alleys
• A magical sword wielded by a hero of a past age
• An unusual metal renowned for its strength and light weight
• A war fought between two nations a century ago


Adventures

Created through the use of a Plot Ticket, Adventures are short stories that the creator GM's for a select group of other players, using a location they have created, a public location, or another player's location with that player's permission. The player running the Adventure is awarded an Advantage at its completion, and has the power to award a set or free Advantage to the players involved. Each player may run one Adventure per Chapter.

Note: It is very likely that Adventures will not be a part of future Playground games. While a nifty concept, execution tends to work out poorly, and it slows down posting as everyone waits on the temporary GM.



The DOs and DO NOTs of Role Playing

DO use proper grammar, spelling, punctuation, etc, etc. For example: “This is a properly spelled, properly punctuated sentence.”

DO NOT use chatspeak, leetspeak, or any other form of internet/texting jargon in any post anywhere in the game. For example: “r u srs” will only get you mocked.

DO write posts that facilitate gameplay. If someone is talking to you, talk back! If you have a creative new thing to build, build it! Posts that facilitate gameplay are staples of any good game.

DO NOT write yourself into a corner. If all you ever do is write pages and pages about yourself, and never interact with anyone else, chances are the others in the game won’t want to interact with you.
-And as an addition to that, DO NOT expect everyone else to come looking for you. Haven’t been talked to in a while? Don’t complain about it, go out and find someone to talk to! Writers don’t like being made to feel as if they’ve been negligent, and if we haven’t talked to you there’s probably a good reason.

DO be courteous to the other players. IC, OOC, over PM; a little teasing is acceptable, but being downright nasty only makes people feel upset and isolated, and can bring any game to a grinding halt.

DO NOT make baseless accusations against other people. It’s mean, it’s not funny, and again it can bring any game to a grinding halt. If someone plays a sneaky character, don’t accuse them of “metagaming”; if two characters who are friends tell each other things they’ve seen, don’t accuse them of “conspiring”.
-As an addition to this, DO take your perceived issues to a PM before airing your dirty laundry in the OOC threads. If someone had a problem with you, I’m sure you’d much rather they speak with you in private, as opposed to rounding up all their friends and forming a schoolyard gang to confront you; show others the same respect.

DO take serious issues to the mods. If you have found that a serious issue cannot be resolved between yourself and another character, PM a mod. That’s what they are there for, to keep the game running smoothly and to ensure that everyone is having the most fun they can.

DO feel free to ask for clarification! If you’re confused about someone’s post, have a question about the rules, or need something explained, please either PM a mod or post your question in OOC to have it cleared up. Playing when you’re uncertain about something can lead to even more snarls and confusion and make everyone irritable.

DO let the other players know if you’re going to be gone for an extended amount of time, so that they can adjust plans accordingly; there’s nothing quite so disheartening as being suddenly and inexplicably stuck in a conversation with a person who up and disappears for a week.

DO NOT use cliches, whenever you can avoid them. The point of a game like this is to be creative, so sticking to “tried and true” personalities, appearances, whatever for your person isn’t going to be inspiring to other players.
-However, DO NOT make a person whose sole purpose appears to be creeping everyone else out. Try to keep it PG-13; when your posts make everyone else shudder and avert their eyes, you’re doing it wrong.

DO have a good time while playing. Having fun is key to a good writing experience.

The Third Clarification: Errata
Advantage Errata
In the course of the games, we've noticed that some kinds of abilities are notoriously difficult to balance. Below is the logic behind the game's "Nerf" rulings.

Altitude Sickness: Why We Nerfed Flight
Flight is an incredibly versatile and tricky advantage. While it is just "one trick," and thus theoretically okay within the bounds of the One Advantage, One Trick rule, flying is useful in so many situations that even a slow kind of levitation is more versatile than the Common rating would suggest. The ability to hang in midair automatically negates any advantage that could conceivably only be used at close range without some very clever writing from another player, to say nothing of how many hazards and obstacles it lets you bypass.

The compromise was to make it difficult to obtain. One rank does not get you actual flight - it gets you falling with style, a sort of wimpy glide that eliminates falling dangers and eases travel as long as you're going down-ish. The second rank is flight with a time/range limit. You can go airborne, but not for long and not very far. Only the third rank actually lets you fly, and even then you aren't superman - you fly at your regular movement rate and obey the laws of momentum. If you want to be faster/more maneuverable, take Speed and Agility advantages.

Transporter Malfunction: Why We Nerfed Teleport
Everything wrong with Flight is magnified by about ten when it comes to Teleport advantages. Going from point A to point B without crossing the intervening space is a huge bonus in almost any context. Someone who can pop about like Nightcrawler can also:
- Escape any nonmagical prison, or any magical one that doesn't specifically hinder this kind of travel, for that matter.
- Dodge any attack they're aware of.
- Win pretty much any race.
- Bypass walls, fences, guards, traps, traffic jams, tax collectors, etc.
- Avoid falling damage if the ability negates momentum - and can play Portal to cancel it out if it doesn't.
- Escape pursuit of almost any kind.

...the list goes on. Even though this is "one trick," it's too powerful to be an at-will kind of thing. As a result, almost any Teleport advantage needs to be carefully discussed in advance of being taken, and if taken it will usually feature a fairly severe limit on how long it takes to use, how frequently it can be used, range, line of sight limitations, etc. Note that a Rank 1 Teleport advantage is probably going to have ALL of those limits, not just one.

Let's Do That Again: Why We Discourage Time Travel
This one should be fairly obvious, and indeed to my knowledge no one has ever tried to abuse time travel advantages. Obviously, any advantage that could possibly retcon another player's actions would need to be heavily discussed ahead of time. Note that something like time slowing down relative to a character would actually be an Agility or Speed advantage, even with the altered flavor.

Note that this does not mean that you can't play a time traveler character if you want to, or that it would be impossible to make such an advantage. It would just have to be custom from the ground up.

We Don't Believe in Faeries: Why We Nerfed Magic
This actually happened so long ago that most of the players may not remember it, but the One Advantage = One Trick rule was put into place specifically to nerf magic advantages. Prior to the creation of that rule, players tended to take magic advantages by school, usually making it the equivalent of a DnD school of magic in terms of scope and variety. What we found out was that this gave the magic-using characters unmatched versatility, even more than the Common rating would suggest (also, at the time, the rating system was not in place - all advantages were +1). All four of the magic-using players agreed that this was too powerful, and magic has been defined by specifics ever since. A good way to think of it would be to think of the spell type descriptors from DnD. Rather than getting Evocation, you'd get Fire Magic. Rather than getting Enchantments, you'd get Charms. Rather than Conjuration, you'd get the ability to summon a kind of monster, etc.

This worked out for the best - and in fact some kinds of magic had a narrow enough range of uses to be bumped up to Uncommon. Fire Magic is really only useful for combat and starting fires, and that one utility use was not enough to make it Common. Water magic, except in Nautical games (like Playground 4) also tends to be Uncommon, but Earth and Air are available everywhere and have a variety of uses, from moving things about to climbing aids to making ships sail faster, and remained Common.

Naturally, the magic in whatever Playground game is made next won't necessarily have elemental themes or Story Elements, but the principle holds regardless.

Notes from previous systems.

I was going to put a description of the older systems here, but realized that it would be easier to link to the previous discussion, which can be found on pages 30-32 of this thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=246478&page=30).

Playground Workbench: What's on the table?

Naturally, it's to be expected that the players both new and old will have ideas concerning how to improve the game. This part of the post is to keep track of what's been proposed/decided/etc. It is now up to date.

Leadership
Introduced in: Playground 1
How it worked: A player took one rank in the leadership advantage and obtained however many followers they wanted, within reason. Additional ranks in Leadership added to the number of followers, or to the "density" (more on that below). Additional advantages could be purchased for one's followers, from the same pool of advantages available to player characters (basically anything covered by the base setting or Story Elements). The benefits of said advantage were "divided" among your followers - in short, if they all had Strength, it would require 100% of them to be present in order for them to actually have a full +1 in combat, unless additional ranks in Leadership had been purchased, in which case half/one quarter/etc would suffice. Combat among followers was usually determined by percentage present rather than additive numbers.

How well it worked: Poorly. The math involved reveals that not only are followers as a group less than the sum of their parts, the lack of plot armor means that they are in fact less than the average of their parts. Taking a rank of leadership and giving one's followers a rank of strength provided slightly less mechanical benefit to a player than taking a rank of strength personally and a rank of underwater basket weaving. 90% of the time, the specific mechanics of leadership were ignored except in the most general sense in favor of common sense: the city guardsmen were more dangerous than average civilians, but not as dangerous as the elite elf warriors in town and nowhere near as individually strong as the demons of the shadow court. On the other hand, the city guard was everywhere and was treated as having enough personnel (there were over a thousand of them at least) to overwhelm the elves or demons if they got their act together, making pointless antagonization of the city guard a foolish idea. Despite the nice roleplaying, almost any of the characters could have (mechanically) plowed through 800 guardsmen, 50 elves, or 4 demons with no effort - the players compensated for the bad rule, making leadership a fun advantage in spite of the mechanics.

Changes made since: Playground 3 saw significant changes to the advantage system as a whole, and the Leadership advantage was altered significantly. With the caveat that common sense trumped all, the followers were allowed under the condition that a "significant fraction" needed to be present to provide a full combat bonus in combat (rather than all of them) and that if all of them were leveled at a PC, they should probably no-contest the PC (in a fight) unless there was some reason why the PC should be able to defeat them all. For other contests, such as stealth vs. perception or even just running away, the PC could compete and win vs. any number of followers. Playground 4 continued this trend, and also boosted the value of the bonus provided by a specific category of advantage up by one, just as with items or warbeasts. Playground 4 also noted that a player is assumed to have enough followers nearby at any given time (fractions were no longer relevant) to provide a full combat bonus.

Proposals: There are currently 3 outstanding options/proposals.

Default - No Change
It has been suggested that the current version of followers is not broken, and should therefore not be "fixed."

VonDoom - Revert
Von Doom has suggested a return to the Playground 3 system.

Mods from the Past - Roleplay
It has been suggested by different moderators at different times (going as far back as the end of Playground 2) that we abandon any pretense at quantifying follower advantages and simply roleplay the relative value of them - essentially going with the "working" version of the follower rules from PG1.

Jade_Tarem/Nefarion Xid - Revise
Or, if the roleplay or reversion suggestions are no good yet you're still dissatisfied with how followers are handled, we could go the other way and completely quantify the follower advantage. This gets very complicated in a hurry, but Nef and I took our best shot at it.

It starts by providing a layer-accessed "tree" for advantages for followers to build from. When a player character becomes a leadership character, they begin by selecting the Leadership advantage, which will be (Special) in terms of rarity, with only one rank possible. This provides the player character with anywhere from 2 to 100 followers. These followers are, in fact, walking punching bags. Should they go up against any decent combat-oriented character, they will receive the same treatment as extras in a Steven Seagal film. When coupled with a PC, they provide a +1 bonus to combat, as some of them last long enough to be a distraction to their enemy.

From there, the two Leadership-related advantages that can be taken are Leadership: Magnitude and Leadership: Power. Magnitude simply increases the number of followers available to you - as well as increasing the number of things you can be doing with your followers and still have the combat bonus available to your PC. For instance, at Magnitude Rank 1, you now have 101-250 followers, and can have them skulking about the city and providing you with twice as much backup. Magnitude 2 increases the number to 251-1000 followers and 3 things at once, and Magnitude 3 provides 1001-10,000 followers and they can do four or five things at the same time while providing you with their combat/assitance bonus - or up to four times that if you "focus" them. Despite the sheer numbers, they remain about as effective as stormtroopers. An example of a player with Leadership and Magnitude 3 would be an extremely popular Lord Mayor - someone with the loyalty of every random civilian in a town.

The catch is that for every rank of Magnitude, you must first have a rank of Authority, Nobility, or Wealth. Someone has to fund this little operation, after all. You cannot have a 'cult of personality' larger than the non-magnified leadership advantage would allow.

The other advantage is Leadership:Power, which does nothing on its own. However, each rank of Power allows you to put that many ranks of one of the follower advantages into your followers. In story, the first rank upgrades them from extras to professionals, the second rank upgrades them to veterans, and the third to elite members of whatever group they're representing.

Finally, followers would receive other advantages out of a more limited (and generalized) pool than Players have. It would effectively come down to any of the "basic" advantages - Strength/Agility/Toughness/Intelligence/Cunning/Charisma/etc. Plus the following:

Equipment: the followers are better geared than normal people. +1 in combat and to various endeavors that would be assisted by nice equipment.

Magic: there are magic-users and magic items of various types among your followers. +1 to combat and various magical contests.

Skilled: the followers are possessed of an unorthodox skill set. The followers have the Profession: Rogue advantage.

Warriors: the followers are soldiers, barbarians, or some other highly dangerous group. +2 to combat only.

Loyalty: the followers will resist any attempt to turn them against you. +3 against such attempts.

Where followers become very powerful is when we combine Magnitude and Power. Magnitude is a multiplier, so a Magnitude 3 (Authority 3) group with Power 2, Warriors 2 has a total combat bonus of (4 + 4)x4 = +32, which actually makes some sense - a Player Character who is a sneaky, cunning rogue with 10 advantages' worth of being stealthy and clever should not be able to plow through them like the main character of a XiaoXiao flash animation, and indeed even a mighty warrior would be overwhelmed by the ten thousand veteran warriors of the barbarian horde attacking him. However, that rogue should be able to sneak by the followers - Stealth 3, Cunning 1, Rogue 3 almost makes it a guarantee, giving the Player character +13 vs. the horde's +4: there might be a lot of them, but the followers aren't trained for sniffing out stealthy types. Note that the numbers given (like +32) assume that you're using the entire group for that task. If that follower group is attacking the player AND another player's keep AND guarding their leader AND serving soup at the homeless shelter, then they can only devote +8 to any of those tasks. This scales up nicely into army-to-army conflict, if it should come to that, as each player would want to be putting their efforts primarily into attack/defense of an area - probably a city - or into attacking each other.

Finally, three more things - the first is that Magnitude could be fluffed as a "density" measurement, if you want your group to be more badass but don't want it to be thousands strong. The numbers provided were more of a measure of the maximum number of followers that would make sense.

Second, the limited selection of advantages is set up to provide fluff flexibility and to make a complicated setup a lot easier to handle. It might look imbalanced at first glance, especially when you see my +32 example, but bear in mind that such a player character is literally useless without their followers, other than being really important (and as shown, one or two advantages invested into anything else can best the horde at anything but combat). Isolated, such a PC can be no-contested by virtually anyone at anything.

Last, it may look like a person can "run out" of advantages to give their followers, again at first glance. But this is not true - "maxing" your followers would require nearly five times the advantages ever given to a player in any iteration of these games, and that's assuming that you spent none on yourself. And of course, with mod permission you can try to take one of these advantages to +4 - just remember the Authority/Power restriction!

So there it is. Fully quantified leadership at last. Thoughts?

Challenges
Introduced in: Playground 1
How it worked: A player, any player, could declare a challenge. The challenge would have a name, a description, and victory conditions (usually a number you would have to hit on a contest roll, plus relevant advantages), and a recommended/maximum number of players. The player(s) would join in, roll to resolve it, and then they or the challenge giver would write in the result. It was basically a confrontational plot ticket.

How well it worked: Better than we thought, actually. A number of challenges were completed in Playground 1, sometimes with surprising results - especially once we decided that a player could oppose the group trying to complete the challenge. Plus, it usually made for more exciting plot-ticket usage than market vagaries or weather phenomena.

Changes made since: Playground 2 did not last long enough to feature any challenges. By Playground 3, challenges had been replaced by adventures.

Proposals: There is currently 1 active proposal.

Default - No change
If left as-is, there will be no challenges in future Playgrounds.

??? - Replace
It has been suggested that Challenges replace the existing Adventure system due to their smaller size and ease of use.

??? - Recombine
It has also been suggested that Challenges be added back in without removing Adventures.

Adventures
Introduced in: Playground 3
How it worked: Any player could, once per chapter, declare an adventure to be in the works. Other players would sign on, and the player running the adventure took on a temporary GM status concerning the adventure, with the players working toward one or more goals. At the end, everyone gets an advantage (no more than one per chapter could be gained this way).

How well it worked: Variable, depending on the length of the adventure and the frequency of the posting. The adventure's weak point is the GM - a stop from the GM halts posting for four to six players.

Changes made since: None.

Proposals: There are currently 2 active proposals

Default - No Change
The adventure system can be kept the way it is.

Various - Scrap It
It's been suggested that the adventure system be dropped entirely in order to boost the usage of plot tickets and prevent GM-drop traps. It could be replaced with the challenge system, or nothing at all.

Various - Vetting
Alternatively, it's been suggested that we keep adventures but with tighter controls on how many players there are and frequency of posting.

Chapters
Introduced in: Playground 1... sort of
How it worked: The mods would declare that a chapter came to a close on a nigh-arbitrary basis, whenever a time skip was called for or interest in current events waned.
How well it worked: Not disastrously, but that's the best you can say about it. Chapters added little value to the game other than time skips and, later, a way of marking when everyone could buy new advantages.
Changes made since: None, save that the end of an arbitrary number of adventures heralded the end of a chapter, rather than an arbitrary amount of time.
Proposals: There is currently one active proposal.

Default - No Change
We can keep the current chapter system, including its influence on advantage gain.

Jade_Tarem - Divorce
We can keep the chapters, but divorce them from everything but timeskips, as this was their only functional value to begin with.

??? - Eliminate
We can also get rid of chapters entirely.

Advantages - Acquisition
Introduced in: Playground 1
How it worked: An advantage was obtained every two weeks (in real life). There were three starting advantages.

How well it worked: Pretty well. The main complaint was that advantage gain had nothing to do with story effort. Obtaining a magic sword meant nothing if you didn't have an existing advantage to spend on it.

Changes made since: Adventures tried to address this, by giving a reward at the end of the adventure, but this came with its own problems (see above). Now, advantages are gained at a rate of one per chapter, one per adventure (limit one per chapter), and on special occasions.

Proposals: See Adventures, above. It's been suggested that we go to the original system and work something else out for effort-based advantage gain.

Advantages - Classifications
Introduced in: Playground 2

How it worked: Having noted that making each advantage worth a flat +1 meant that a broader scoped advantage was always better, advantages were rebalanced to exchange variety of uses for power - the fewer the number of situations it could be useful in, the bigger the bonus.

How well it worked: The players seemed to enjoy it.

Changes made since: Having noticed that "regular" advantages were superior to external ones, such as items or followers that could be taken away, it was decided that advantages tied to external, removable sources would be one category of bonus higher than their contemporaries in Playground 4. Also in Playground 4, Locus-based advantages are worth two categories more, due to the fact that a locus cannot move to most locales.

Proposals: There is one active proposal that we return to the old system. Broadening the advantages in scope and ditching the one-advantage one-trick rule. It might make more rounded characters, but I'm not sure who actually supports it.

TechnOkami
2012-09-22, 12:20 PM
Ah, I see what this thread is for now. Snazzy.

Starsign
2012-09-22, 12:27 PM
Yep. Now I believe we all agreed that we're holding off from opening up another Playground game till mid-December (please correct me if I am wrong) so I guess it means we'd need to decide on what system to go with. Playground 3 is pretty familiar for a lot of us but when I think of it, Playground 4 (the system used above) is better balanced and developed aside from the obvious flaw.

Might I suggest that every player start with 8 Advantages along with the usual 6 Story Elements and 1 Plot Ticket? I'm suggesting fewer Advantages than last time to allow for more development as the game goes on depending on the various events/adventures/plots the characters are involved in.

EDIT: Ugh, I feel like I just sounded like I'm a moderator. (when I'm absolutely not) Sorry if I might be a little too forceful with suggestions. :smallredface:

Jade_Tarem
2012-09-22, 12:47 PM
It hit me that the 10 advantages thing was never explained - we actually went from 6 to 10 due to the jump from using a d6 to a d10. The bigger die size means that each bonus counts for less, and we adjusted many of the in-story depictions of what was going on to match.

As for development, that's more a function of how often advantages are gained than how many we start with - especially since the lack of a cap on how many advantages can be gained in the course of a story means that dropping to 8 advantages doesn't give us "more development," just fewer advantages. If you want more growth, we could go to the PG1 setup and just pick up one every two weeks instead of 1 per month, chapter, and adventure (note that adventures would likely be phased out). Also note that we have always had a very slow chapter rollover, and should likely ditch that as well, IMO.

Starsign
2012-09-22, 12:56 PM
It hit me that the 10 advantages thing was never explained - we actually went from 6 to 10 due to the jump from using a d6 to a d10. The bigger die size means that each bonus counts for less, and we adjusted many of the in-story depictions of what was going on to match.

As for development, that's more a function of how often advantages are gained than how many we start with - especially since the lack of a cap on how many advantages can be gained in the course of a story means that dropping to 8 advantages doesn't give us "more development," just fewer advantages. If you want more growth, we could go to the PG1 setup and just pick up one every two weeks instead of 1 per month, chapter, and adventure (note that adventures would likely be phased out). Also note that we have always had a very slow chapter rollover, and should likely ditch that as well, IMO.

Oh, right. Well in that case it might be better to stick with what we had then for Playground 4, but gaining an advantage once every 2 weeks might be better than one month. And yeah I agree, Chapters need to go as well.

Tebryn
2012-09-22, 02:07 PM
Reporting in. Nothing more to say but subbing to the thread.

Jade_Tarem
2012-09-22, 03:38 PM
Added the Third Clarification to discuss past rulings, and will add to it as I remember them.

VonDoom
2012-09-22, 04:41 PM
Hmm. Actually, why not move away from the Chapter designation entirely? Without a dedicated GM handling transitions, declaring certain adventures/plotlines to be 'chapter ending' seems a bit biased -- and the slow turn-over and drag on these was rather problematic, as well.

Real-time advancements as well as rewards for running/completing Adventures seems the best way to go.

If we move it up to every two weeks instead of a month, we may want to consider actually checking up on posting rate. If a person didn't post at least twice a week (which, by all accounts, isn't asking that much), they don't get their next timed advantage, for example.

While negative reinforcement is probably not that great in general, it would make the time advancement advantages more of a reward for activity rather than just ... being there.

Tebryn
2012-09-22, 06:16 PM
Hmm. Actually, why not move away from the Chapter designation entirely? Without a dedicated GM handling transitions, declaring certain adventures/plotlines to be 'chapter ending' seems a bit biased -- and the slow turn-over and drag on these was rather problematic, as well.

I second this whole heartedly.

Starsign
2012-09-22, 06:36 PM
Hmm. Actually, why not move away from the Chapter designation entirely? Without a dedicated GM handling transitions, declaring certain adventures/plotlines to be 'chapter ending' seems a bit biased -- and the slow turn-over and drag on these was rather problematic, as well.

Real-time advancements as well as rewards for running/completing Adventures seems the best way to go.

If we move it up to every two weeks instead of a month, we may want to consider actually checking up on posting rate. If a person didn't post at least twice a week (which, by all accounts, isn't asking that much), they don't get their next timed advantage, for example.

While negative reinforcement is probably not that great in general, it would make the time advancement advantages more of a reward for activity rather than just ... being there.

I am in agreement with this. Also I was thinking that if we are to still use Adventures, perhaps they can have more opportunities to focus on characters interacting with each other instead of interacting with the story? I know that story is important in an adventure but I think a large part of what can keep an adventure going is the respective characters being able to talk with each other and flesh out their personalities. I like to look at the adventure VonDoom ran back in Playground 3 as an example. It got my character interested in Ikokuan culture while getting to meet Tebryn's and Bladescape's characters.

Also I liked the idea of gaining an Advantage at the end of an adventure based on what happened in the adventure itself. I look again to VonDoom's adventure that he ran before. (this is essentially his idea that I thought might be good to see more of) Perhaps though that there could be more freedom in what the players decide so long as they can come up with a good, reasonable explanation why his or her character got that advantage.

Jade_Tarem
2012-09-22, 09:56 PM
Removing the chapter designation was what I was talking about earlier, sorry if I didn't make that clear.

I'm still fairly opposed to keeping Adventures. While it is certainly possible to point to one or two successful adventures, the truth is that they fail, to the great detriment of the game, more often than not - and even the successful ones tend to slow posting. It also seems to discourage new players from seeking to make contact with other players until they can do so in the context of an adventure, and that's not good at all. Statistically, the game is at its smoothest and most active when there are no active GMs, even in a temporary capacity.

In fact, I'd sooner try to come up with an entirely different merit-based advantage gain system than to continue with Adventures.

Starsign
2012-09-22, 10:07 PM
I'm still fairly opposed to keeping Adventures. While it is certainly possible to point to one or two successful adventures, the truth is that they fail, to the great detriment of the game, more often than not - and even the successful ones tend to slow posting. It also seems to discourage new players from seeking to make contact with other players until they can do so in the context of an adventure, and that's not good at all. Statistically, the game is at its smoothest and most active when there are no active GMs, even in a temporary capacity.

In fact, I'd sooner try to come up with an entirely different merit-based advantage gain system than to continue with Adventures.

Well I do have to agree; a couple of adventures did crash and burn unspectacularly due to how they work. Were they there in Playground 1? If so, how did it do back then?

If we are going for a merit-based advantage system, might I suggest that a special advantage (meaning one more valuable than the normal advantage) be allowed to a player upon completion of one of their character's story arcs or something like that? (so basically one, two, or at the absolute max three Advantages gained from that and only if the game manages to get that far)

I would say that it is best to avoid merits that can be incredibly subjective and easy to be rewarded for. Perhaps merits should be rewarded more scarcely (like the example I showed above) rather than one for every spectacular post players manage to do up?

EDIT: Thinking back actually, I dunno if scarcely rewarded advantages are actually good for motivating players. Then again games like these I feel shouldn't need TOO much reinforcement to keep things alive.

Jade_Tarem
2012-09-22, 10:19 PM
What we had in PG1 was the Challenge system, which worked more like Kasanip's recent "adventure" than an actual adventure, and most of them weren't even as long as that. There might or might not be rewards given. The primary benefit of the challenge system was that the person creating the challenge didn't have to run it, exactly, they just had to come up with the conditions for victory, specify how many people could possibly participate, and what the situation was. Then the players could make their joint roll or rolls and decide how things play out.

Also, as I understand it, the Adventures that I've kept track of so far went like this:

Arena Demon Attack - Dragged badly.
Rhetizian Embassy Murder Mystery - Dragged, ended on an anticlimax.
Train Hijacking - Started well, dragged, dropped by GM
"Pirates" on the Ikokuan ship - Ended well(?)
Xondoure's PG4 adventure - massive lag (looked dropped), just now picking up again.
Dinner at Castle GreyCourt - Dragged, dropped by GM.
Rescue of Arukumedez - Ended well, not actually an adventure

I might be missing a couple, but even counting Rescue of Arukumedez, we've had two or three adventures out of eight or nine that continued and ended in a timely manner. This is not a good record.

However, IIRC we completed most of the challenges from PG1 rather quickly due to the reduced size and lack of reliance on the "GM." Is that the direction we should be going in? I don't know.

Also bear in mind that PG1 did just fine without merit based advantage gain - and that VonDoom's suggestion of withholding advantages without activity has some upsides. I'll need to think about this.

EDIT: Nominating another player for a bonus advantage informally, whether for superior roleplay, hard work on the system, or driving the plot through sparse times, has also worked before.

TheDarkDM
2012-09-22, 11:15 PM
Hey everyone, sorry to have disappeared on you for so long. I'm quite glad to see that P4 is still going strong despite Nef and my flakiness. And, perhaps most importantly, it's good to hear concentrated feedback on the rules from you guys.

To add my own two cents to this discussion, I'll start by agreeing with the general consensus that dividing things into chapters was a bad idea. It was an attempt to alleviate a minor issue of explaining advantage gain on a two week system (where important events might not have happened for every period people were supposed to become better), and replaced that minor niggle with something that drastically reduced the sense of organic growth in characters. In that same vein, I'm in agreement with Jade that Adventures were an idea to alleviate a minor niggle (it being a bit difficult for people to tell side stories without increased narrative power), that ballooned into a system that often tied the progression of the game to one person. I know that both those decisions were made in an attempt to codify the game into a more rigid system of checks and balances that would reduce the mods day to day involvement with the running of the machine, but on the whole I think we were misguided. While I am loathe to keep referencing P1 when so many of you began playing this system in P3, and while I quite enjoyed P3, I still think P1 had the best combination of world building, player involvement, and most importantly collaborative storytelling simply because the notions of ownership over a scenario were so fluid and advancing your mechanical growth was not dependent on other people finishing their business.

So, that's were I stand, but how do I think that relates to the rules in general? In addition to what has already been said, I think we should take a long, hard look at the "one trick, one Advantage" rule. To be fair, I was perhaps the hardest hit by that rule back in P1, so I'm likely biased, but I think that forcing people to box their concepts into a set of rigid abilities was again an unintended overreaction to the perception that the system might be susceptible to abuse. Prior to that rule, we had people who were able to take ranks in schools of magic and have the full suite of powers, and it helped to round out a concept. However, I do still think that Advantage grades should be maintained, they were a very necessary addition to alleviate certain imbalances.

On challenges, I am in agreement with Jade that they should probably return and take the place of Adventures. To expand on exactly how they work - for those familiar with D&D, they were very much like skill challenges. A person would create a scene for the challenge with a Plot Ticket (say, a mob of pirates attacking a prosperous street), set the threshold for victory and any permutations within (a net roll of 10 drives them off with a hard fight, 15 they're clearly outmatched, 20 and they run as soon as your prowess becomes apparent), and the intended result (failure, and the pirates set fire to the district, succeed and you push them back to their ships). Once all that was presented, it was up to the players to narrate exactly how they succeeded or failed at smiting the pirates. Any rewards were often presented within the bounds of the plot by appropriately placed players, such as the Lord Marshall or one of our Nobles.

On withholding advantages due to lack of activity, I agree with Doom that there should be some incentive to post. However, I'm not in favor of a hard bar that needs to be passed. What if someone posts once in the first week, but six times in the second? I think activity needs to be judged in relation to the activity of the other players for the negative reinforcement to be fairly applied.

In summation, I'm in favor of a return to the more organic, less strictly adjudicated ruleset of P1. While it had some weirdness, no mistake, and there were some strident debates in the OOC, it endured the longest and thrived until it was killed by the Hell Month that is December. While that puts far more responsibility on the player base one the whole to police each other and interpret the rules, I feel that level of engagement can only help the game.

Tebryn
2012-09-22, 11:17 PM
EDIT: Nominating another player for a bonus advantage informally, whether for superior roleplay, hard work on the system, or driving the plot through sparse times, has also worked before.

I had a problem with this when it was mentioned in game 4 and have a problem with it now. Advantages and bonus's shouldn't be left up to a vote or anything approaching it. The reward for sticking with the story...is making a bigger mark on said story and improving it. That's the only reward one should be going for. Awarding people for "Superior Roleplay" doesn't just smack of pretentiousness but it's impossible to gauge on a universal board making it a metric for bonuses impossible at worst and potentially inflammatory at best. Good roleplaying also doesn't equal good story telling. The two are not related but are not necessarily unconnected. Promoting one over the other is all well and good but we should be promoting both but not with Bonus Advantages or anything like that. Constructive criticism and working with people is a much better way of going about it.

Also, while I am adding my opinion, I really didn't like moving Story Elements to such a limited number in Four. It made it feel like people didn't want the world to be fleshed out and was one of the major reasons I grew bored of the game itself especially in a game where freedom of movement through the world was one of it's strong points. We weren't able to flesh out the very world we wanted to visit.

Jade_Tarem
2012-09-22, 11:31 PM
I had a problem with this when it was mentioned in game 4 and have a problem with it now. Advantages and bonus's shouldn't be left up to a vote or anything approaching it. The reward for sticking with the story...is making a bigger mark on said story and improving it. That's the only reward one should be going for. Awarding people for "Superior Roleplay" doesn't just smack of pretentiousness but it's impossible to gauge on a universal board making it a metric for bonuses impossible at worst and potentially inflammatory at best.

Also, while I am adding my opinion, I really didn't like moving Story Elements to such a limited number in Four. It made it feel like people didn't want the world to be fleshed out and was one of the major reasons I grew bored of the game itself especially in a game where freedom of movement through the world was one of it's strong points. We weren't able to flesh out the very world we wanted to visit.

I'll start with story elements, to which my response is - What? We have never decreased the starting number of story elements for the opening group of players. For that matter, Story Elements are gained at the rate of one per week, and I just don't see people spending them at that rate.

As for bonuses for roleplaying, we do not offer such kudos in order to sneer down at other players, and frankly - given that up until now, whenever the mods have asked the players about merit-awarded advantages the response has always been overwhelmingly positive - I'm a teensy bit offended that you jumped right to "being pretentious" as the reason why we're doing that and find it darkly comical that you do so in the same sentence that you describe the practice as being "inflammatory."

As for actually judging roleplay, taste may be subjective, but you nonetheless do not have to be a baker to know that a given cake tastes like the underside of a lawnmower. In the same way, you do not have to be a professional writer to be able to judge that someone might be doing a good job of writing and moving the story along - or a very poor one. I do not know if you were here for Playground 2 or not, but had you been around for a certain someone's posts you might share our perspective on trying to keep to a certain quality of roleplay. In a perfect world, you are correct that we might not need such a system. I'd certainly like to try a game without it. But there absolutely were solid reasons for trying it to begin with.

Tebryn
2012-09-22, 11:44 PM
I'll start with story elements, to which my response is - What? We have never decreased the starting number of story elements for the opening group of players.

Perhaps I didn't explain properly. The rate at which they were gained was decreased from one a week to...I believe it was one a chapter? For a game about Exploration that felt altogether stifling.


As for bonuses for roleplaying, we do not offer such kudos in order to sneer down at other players, and frankly - given that up until now, whenever the mods have asked the players about merit-awarded advantages the response has always been overwhelmingly positive - I'm a teensy bit offended that you jumped right to "being pretentious" as the reason why we're doing that and find it darkly comical that you do so in the same sentence that you describe the practice as being "inflammatory."

You'll forgive me for any offense caused, however I did not say at any point anyone in the game at present or in the past was being pretentious or even implied that anyone "sneered" at others role playing or storytelling. Merely that at first glance that's the feeling it somewhat conveys. The very word "Superior" implies that it is better, a metric I find cannot be quantified. I'll delve more into that below.

I also didn't see "overwhelmingly positive" reactions to a merit based bonuses however it could have been in games I wasn't in. Again, you'll forgive me that I hope. I kept my mouth shut on the subject at the start because I was one of the "New" Guys and generally speaking I still am. However, now that the floor is opened to working the system I feel it's actually appropriate to say "I really don't care for it." As I said, the bonus for being a "Superior" Roleplayer and sticking with the game is influencing the story as you see fit more and telling the stories you want to tell to build the world.


As for actually judging roleplay, taste may be subjective, but you nonetheless do not have to be a baker to know that a given cake tastes like the underside of a lawnmower. In the same way, you do not have to be a professional writer to be able to judge that someone might be doing a good job of writing and moving the story along - or a very poor one. I do not know if you were here for Playground 2 or not, but had you been around for a certain someone's posts you might share our perspective on trying to keep to a certain quality of roleplay.

I wasn't around for Playground 2 but...I've been roleplaying since the days of Ultima Online. I have seen bad role playing. I assure you. However bad is easy to pin down. "Superior" as the word you used is not. It's the very reason, sticking with your food analogy, why we can more or less all agree on what is -bad- food. But we can't agree on what is "Superior" food. I like spicy food on the level of eating Ghost Chili flakes on everything and everything. I find that "Superior" but there are plenty that disagree. On the same hand, I find the taste of dark choclate utterly repugnant but the Candy market seems to prove that I am an exception. "Good" is not quantifiable. Bad is. Hence the problem I find with trying to reward "Good" instead of...generally just trying to help the "Bad" not be quite so "Bad".

The only way we can establish "Superior" Role Playing is by taking a poll and going with the majority. Not only would a vote slow the game down as people wait for people to cast the vote...having seen similar systems in other games in other places, the people who feel they're Role Playing great may very well start to feel under-appreciated or insulted. Now, a rational person would say "Hey, how do I improve?" but most people aren't when their feelings are being hurt, which could lead to player arguments or people just flat leaving the game. Neither of which anyone wants.

Jade_Tarem
2012-09-23, 12:24 AM
Perhaps, but I wasn't suggesting we take a massive poll. The way this has worked before has been thus:

Player A: "Man, Player C has really been X, and I think they deserve a bonus for that."

Player B: "Sure. Anyone object?"

*Crickets*

And then Player C gets the advantage. You are quite correct that when people play their character they aren't going to do so in a way that they perceive as poor, but positive reinforcement for a character that everyone likes - at least, as a character - is usually not such a big problem.

There was, now that you have me thinking about it, one more reason for the merit-based advantages. Namely, that the characters in question might complete various goals or what have you, only for nothing to come of it.

For example, lets say that so-and-so progresses through the story until he acquires a magic sword. But...! It's the day after advantage day and he's already spent all his advantages. Now, he can either have a pretend magic sword that doesn't do anything for two weeks, which is awkward, or he can not post for two weeks, which is even worse. The merit thing was partly put into place for that issue as well.

Since we are, in fact, making adjustments to the system, how would you see that issue resolved?

Tebryn
2012-09-23, 12:30 AM
There was, now that you have me thinking about it, one more reason for the merit-based advantages. Namely, that the characters in question might complete various goals or what have you, only for nothing to come of it.

For example, lets say that so-and-so progresses through the story until he acquires a magic sword. But...! It's the day after advantage day and he's already spent all his advantages. Now, he can either have a pretend magic sword that doesn't do anything for two weeks, which is awkward, or he can not post for two weeks, which is even worse. The merit thing was partly put into place for that issue as well.

Since we are, in fact, making adjustments to the system, how would you see that issue resolved?

I actually am more inclined towards this style of metit based rewards...they're in game as well as in system instead of something more or less arbitrary and unconnected from anything going on in the game.

Starsign
2012-09-23, 12:32 AM
I actually am more inclined towards this style of metit based rewards...they're in game as well as in system instead of something more or less arbitrary and unconnected from anything going on in the game.

Agreed, I think it should work well. Though I would like to mention that there should be a way or limit to keep a player from trying to do this constantly to gain a large numbers advantage over the other players, no matter how well he or she hides it with excellent roleplaying.

Xondoure
2012-09-23, 06:02 AM
Honestly I don't think we need to codify the granting of bonuses for superior role playing. (And I don't think it's an easily abused system for the people trying to gain advantages, though perhaps a biased one against newer players.)

As I see it, this has already happened in the past without any sort of rule enforcing it. As is, when a person receives such a reward it's usually because they've been essential in keeping the game alive, or bringing characters together in a way that facilitates good storytelling while keeping people involved.

If this rule is merely meant to acknowledge that this happens, then I don't disagree. However it seems like this rule will only encourage people to try and pull crazy stunts to prove how amazing they are, and be disappointed if they aren't rewarded for the effort.

@TheDarkDM: Good to have you back with us. :smallsmile:

I mostly agree that advantage gain should return to being handed out once every couple weeks, and to leave it to the players to determine how gaining the advantage makes sense. Throwing in bonus advantages for holidays, encouragement after lulls, and important breaks in the story (when they happen, without worrying about waiting for one like with chapters.)

As for adventures. I think if they are going to continue they should be limited to three or four players at most. That way the whole game doesn't get hung up around them. Challenges may be a better way of going about this however. And I wouldn't miss either if everyone decides they just complicate things.

Finally on advantages: I think the one advantage one trick rule has already been thrown out by the rank system. Doesn't matter how many tricks really so long as it's only applicable in specific situations.

VonDoom
2012-09-23, 06:36 AM
Regarding Adventures. If I'm entirely and brutally honest, most of the ones that took ages and dragged on had rather lacking posting frequency from the runners (and sometimes participants, but one or two players not posting for a couple of days can generally be skipped over with minimal issues). The Arena was -said- to take ages, but with people interacting and doing things, I never really had that impression until 'the action' started. And when it did, it almost felt a little too early since a lot of people still had multiple interaction scenes going on.

As long as its primary purpose (or at least an enjoyable purpose) is characters interacting, how long they do so is of little consequence. The problem only came when the adventure had an action part and people were slow with their posts. I don't recall if the runner was as well, but it's entirely possible.

Which is why I've said it before: people who consider running adventures should thoroughly examine their own motivation, time and persistence before they start something big. The problem is not stories/adventures/whatever, it's when people integral to their progress don't invest enough time into it.

A potential aid to facilitate things if adventures do go bad would be to actually provide a summary of what the adventure was supposed to be to the Game Moderators and offer a few short, potential endings in summary. With that, if the adventure runner disappears without advance notice or its process becomes actually detrimental to the game to the point that multiple people are asking that it just be resolved already, it can be ended with a summary of how things proceed from the current point and end.

TheDarkDM
2012-09-23, 06:58 AM
Regarding Adventures. If I'm entirely and brutally honest, most of the ones that took ages and dragged on had rather lacking posting frequency from the runners (and sometimes participants, but one or two players not posting for a couple of days can generally be skipped over with minimal issues). The Arena was -said- to take ages, but with people interacting and doing things, I never really had that impression until 'the action' started. And when it did, it almost felt a little too early since a lot of people still had multiple interaction scenes going on.

As long as its primary purpose (or at least an enjoyable purpose) is characters interacting, how long they do so is of little consequence. The problem only came when the adventure had an action part and people were slow with their posts. I don't recall if the runner was as well, but it's entirely possible.

Which is why I've said it before: people who consider running adventures should thoroughly examine their own motivation, time and persistence before they start something big. The problem is not stories/adventures/whatever, it's when people integral to their progress don't invest enough time into it.

A potential aid to facilitate things if adventures do go bad would be to actually provide a summary of what the adventure was supposed to be to the Game Moderators and offer a few short, potential endings in summary. With that, if the adventure runner disappears without advance notice or its process becomes actually detrimental to the game to the point that multiple people are asking that it just be resolved already, it can be ended with a summary of how things proceed from the current point and end.

While you make a good point, consider for a moment: as you've said, the most naturally flowing portion of an Adventure is during the interactions between characters, and that the presence or lack thereof of a GM only becomes noticeable once challenge segments start. However, the use of Adventures to frame and lead to this interaction is just as easily accomplished by Plot Tickets. Everything from gang wars to galas can be instigated by the prudent use of a plot ticket and the involvement of players, and challenges that are now handled by the designated GM could, I think, be more elegantly portrayed by using the old form of Challenges. The only real difference is that using a combination of Plot Tickets and Challenges distributes ownership of the story somewhat evenly between the players, rather than placing ownership solely in the hands of someone who might suffer an urgent RL emergency, a change in shifts at work, or any of the other countless unforeseen events that can kill an Adventure. An added benefit is that allowing this freedom enables other players to add their own ideas to a given scenario. To continue the example of the pirate invasion from P1, after the initial "Pirates are invading" Plot Ticket, several other players added on to the scenario, introducing roving pirate mobs, a battle at the city armory, and the city guard's evacuation of the invaded districts with their own Challenges and Plot Tickets. Now, while this makes it somewhat more difficult to tell a specific story without the prior assent of all involved, my opinion is that the added investment on the part of the players and the unforeseen twists that can occur make it a superior way to approach things.

VonDoom
2012-09-23, 07:14 AM
True enough, but you're missing one thing:

Those two ways of running things are not mutually exclusive. You could easily have done that sort of plot ticket stuff in Playground 3, presumably 4 as well, since these are simply the use of Plot Tickets that multiple people expand on.

Those require less attention and time investment from one single person, are more flexible and everything else you say, making them particularly preferable for those who tend to be busy or have trouble keeping motivated if something doesn't go entirely smoothly.

However, there is a certain something to be said of having a consistent story narrated by the same person, with an overall theme, a writing consistency and a story that may be shaped by those who participate but that has a general idea of where it wants to go right from the start.

And those who can (or hope to) successfully do that ought to have the tools to do so without having to somehow expend half a dozen plot tickets for their one adventure. (This may be a vast exaggeration, or it may not. I'd have to look at the actual adventures to see what ought to have been a plot ticket that wasn't already.)

So we ought to differentiate:

The Arena thing ought to have been a Plot Ticket. The attack a second one, since it's fairly straightforward and people could have built on this whole cult business (I can't speak for the runner's intentions on whether he meant to do something specific with the whole cult or just the one NPC he introduced).

The Ikokan Ship could have been the same. A 'pirate' attack was the introduction of another element that was contained in itself and straightforward.

The Train Incident and Kasanip's adventure, however, were clearly more involved in concept and scope and fine as proper adventures. Splitting those up into straightforward 'this happens, deal with it' would have been detrimental more than anything, as far as I'm concerned, and far less interesting or involving. If some safety measures are introduced that let others bring it to an end in the event of it becoming problematic to the continuation of the game itself, leaving them in as something that can be done is, as far as I'm concerned, a must.

Xondoure
2012-09-23, 12:39 PM
True enough, but you're missing one thing:

Those two ways of running things are not mutually exclusive. You could easily have done that sort of plot ticket stuff in Playground 3, presumably 4 as well, since these are simply the use of Plot Tickets that multiple people expand on.

Those require less attention and time investment from one single person, are more flexible and everything else you say, making them particularly preferable for those who tend to be busy or have trouble keeping motivated if something doesn't go entirely smoothly.

However, there is a certain something to be said of having a consistent story narrated by the same person, with an overall theme, a writing consistency and a story that may be shaped by those who participate but that has a general idea of where it wants to go right from the start.

And those who can (or hope to) successfully do that ought to have the tools to do so without having to somehow expend half a dozen plot tickets for their one adventure. (This may be a vast exaggeration, or it may not. I'd have to look at the actual adventures to see what ought to have been a plot ticket that wasn't already.)

So we ought to differentiate:

The Arena thing ought to have been a Plot Ticket. The attack a second one, since it's fairly straightforward and people could have built on this whole cult business (I can't speak for the runner's intentions on whether he meant to do something specific with the whole cult or just the one NPC he introduced).

The Ikokan Ship could have been the same. A 'pirate' attack was the introduction of another element that was contained in itself and straightforward.

The Train Incident and Kasanip's adventure, however, were clearly more involved in concept and scope and fine as proper adventures. Splitting those up into straightforward 'this happens, deal with it' would have been detrimental more than anything, as far as I'm concerned, and far less interesting or involving. If some safety measures are introduced that let others bring it to an end in the event of it becoming problematic to the continuation of the game itself, leaving them in as something that can be done is, as far as I'm concerned, a must.

Trouble is people are less likely to do the first when the latter exists. Which is why I suggest smaller party sizes. There's nothing wrong with more single player driven co-operative narratives, that's what most tabletop RPGs are all about. However, any GM can get overwhelmed when having to keep eight or nine characters all engaged in the same adventure. Having a limit of four active players could go a long way to fixing that particular problem, encouraging people to use plot tickets and challenges for bigger events, and leave adventures for the times when a player wants full control to explore a plot they have in mind.

VonDoom
2012-09-23, 12:51 PM
Hmm. If we use the idea of preparing some solution in advance in case the adventure is stalled, we could just make an 'adventure application' instead, meaning that a small form for adventures would be drafted that runners would have to submit. This could include premise summary, scope, involved characters if known in advance, 1-3 resolution options if the adventure has to be cut short and maybe a few more things.

Since this is in addition to setting up story elements it's an extra bit of work that can be avoided if it's something straightforward that could (and should) be done via plot ticket.

Not sure if this is a good solution, but if people automatically wanting to run adventures rather than those challenges/plot tickets is potential problem, it might help. Though, honestly? For the Ikokan Ship adventure I'd absolutely have preferred setting up the scene via Plot Ticket and then using the Challenge system for the robbers.

Starsign
2012-09-23, 01:07 PM
Trouble is people are less likely to do the first when the latter exists. Which is why I suggest smaller party sizes. There's nothing wrong with more single player driven co-operative narratives, that's what most tabletop RPGs are all about. However, any GM can get overwhelmed when having to keep eight or nine characters all engaged in the same adventure. Having a limit of four active players could go a long way to fixing that particular problem, encouraging people to use plot tickets and challenges for bigger events, and leave adventures for the times when a player wants full control to explore a plot they have in mind.

If I may speak, I agree that Adventures should be fewer in number, 4 players max is my opinion. Also I think players should be more willing to make use of plot tickets and character arc progression when/if appropriate for an Adventure. I think it might help if the players can add a personal goal or objective in an adventure or be able to integrate a part of their character's plot in without overriding the entire adventure.


Hmm. If we use the idea of preparing some solution in advance in case the adventure is stalled, we could just make an 'adventure application' instead, meaning that a small form for adventures would be drafted that runners would have to submit. This could include premise summary, scope, involved characters if known in advance, 1-3 resolution options if the adventure has to be cut short and maybe a few more things.

Since this is in addition to setting up story elements it's an extra bit of work that can be avoided if it's something straightforward that could (and should) be done via plot ticket.

Not sure if this is a good solution, but if people automatically wanting to run adventures rather than those challenges/plot tickets is potential problem, it might help. Though, honestly? For the Ikokan Ship adventure I'd absolutely have preferred setting up the scene via Plot Ticket and then using the Challenge system for the robbers.
I think the Challenge system can work so long as players are willing to agree on what the specific challenge will be. If they can't agree then there could be a problem. I know it worked well in Playground 1 but that doesn't mean it will work again, especially if it'll revolve around rules that weren't in Playground 1.

VonDoom
2012-09-23, 01:14 PM
Really not a fan of placing hard limits on participants. Some can handle more than others. If we do use one, I'd feel more comfortable using 5 or 6, with a note that adventures approaching the maximum should not be started arbitrarily.

Jade_Tarem
2012-09-23, 02:02 PM
Really not a fan of placing hard limits on participants. Some can handle more than others. If we do use one, I'd feel more comfortable using 5 or 6, with a note that adventures approaching the maximum should not be started arbitrarily.

Alternatively (or even in addition to this), we could include as part of the adventure application the note of how frequently the person running the adventure expects to be able to post. If there's a chance that, at some point during the adventure, there will be a big delay or drop in posting from the person running it, then the players involved will know to go ahead and get involved in something else.


I think the Challenge system can work so long as players are willing to agree on what the specific challenge will be. If they can't agree then there could be a problem. I know it worked well in Playground 1 but that doesn't mean it will work again, especially if it'll revolve around rules that weren't in Playground 1.

Well yes, disagreements between players generally need to be resolved before IC progress can be made. That's true whether the characters are participating in challenges or eating breakfast. It's also true that success in Playground 1 doesn't equal success in another iteration of the game, but if we took things out based on what might not work then this game would just be an OOC thread full of people discussing how cool the game would have been if we had decided to run it.

VonDoom
2012-09-24, 11:41 AM
Alright, since conversation seems to have slowed a bit, let's spice things up with a new topic: location. Generally, a city will be the preferred environment since there's a lot of things going on. Making it a port city allows for added variety and does little to detract from anything else, so generally a port city (whether it's an actual seaport, a city of portals akin to Planescape's Sigil or a sky-city with flying ships) is better.

Placing it fairly close to a border can also serve to spice things up a bit, though generally a true -capital- tends to not be directly -on- the border.

Any further insights?

---

Also, I want to bring up Follower advantages again. Thinking back on the explanation for the new system, I'm not sure if that's such a good thing after all. It was explained that the reason for the advantage 'net worth increase' was that it'd only be useful if the group is there to do it, as a group.

But when I asked what that'd be like for 'leet ninjaz' who tend to split up and cover a lot of ground, I (may wrongly) recall that you're generally assumed to have enough Followers with you so that they remain useful to their Advantage level unless you're somewhere you couldn't bring them.

What, then, besides the increase is the exact difference from how it was in Playground III? If I can send six of my loyal ninja retainers across the city to spy on various targets while walking into the Magical Castle of Fu Manchu only to have, once ambushed, my four escort girls turn out to be awesome female ninjas who kick ass, then that's not much of a system limit.

While I'm generally more of a 'let's not put every little thing down and deal with things using common sense', followers especially are an exceptionally useful and easily 'abusable' advantage, since generally people will have very different ideas of what's appropriate and what isn't.

But, like I said, I may be misremembering that conversation or missing something. I hope I am, because a convenient solution would be pretty awesome to have.

Starsign
2012-09-24, 11:54 AM
Alright, since conversation seems to have slowed a bit, let's spice things up with a new topic: location. Generally, a city will be the preferred environment since there's a lot of things going on. Making it a port city allows for added variety and does little to detract from anything else, so generally a port city (whether it's an actual seaport, a city of portals akin to Planescape's Sigil or a sky-city with flying ships) is better.

Placing it fairly close to a border can also serve to spice things up a bit, though generally a true -capital- tends to not be directly -on- the border.

Any further insights?
I agree that having a port or harbor of some kind is good for the city. One of the things I really liked about Playground 3 was that the main city that the game took place in was a main attraction in regards to plot. It gave it a sense of identity and notability and I think it's one of Playground 3's strongest points. IIRC though, Jade mentioned how Story Elements weren't cranked out into the world setting like candy there as it did in Playground 1 so it can be a downside depending on player interest.

VonDoom
2012-09-24, 11:56 AM
The dreaded 'does not show response' forum bug rears its ugly head again. Behold, Starsign's post!

Tebryn
2012-09-24, 12:40 PM
Alright, since conversation seems to have slowed a bit, let's spice things up with a new topic: location. Generally, a city will be the preferred environment since there's a lot of things going on. Making it a port city allows for added variety and does little to detract from anything else, so generally a port city (whether it's an actual seaport, a city of portals akin to Planescape's Sigil or a sky-city with flying ships) is better.

Placing it fairly close to a border can also serve to spice things up a bit, though generally a true -capital- tends to not be directly -on- the border.

Any further insights?

Honestly, going with a less fleshed out system I'd like to see...a less fleshed out starting location. Wether it's an outlying post that the characters are going to for fame or glory or a ravaged port city...either way. Something less set in stone than what we've gone with so the players can build the city.




Also, I want to bring up Follower advantages again. Thinking back on the explanation for the new system, I'm not sure if that's such a good thing after all. It was explained that the reason for the advantage 'net worth increase' was that it'd only be useful if the group is there to do it, as a group.

But when I asked what that'd be like for 'leet ninjaz' who tend to split up and cover a lot of ground, I (may wrongly) recall that you're generally assumed to have enough Followers with you so that they remain useful to their Advantage level unless you're somewhere you couldn't bring them.

What, then, besides the increase is the exact difference from how it was in Playground III? If I can send six of my loyal ninja retainers across the city to spy on various targets while walking into the Magical Castle of Fu Manchu only to have, once ambushed, my four escort girls turn out to be awesome female ninjas who kick ass, then that's not much of a system limit.

While I'm generally more of a 'let's not put every little thing down and deal with things using common sense', followers especially are an exceptionally useful and easily 'abusable' advantage, since generally people will have very different ideas of what's appropriate and what isn't.

But, like I said, I may be misremembering that conversation or missing something. I hope I am, because a convenient solution would be pretty awesome to have.


They, if I recall correctly, bumped the number bonus as if what ever advantage was on the Follower by one rarity level. Though if you sent your people away...you sent them away. I think that was the same for both games however.

VonDoom
2012-09-25, 09:01 AM
Tebryn, I think that because you came in late, there's a bit of a distortion in perception as to the beginning state of the game.

Almost everything about Taelarys was completely open to start with. The Sorcerous Houses, noble titles, all that stuff was introduced by players.

Though I do think that the Houses as used in III were a little too omni-present. Especially in a city with lots of immigration and traveling going on, there ought to have been a flourishing magic 'underground', so to speak, that's tolerated mostly because it would be impossible to police in the first place.

Sorcerous Bloodlines, too, are fine, but a little too restrictive as far as expansion and concept versatility are concerned. I'd personally spin it so that Sorcerous Bloodlines are the ones who can perform 'higher' magic and have more innate power (and are thus generally presumed to be more powerful as opposed to their lesser brethren), but that there are also less powerful and established minor bloodlines stemming from various magical critters or oddities as well as learned magics -- all of which could be powerful in their own right, but generally need much longer and/or special circumstances to get as far as a proper Sorcerer, theme-wise.

That way the Houses can still be extremely prestigious and powerful, can keep a tight reign on -official and sanctioned- magic activity as opposed to underhanded and secret stuff, meaning that if you want to legally peddle your magical wares you better sign up and pay your dues, but they won't bother the obscure wise woman who occasionally does some hokey healing spells in the slums, even if they know about her activities, unless she suddenly starts a franchise or draws lots of public attention.


To summarize -- an oppressive atmosphere is fine (and awesome), but generally it should leave some wiggle room to allow players to introduce new concepts.

Jade_Tarem
2012-09-25, 09:45 AM
Tebryn, I think that because you came in late, there's a bit of a distortion in perception as to the beginning state of the game.

Almost everything about Taelarys was completely open to start with. The Sorcerous Houses, noble titles, all that stuff was introduced by players.

Though I do think that the Houses as used in III were a little too omni-present. Especially in a city with lots of immigration and traveling going on, there ought to have been a flourishing magic 'underground', so to speak, that's tolerated mostly because it would be impossible to police in the first place.

Sorcerous Bloodlines, too, are fine, but a little too restrictive as far as expansion and concept versatility are concerned. I'd personally spin it so that Sorcerous Bloodlines are the ones who can perform 'higher' magic and have more innate power (and are thus generally presumed to be more powerful as opposed to their lesser brethren), but that there are also less powerful and established minor bloodlines stemming from various magical critters or oddities as well as learned magics -- all of which could be powerful in their own right, but generally need much longer and/or special circumstances to get as far as a proper Sorcerer, theme-wise.

That way the Houses can still be extremely prestigious and powerful, can keep a tight reign on -official and sanctioned- magic activity as opposed to underhanded and secret stuff, meaning that if you want to legally peddle your magical wares you better sign up and pay your dues, but they won't bother the obscure wise woman who occasionally does some hokey healing spells in the slums, even if they know about her activities, unless she suddenly starts a franchise or draws lots of public attention.


To summarize -- an oppressive atmosphere is fine (and awesome), but generally it should leave some wiggle room to allow players to introduce new concepts.

Those are good points, and good reasons why we would want to include changes if we went back to PG3, but I don't know how applicable that will be in PG5. So far, each iteration of the game has featured a different setup concerning magic.

It sounds like what we had in PG1 was more your thing - Using magic in the city required a license, but we had a fairly extensive amount of unsanctioned magic going on regardless. Even the normally law-abiding Maranis was an illegal mage for the first half of the game, although that was just because she didn't know about the sanction until she had teamed up with the city guard.

As for followers, I have most of a post done to answer your questions on that on my other computer, and won't get back to it until tonight. The current system is still feeling the echoes of how much of a mess it was in PG1, though.

TheDarkDM
2012-09-25, 01:06 PM
Can I just say I kind of liked the weird, nebulous wackiness of followers in P1? I don't deny there were problems, but I liked that it was so loose that everyone's mooks could be flavored a different way and still work.

And as the creator of the Sorcerous Houses, Doom, I find that suggestion to be awesome and a fine compromise. I am sometimes blinded by my personal preference for grimmer, darker grimdark, an so apologize for being the source of any consternation on the magical front.

Starsign
2012-09-25, 01:10 PM
And as the creator of the Sorcerous Houses, Doom, I find that suggestion to be awesome and a fine compromise. I am sometimes blinded by my personal preference for grimmer, darker grimdark, an so apologize for being the source of any consternation on the magical front.

Huge fan of A Song of Fire and Ice? :smallwink:

EDIT: BTW please respond to my PM when you can. :smallsmile:

TheDarkDM
2012-09-25, 01:26 PM
Huge fan of A Song of Fire and Ice? :smallwink:

EDIT: BTW please respond to my PM when you can. :smallsmile:

Pretty much. :smalltongue:

And I'll get to your PM today. Sorry for the delay.

Starsign
2012-09-25, 01:33 PM
Pretty much. :smalltongue:

And I'll get to your PM today. Sorry for the delay.

No problem. Thanks for letting me know.

Also I'm mostly staying out of the conversation of Followers, but this is the first time I've heard of PG1's Followers "being a mess" as Jade said.

VonDoom
2012-09-25, 01:35 PM
Oh, don't get me wrong, I love grimdark myself. But a huge part of that is also a huge amount of corruption and inability to police everything that exacerbates it when they -do- show up and do something. And make examples of people when they do. Right? :smallbiggrin:

And, hey, if you want to gain awesome magic equal to the strongest natural casters by selling your soul to Hell or dealing with Cthulhu-type-insanities, why not? Or do awesome ritualistic stuff with lots of very particular things about them in exchange for a very specific (but powerful) effect, why not?

Though, actually, the most grimdark magic system I can think of -is- one where you can only get magical powers by bargaining with evil entities or chaining yourself to eldritch artifacts. :smallamused:

(Or, you know, becoming a monster yourself and gaining abilities through doing that. One could do awesome Lovecraftian spins on the vampiric front, voluntarily infect yourself with Lycanthropy during an unholy ritual to gain limited shapeshifting power in exchange for the occasional violent outburst, remove your soul and place it in an egg inside a ... well, you'd probably know the Koschei the Deathless drill, Dark. Yay proto-Lichdom!)

Starsign
2012-09-25, 01:44 PM
Speaking of grimdark, what kind of tone will we be going for with Playground 5? Nothing is wrong with grimdark but I'd like to avoid it dominating the entire game. I think it severely limits the interest other players might have with it if they might be expecting something more general.

Please ignore this post. I was being rather nonsensical here. :smallredface:

Tebryn
2012-09-25, 02:45 PM
I don't think we should go for a tone. Let the players set it as they wish.

Starsign
2012-09-25, 02:47 PM
I don't think we should go for a tone. Let the players set it as they wish.

...Yeah, that's why I shouldn't have bothered with my post I made here before *facepalm*

TechnOkami
2012-09-25, 02:59 PM
Question: what were the parameters of Bastion before it became fully fleshed out? Also, what lead to its, well, popularity in to becoming a lore-packed sandwich of deliciousness?

I'm asking this because if we can nail down the catalyst which caused people to go bananas to add fluff to the Bastion/Telarys world, then we could make a new world much more easily, I think.

Xondoure
2012-09-25, 03:17 PM
Yeah PG3 was tricky with magic, though as has been said the issues there are unlikely to show up again.

And I think player consensus seems to be leaning more towards as open as possible in regards to setting, so with that in mind I would suggest we wait and see what tone develops over the course of the game.

As for adventure size limits: If you want more than five players including yourself to be involved then in my opinion that's a good sign that it shouldn't be an adventure and should be a plot ticket instead. Alternatively, larger adventures could be approved, but only for players that have already successfully run smaller scale events. Moving away from adventures, especially in the early days of the game, seems like the smartest move all around. But it'd be nice if we could keep the option open, while mitigating its potential to drag the game down with it.

VonDoom
2012-09-25, 03:22 PM
Well, open, but to an extent that it still remains consistent and not a huge giant cluster-f ... well, you know.

And I'm not sure that not setting anything at all to start with is a good idea. You need at least a little bit to build upon. A general theme/tone is a good thing, something we can vote on and discuss that in the beginning before we get started with fleshing things out, but that gives people a common base to work with.

Xondoure
2012-09-25, 04:22 PM
Well, open, but to an extent that it still remains consistent and not a huge giant cluster-f ... well, you know.

And I'm not sure that not setting anything at all to start with is a good idea. You need at least a little bit to build upon. A general theme/tone is a good thing, something we can vote on and discuss that in the beginning before we get started with fleshing things out, but that gives people a common base to work with.

Trouble is such themes inevitably clash with each other. Things such as "swords are still relevant" are okay because that keeps options open instead of closing them. But when stuff like "no magical technology" gets in the way of what people want to play I think the game suffers for it. Not that choosing a genre can't be entertaining, but part of the charm of playground 1 that people have been talking about was the pure open world where literally all that was established from the beginning was a port town called Bastion.

VonDoom
2012-09-25, 04:37 PM
Not so, Xondoure. To use an exaggerated example: if we're playing in a fantasy world and someone wants to make a Space Marine character, that's not the place for it.

To create an at least vaguely consistent setting, one must first agree on a basic tone/genre/theme/whatever you call it.

Xondoure
2012-09-25, 04:47 PM
Not so, Xondoure. To use an exaggerated example: if we're playing in a fantasy world and someone wants to make a Space Marine character, that's not the place for it.

To create an at least vaguely consistent setting, one must first agree on a basic tone/genre/theme/whatever you call it.

My point is more that the setting, and therefore what is and isn't appropriate could be built up along with the story elements that slowly make up the setting. Exaggerated examples are obvious, and easy to catch. Characters that are less so may be considered to simply be adding to the setting, as opposed to violating it.

To use an example from Playground 3, a big part of it was the monopolization of magic by the sorcerous houses. But as you yourself pointed out this was too restrictive, and the game had a large amount of underground casters which either clashed with the setting, or added another layer to the structure of the city depending on your point of view.

Or look at the ban on magical technology which was consistently ignored (to the point that an early character was a homunculus.)

If all we have is a single town, and then the details of how magic, technology, and everything else is set down by the players until we have a setting with enough rules to decide what new story elements add and which ones subtract from the setting, that seems like the ideal set up to me.

Jade_Tarem
2012-09-26, 09:37 AM
Barring the aforementioned easy-to-catch exaggerated examples, we found in PG1 that throwing a bunch of things against a blank theme might alter the setting's "standards" somewhat, but wouldn't wreck it.

To give you an example, early in the recruitment thread I created the Brightleaf Clans as a collection of elven tribes in an almost-permanently frozen coniferous forested mountain range, let them have Standard Tolkienesque Technology, and then focused on culture. I figured that would put them on par with the rest of the world in terms of tech.

But I was wrong! Bastion and Vivexia had the next century's worth of technology available, frequently trotting out plate mail, fancy carriages, crossbows, and even arabesques on occasion. And a couple of distant nations or nation-states had even higher tech, although they were pushing it and got called on it when the player that created them started talking about rifling and interchangable parts. The thing was that the elves I made found themselves at the low end of the bell curve when it came to tech, instead of in the middle.

The players worked it out together - this low end tech was blamed on the harsh conditions and isolated area that they were living in, and the Brightleaf Clans, as a whole, took the setting's instability to try to work their way out of their isolationist stance and reconnect with the rest of the world to catch up in the tech race - using greater average magical proficiency and wider skillsets as a crutch in the meantime. It worked out very well, even though where it ended wasn't what I had in mind when it started.

GuyFawkes
2012-09-26, 01:17 PM
Hello there.

Finally had the time to drop by and read this thread through.

Just a suggestion. Could we have, perhaps on the OP or in some other place for that matter, a summary of proposed changes for each aspect of the game (advantages, adventures, etc) being tackled so we could at least mark where each of them is at in terms of development of the actual version to be used for future games? It would help for others who would want to contribute and put forth their opinions to know which issues still need to be addressed and which ones are already pretty much hammered down.

Cheers!

Jade_Tarem
2012-09-26, 03:16 PM
I can do this as soon as my job exits crazy month.

Starsign
2012-10-01, 10:09 AM
Been rather quiet here. Everyone been well lately? (wondering about Guy's suggestion too, might help to organize everything)

TechnOkami
2012-10-01, 10:24 AM
I think everyone's waiting for the dead month of PbP games to pass over, and then start a new Playground Game. :smalltongue:

Starsign
2012-10-01, 10:27 AM
I think everyone's waiting for the dead month of PbP games to pass over, and then start a new Playground Game. :smalltongue:

I believe it's dead months as I recall November and part of December are pretty bad as well. (sarcastic yay for college exams) Hence why Jade recommended we start Playground 5 mid-December.

Though great to hear from you anyway. :smallbiggrin:

TechnOkami
2012-10-01, 10:30 AM
I believe it's dead months as I recall November and part of December are pretty bad as well. (sarcastic yay for college exams) Hence why Jade recommended we start Playground 5 mid-December.

Though great to hear from you anyway. :smallbiggrin:

Well, yeah, makes sense that everyone's waiting for time to pass over before we crack our knuckles and start crafting new world.

Also, I have like 30 mins. of wait time before my painting class, so I have nothing better to do.

BladeofObliviom
2012-10-01, 10:36 AM
Or look at the ban on magical technology which was consistently ignored (to the point that an early character was a homunculus.)

For the record, it was passed off with technobabble about steam-based pneumatics, neural wiring, and simple motors.

Probably impossible realistically, but the only magic involved was to keep the brain from just falling apart or dying in there, not actually interacting with the tech. :smalltongue:

I stand by that concept as one of the more awesome things I've come up with, too. :smallamused:

GuyFawkes
2012-10-01, 11:26 AM
@Star actually if you'd take a look at the OP, there's already a portion for what I suggested, though as stated it is nowhere near complete.

Jade_Tarem
2012-10-01, 11:53 AM
Correct. It was kind of a busy month where I work, but the super crunch mode is finally over, so I can get back to work on that portion of the opening post that's sorting and displaying all the suggestions and decisions. It won't all be done at once, but I do intend to work on it tonight.

Don't let that stop you from making new suggestions. I'll get to it all eventually.

Starsign
2012-10-01, 12:08 PM
@Star actually if you'd take a look at the OP, there's already a portion for what I suggested, though as stated it is nowhere near complete.
Oh! I uh... Missed that. That was silly of me. :smallredface:


Correct. It was kind of a busy month where I work, but the super crunch mode is finally over, so I can get back to work on that portion of the opening post that's sorting and displaying all the suggestions and decisions. It won't all be done at once, but I do intend to work on it tonight.

Don't let that stop you from making new suggestions. I'll get to it all eventually.

Well my suggestions are relatively crap at best so I'll probably stay out of suggestions unless I've got something I know is worth asking. Anyone else have any suggestions though?

Xondoure
2012-10-01, 01:44 PM
For the record, it was passed off with technobabble about steam-based pneumatics, neural wiring, and simple motors.

Probably impossible realistically, but the only magic involved was to keep the brain from just falling apart or dying in there, not actually interacting with the tech. :smalltongue:

I stand by that concept as one of the more awesome things I've come up with, too. :smallamused:

Oh I agree it was awesome. Hence why it's such a great example for why restrictions like no magitech hurt the game more than help it.

DrewVolker
2012-10-01, 09:49 PM
I love this set up. So much so that I've been toying around with trying to adapt it to a tabletopish feel so I could give it a go with a few friends of mine in town.
I'm also thinking about trying out the concept on a different online rping site a friend of mine is trying to get me into.
But I did wish to ask if this was okay before doing so. I will give credit where credit is due (most likely by saying "I am using the Playground system, located here: [with a link to this thread here]" or "I am using a system based on the Playground system", though I would like to know if you would be okay with this before hand.

Thanks for the awesome system!

GuyFawkes
2012-10-01, 10:33 PM
Hmm, I do not have suggestions yet for the rules, but I do have another for ease of compiling stuff. Comments, suggestions, and points regarding a particular rule or topic could be posted under headers so it would be easy to look up and sort.

For example,

On adventures

I am blah blah blah....

On the setting

blah blah blah blah....

...something like that.

ForzaFiori
2012-10-02, 01:04 AM
Hey, figured I'd at least drop in and say hey (and subscribe). I may try to join P5 when it starts (and try to be less flaky than I was in P1 and 2)

Jade_Tarem
2012-10-02, 04:42 AM
Hmm, I do not have suggestions yet for the rules, but I do have another for ease of compiling stuff. Comments, suggestions, and points regarding a particular rule or topic could be posted under headers so it would be easy to look up and sort.

For example,

On adventures

I am blah blah blah....

On the setting

blah blah blah blah....

...something like that.

I was already planning on doing that - hence the Leadership heading there now - I just haven't gotten around to the next topic yet.


Hey, figured I'd at least drop in and say hey (and subscribe). I may try to join P5 when it starts (and try to be less flaky than I was in P1 and 2)

Good to see you again!


I love this set up. So much so that I've been toying around with trying to adapt it to a tabletopish feel so I could give it a go with a few friends of mine in town.
I'm also thinking about trying out the concept on a different online rping site a friend of mine is trying to get me into.
But I did wish to ask if this was okay before doing so. I will give credit where credit is due (most likely by saying "I am using the Playground system, located here: [with a link to this thread here]" or "I am using a system based on the Playground system", though I would like to know if you would be okay with this before hand.

Thanks for the awesome system!

I don't see a problem with this. Good luck!

GuyFawkes
2012-10-02, 08:49 AM
I was already planning on doing that - hence the Leadership heading there now - I just haven't gotten around to the next topic yet.

Ah, I meant for those who would post their suggestions in the future. So it would be easier for whoever would be compiling stuff (I'm guessing you mostly).

Jade_Tarem
2012-10-02, 02:58 PM
Ah, I meant for those who would post their suggestions in the future. So it would be easier for whoever would be compiling stuff (I'm guessing you mostly).

That would indeed be helpful.

Edit: while not complete, I think the five categories now shown under the workbench will cover all of the suggestions the players had in the PG4 OOC. Did I leave any topics out?

Starsign
2012-10-02, 08:33 PM
That would indeed be helpful.

Edit: while not complete, I think the five categories now shown under the workbench will cover all of the suggestions the players had in the PG4 OOC. Did I leave any topics out?

Not as far as I can recall. IIRC setting ideas only came up on this specific thread.

Starsign
2012-10-11, 08:50 AM
It's been rather quiet here lately. Is anyone else still checking up on this thread?

ForzaFiori
2012-10-11, 01:07 PM
I'm still here, but since I haven't played since P2 (and I only stayed in it for a short time) I don't really know what problems the current rule set has.

Jade_Tarem
2012-10-11, 03:38 PM
I'm still here, but since I haven't played since P2 (and I only stayed in it for a short time) I don't really know what problems the current rule set has.

Mostly? Not enough players. :smallamused:

That said, I'm still monitoring this thread. And updating the OP occasionally when I can.

Starsign
2012-10-12, 10:27 AM
I think the problem is more not enough players who have the time, especially during midterms and exams. With the other games I'm in, I'm not sure if I'll have time to join P5 if we ever get to that.

...BTW, DM if you are still reading this thread, could you respond to my PM that I sent a short time before the forums went down please? I was hoping to continue our conversation we had there. :smallsmile:

Tebryn
2012-10-12, 11:41 AM
It's been rather quiet here lately. Is anyone else still checking up on this thread?

Well, the forums were down for 4 days which doesn't help but the biggest thing? We're not starting until another month and a bit more...there's not much to say other than that? The rules weren't really a huge problem in the first place, at least from what I saw, so for me there's little need to comment. I'm just waiting for Five to start.

GuyFawkes
2012-10-12, 11:42 AM
Or lack of players willing to stick with the game 'til the end. :smallwink: This is just coming from whatever small experience I have with this game, but I just don't see the advantage of picking up wherever you want to proceed in your character's development being used enough in this game.

Sure it's a given one or more players of the characters yours is in interacting with becomes unable to post for whatever reason. This is pbp, it's bound to happen. But if you wanted to, you could just very much pick up some other day and do something else with your character, possibly with other players. I just don't see this exercised really, a facet of the game which should somehow mitigate lulls in adventures or scenarios and such.

I don't believe it's just because people are busy. It's more of people getting tired of the game. Because if you really like to play in a game, no matter how long you are gone, you'd come back and play again whenever you are able to do so.

As for how to address that, I have not a clue. If you can't find something fun to do in a freeform game, I guess it just isn't for you? :smalltongue:

Jade_Tarem
2012-10-12, 07:42 PM
Does aaaaaanybody want to give a Sci-Fi base technology a shot? For PG5, I mean?

We've done fantasy at all pre-industrial tech levels other than "Dark Ages or Earlier," you see. Does no one want anything different?

BladeofObliviom
2012-10-12, 07:49 PM
Does aaaaaanybody want to give a Sci-Fi base technology a shot? For PG5, I mean?

We've done fantasy at all pre-industrial tech levels other than "Dark Ages or Earlier," you see. Does no one want anything different?

Hmm. Probably a pre-spaceflight version, though, or else it will end up being Playground 4 IN SPACE! In fact, an earth-limited "cyberpunk" sort of game might be interesting.

Tebryn
2012-10-12, 07:51 PM
Does aaaaaanybody want to give a Sci-Fi base technology a shot? For PG5, I mean?

We've done fantasy at all pre-industrial tech levels other than "Dark Ages or Earlier," you see. Does no one want anything different?

The Sci-Fi game I feel would suffer the same problems that the High Seas Adventure suffered. The world is much to large and much to open, even more so with a Sci-Fi theme.

A modern setting like the Afterlife idea would be cool but really...I think we're putting the cart before the horse here. Especially considering we've been discussing not over planning things and not letting the setting breath.

Starsign
2012-10-12, 08:00 PM
Hmm. Probably a pre-spaceflight version, though, or else it will end up being Playground 4 IN SPACE! In fact, an earth-limited "cyberpunk" sort of game might be interesting.


The Sci-Fi game I feel would suffer the same problems that the High Seas Adventure suffered. The world is much to large and much to open, even more so with a Sci-Fi theme.

A modern setting like the Afterlife idea would be cool but really...I think we're putting the cart before the horse here. Especially considering we've been discussing not over planning things and not letting the setting breath.

My thoughts echo these two. Sci-fi might be a good idea on paper but I think it's best to avoid the space-faring part of it.

I remember once talking with Xondoure and he once suggested a superhero-ish one where everyone has an extraordinary amount of advantages to start with. (if I'm not recalling correctly Xon, please let me know :smallredface:) Thought I'd mention that just in case.

Xondoure
2012-10-12, 08:01 PM
The Sci-Fi game I feel would suffer the same problems that the High Seas Adventure suffered. The world is much to large and much to open, even more so with a Sci-Fi theme.

A modern setting like the Afterlife idea would be cool but really...I think we're putting the cart before the horse here. Especially considering we've been discussing not over planning things and [not] letting the setting breath.

Well, if we do head towards sci fi, my suggestion would be Star Trek/Warsish sci fi. Or in other words, futuristic fantasy. Trouble with hard sci fi is it's very restrictive, and indeed the fun is in exploring those self imposed limits and what that creates. Soft sci fi is much more all inclusive.

That said I'd love to see an early 20th century vibe. Declining empires, world wars, advent of the airplane...

Tebryn
2012-10-12, 08:04 PM
That said I'd love to see an early 20th century vibe. Declining empires, world wars, advent of the airplane...

I'd like this as well, though still with a fantasy bent. Honestly, the Steampunk/Magecraft setting we had in three was really interesting. My vote, if we're voting on a feel...would be something like this. I'd love to explore a transition from MAGIC to Steam Punk setting.

Starsign
2012-10-12, 08:07 PM
WThat said I'd love to see an early 20th century vibe. Declining empires, world wars, advent of the airplane...

Oh I'd agree with this as well. But I'd rather avoid Steampunk. Didn't we already have that for Playground 3? I think we can try going with something else than Steampunk.

BladeofObliviom
2012-10-12, 08:08 PM
Eh, I wouldn't go so far as to vote on a "Feel." Establishing a Tech baseline is one thing, but establishing the feel of the setting before anyone starts worldbuilding is probably not the best idea.

Xondoure
2012-10-12, 08:38 PM
I'd like this as well, though still with a fantasy bent. Honestly, the Steampunk/Magecraft setting we had in three was really interesting. My vote, if we're voting on a feel...would be something like this. I'd love to explore a transition from MAGIC to Steam Punk setting.

Technology wise steam punk would be a fading novelty at that point in time. Other than trains and some ships WWI was pretty firmly in the combustion engine phase.

Tebryn
2012-10-12, 08:47 PM
I'm aware of that but I don't think we should use the Real World for the baseline of much other than "This setting is like X period." Not just because playing in the real world is something I do every day and thus am against doing in game but also because Forum Rules.

TechnOkami
2012-10-12, 09:05 PM
I'd certainly like a sci-fi campaign of sorts.

I'd love to play a nature-based person where nature has fused perfectly with nanotechnology.

Kasanip
2012-10-12, 09:31 PM
I don't have such an opinion about a setting. Sci-Fi Eris, or Modern Eris, or Fantasy Eris are same kind of character, I think. To say, it is probably possible to play a character of any setting.

However, it is easier for me if setting can be understood easily. I think [Sci Fi] can have good stories. But I don't know if technology vocabulary can be understood by me.

Jade_Tarem
2012-10-12, 09:37 PM
On OPEN SPACE = BAD!

I tend to think that this is a distortion of the lesson we picked up from Playground 2.

In PG2, players were scattered everywhere, limiting opportunities for interaction and contributing to the fast end of the game. The problem was that, with Teleportation so restricted, the game's base technology didn't allow for rapid travel - and we had two or three attempts to create a City of Adventure.

Now consider soft sci-fi. There's no longer a hard restriction on how long it takes to get anywhere. If our baseline FTL tech is just that good, then we can have a big ol' space station city with ships popping in from just about anywhere. There's no shortage of plots or adventures for that sort of setup - Deep Space 9 and Babylon 5 ran at the same time and never really had trouble making that work.*

Plus, it comes with some bonuses that you don't get in the more fantasy setting. I've seen elves get added in to every setting so far, but in space players would, I think, get a little more creative - or at the very least, be drawing from a different pool of archetypes.

And I'm not ignoring the other ideas - but "Magic as technology, but seriously" has been done very well in Eberron and even some TV shows.

*This is an oversimplification of the issue. There were actually severe legal questions that came up during the creation of the two shows due to their similarity. Nonetheless, DS9 ran for seven seasons and B5 ran for five, so I think we can call them reasonably successful.

Kasanip
2012-10-13, 08:34 AM
Now consider soft sci-fi. There's no longer a hard restriction on how long it takes to get anywhere. If our baseline FTL tech is just that good, then we can have a big ol' space station city with ships popping in from just about anywhere. There's no shortage of plots or adventures for that sort of setup - Deep Space 9 and Babylon 5 ran at the same time and never really had trouble making that work.*

I think there is favorite sentence of plot of a forum user The_Succubus and TheDarkDM, to say "All travel happens at the speed of plot, meaning your characters reaches where he or she needs to be exactly when the plot demands them to."
Wasn't one concern about use of [adventure] to cause many troubles, so not to use again? Like it is said by Jade_Tarem, it doesn't seem a different situation of Playground 3 and 4, I think.



Plus, it comes with some bonuses that you don't get in the more fantasy setting. I've seen elves get added in to every setting so far, but in space players would, I think, get a little more creative - or at the very least, be drawing from a different pool of archetypes.

Sorry, actually it was my first nostalgic idea: 星界の戦旗 (http://www.sunrise-inc.co.jp/seikai/) :smallredface:

Jade_Tarem
2012-10-13, 09:58 AM
Sorry, actually it was my first nostalgic idea: 星界の戦旗 (http://www.sunrise-inc.co.jp/seikai/) :smallredface:

There's no reason that elves can't show up again, or anything else (I do think Warhammer 40K's orcs should sit this one out, though). However, I doubt that the Liir (http://sots.rorschach.net/Category:Liir) would get added to a fantasy or modern setting.

Edit: Also, the "speed of plot" statement is borrowed from none other than J. Straczynski, the creator of... Babylon 5. A TV show set on a space station. How about that? :smallamused:

Starsign
2012-10-13, 10:24 AM
Just to mention here, Sci-fi can be VERY loose in terms of what it actually is. At the moment we just seem to be connecting it to space-traveling. (and everything that applies to it) Generally I like to think of it as a genre of advanced technology and science in the future; the specifics depend on the work in question. In this case I'll just use space-travel in replace of Sci-Fi if we go with the space station idea.

Whether or not space-travel can work we can try for ourselves, but I think the more important question is if we want to have a space-traveling setting or not; I think that should be decided before recruitment begins. Trying to add space-traveling technology to a fantasy setting seems a little... Odd to me. I've seen works of fiction that suddenly shift genres part-way in, almost always with results that lack the writing quality these kinds of games usually have.

So I think it might be a good idea to first decide whether we go with Fantasy or space-travel before we figure out how space-travel is going to work for a game like this. I'm all up for either even if Sci-Fi and cosmic settings aren't my strong suit.

Jade_Tarem
2012-10-13, 11:13 AM
Whether or not space-travel can work we can try for ourselves, but I think the more important question is if we want to have a space-traveling setting or not; I think that should be decided before recruitment begins. Trying to add space-traveling technology to a fantasy setting seems a little... Odd to me. I've seen works of fiction that suddenly shift genres part-way in, almost always with results that lack the writing quality these kinds of games usually have.

Then you've been reading the wrong Sci-Fi/Fantasy. Writing quality and genre are separate beasts. To paraphrase Jim Butcher: "Picture a plot where a farm kid is orphaned by circumstance, but an old wizard takes him on as an apprentice. They then team up with a snarky, greedy rogue and an intelligent animal to rescue a feisty princess from the Black Knight in his fortress of doom. Done wrong, that's a fantasy cliche. Done right? It's Star Wars." Even if you aren't a fan of Star Wars, there's a lot of truth to that.

No one is arguing that the Science Fiction and Fantasy genres aren't huge. There is also an entire genre called SciFi/Fantasy that combines the two, which includes the aforementioned Star Wars and, arguably, a lot of other things. No one is arguing that we don't need to establish a base tech level before we proceed - that's what this entire conversation is about. The one area where I feel the mods did the players a serious disservice in Playground 4 was establishing a lot of limits on the setting. If we had just specified a time period and base tech level, the players could probably have produced a world more to everyone's liking.

And while it's correct that we shouldn't do it if that's not what the players want, I haven't heard anyone say "I don't want to play a space game." The objection is always "Space will never work!" Yet the reasons for why it won't work seem a little bizarre to me. "It's too open and inclusive and travel is too unrestricted" is much the same thing as saying "I can't move with all this space to do it in!"

What, exactly, suffers if we have FTL? The concern seems to be that the player characters will disappear to the far corners of the galaxy and never ever talk to one another, but that's... kinda goofy. You're the players. You control the player characters. We still have a City of Adventure - the Space Station (and we can park it over a fully inhabited moon/planet if that's not enough) - so it's up to you to invent a reason why your character would want to live/be there most of the time. You know, the same way that you would invent a reason for your character to be in Bastion or Telraya or Taelarys or Wayfarer's Point. Someone mentioned that we should avoid Playground IN SPACE but... why? Playground was never tied to a specific time period or even genre. It's just a way to have fun and try out character concepts that can't be modeled by a more restrictive system.

GuyFawkes
2012-10-13, 11:27 AM
Yet another thing that I don't get why having a sea-based campaign is a bad thing. If you want to be somewhere at some point in time, you could be there anyway.

So, again I don't really see the problem with a soft sci-fi space setting being too large when you can have FTL travel, or hell, even instantaneous travel.

Well, if people are into into weird stuff like me, you could very well mix actual fantasy elements with steampunk and sci-fi (mecha) elements a la Xenogears.

Tebryn
2012-10-13, 11:31 AM
I haven't heard anyone say "I don't want to play a space game." The objection is always "Space will never work!"

I do not wish to play a space game.

GuyFawkes
2012-10-13, 11:35 AM
Then you've been reading the wrong Sci-Fi/Fantasy. Writing quality and genre are separate beasts. To paraphrase Jim Butcher: "Picture a plot where a farm kid is orphaned by circumstance, but an old wizard takes him on as an apprentice. They then team up with a snarky, greedy rogue and an intelligent animal to rescue a feisty princess from the Black Knight in his fortress of doom. Done wrong, that's a fantasy cliche. Done right? It's Star Wars." Even if you aren't a fan of Star Wars, there's a lot of truth to that.

No one is arguing that the Science Fiction and Fantasy genres aren't huge. There is also an entire genre called SciFi/Fantasy that combines the two, which includes the aforementioned Star Wars and, arguably, a lot of other things. No one is arguing that we don't need to establish a base tech level before we proceed - that's what this entire conversation is about. The one area where I feel the mods did the players a serious disservice in Playground 4 was establishing a lot of limits on the setting. If we had just specified a time period and base tech level, the players could probably have produced a world more to everyone's liking.

And while it's correct that we shouldn't do it if that's not what the players want, I haven't heard anyone say "I don't want to play a space game." The objection is always "Space will never work!" Yet the reasons for why it won't work seem a little bizarre to me. "It's too open and inclusive and travel is too unrestricted" is much the same thing as saying "I can't move with all this space to do it in!"

What, exactly, suffers if we have FTL? The concern seems to be that the player characters will disappear to the far corners of the galaxy and never ever talk to one another, but that's... kinda goofy. You're the players. You control the player characters. We still have a City of Adventure - the Space Station (and we can park it over a fully inhabited moon/planet if that's not enough) - so it's up to you to invent a reason why your character would want to live/be there most of the time. You know, the same way that you would invent a reason for your character to be in Bastion or Telraya or Taelarys or Wayfarer's Point. Someone mentioned that we should avoid Playground IN SPACE but... why? Playground was never tied to a specific time period or even genre. It's just a way to have fun and try out character concepts that can't be modeled by a more restrictive system.

Maybe I should go ahead and say that from now on we should interpret someone saying a setting/story element not working is equivalent to him/her saying he/she doesn't like the setting/story element. :smallbiggrin:

Tebryn
2012-10-13, 11:36 AM
Maybe I should go ahead and say that from now on we should interpret someone saying a setting/story element not working is equivalent to him/her saying he/she doesn't like the setting/story element. :smallbiggrin:

I don't think that's particularly fair. :smalltongue: Or helpful.

TechnOkami
2012-10-13, 11:37 AM
Question: what's FTL again?

Starsign
2012-10-13, 11:38 AM
Maybe I should go ahead and say that from now on we should interpret someone saying a setting/story element not working is equivalent to him/her saying he/she doesn't like the setting/story element. :smallbiggrin:


I don't think that's particularly fair. :smalltongue: Or helpful.
Um... Yeah, agreeing with Tebryn here :smallredface:


Question: what's FTL again?

The computer game rougelike. Didn't you see it on Steam? :smalltongue:

Tebryn
2012-10-13, 11:43 AM
The computer game rougelike. Didn't you see it on Steam? :smalltongue:

A very fun game, and as difficult as walking uphill on a downward incline.

FTL is Faster Than Light.

GuyFawkes
2012-10-13, 11:47 AM
I don't think that's particularly fair. :smalltongue: Or helpful.

Of course it's a jest. But to be clear, my point here is if someone does not like a particular element, one should not go about and say things like that will not work and just say it outright. Like you did, my good sir. You stated you don't like a space game, plain and simple. That is how things should be done. :smallwink:


Just to mention here, Sci-fi can be VERY loose in terms of what it actually is. At the moment we just seem to be connecting it to space-traveling. (and everything that applies to it) Generally I like to think of it as a genre of advanced technology and science in the future; the specifics depend on the work in question. In this case I'll just use space-travel in replace of Sci-Fi if we go with the space station idea.

Whether or not space-travel can work we can try for ourselves, but I think the more important question is if we want to have a space-traveling setting or not; I think that should be decided before recruitment begins. Trying to add space-traveling technology to a fantasy setting seems a little... Odd to me. I've seen works of fiction that suddenly shift genres part-way in, almost always with results that lack the writing quality these kinds of games usually have.

So I think it might be a good idea to first decide whether we go with Fantasy or space-travel before we figure out how space-travel is going to work for a game like this. I'm all up for either even if Sci-Fi and cosmic settings aren't my strong suit.

I agree. My take here is if we do take the sci-fi route for PG5, then we start with that. Whether it will be a space-station, space exploration game, or whether it is a land-bound game will have to be decided by the players through the process of setting creation.

@Techno It's Faster-Than-Light

Tebryn
2012-10-13, 11:57 AM
Of course it's a jest. But to be clear, my point here is if someone does not like a particular element, one should not go about and say things like that will not work and just say it outright. Like you did, my good sir. You stated you don't like a space game, plain and simple. That is how things should be done. :smallwink:


It's not even that. I don't mind games set on space ships or things like that. I mean, I just praised FTL: Faster Than Light as being jolly good fun but...perhaps it's the context of putting it to the forums or even pen and paper where it simply starts to break down for me. I've been doing Play By Posts for a long time and while a whole lot of games just belly up, I've never seen them go into the ditch as fast as Space Travel games. Now, that's just personal experiance but we're the sum total of all of that so my gut reaction to seeing "Playground: In Spaaaaaaaaaaace" is....avoid it. I'd rather make Playground 5 work than have to discuss why it didn't work while we plot out Playground 6 if we plot it out at all.

Sure, that's a little pessimistic and maybe not fair to what very well could be a spectacular game where everyone enjoys themselves and everyone finishes what they intended to do. That's a possibility. However, another part of me is leery when we start this by saying "Less defined aspects of the game" and then go and start defining aspects of the game. That's what Playground 4 was going to be when we first discussed it and it was much more restrictive than Playground 3.

Generic should be what we focus on and let the starting story elements decide what we do. If the majority of story elements swing towards a High Fantasy game then that's what we play. If the Story Elements swing to a Space Opera set in a distant star system with giant space smurfs then so be it. Ya, it's going to be difficult to get new interest swiftly, however that's the joy of having this thread. The older characters can easily make their characters here and then we can see what comes out of the blender. Then we make a recruitment thread. I am more opposed to trying to set up even baselines and so early at that than anything else really.

GuyFawkes
2012-10-13, 12:52 PM
It's not even that. I don't mind games set on space ships or things like that. I mean, I just praised FTL: Faster Than Light as being jolly good fun but...perhaps it's the context of putting it to the forums or even pen and paper where it simply starts to break down for me. I've been doing Play By Posts for a long time and while a whole lot of games just belly up, I've never seen them go into the ditch as fast as Space Travel games. Now, that's just personal experiance but we're the sum total of all of that so my gut reaction to seeing "Playground: In Spaaaaaaaaaaace" is....avoid it. I'd rather make Playground 5 work than have to discuss why it didn't work while we plot out Playground 6 if we plot it out at all.

Sure, that's a little pessimistic and maybe not fair to what very well could be a spectacular game where everyone enjoys themselves and everyone finishes what they intended to do. That's a possibility. However, another part of me is leery when we start this by saying "Less defined aspects of the game" and then go and start defining aspects of the game. That's what Playground 4 was going to be when we first discussed it and it was much more restrictive than Playground 3.

Generic should be what we focus on and let the starting story elements decide what we do. If the majority of story elements swing towards a High Fantasy game then that's what we play. If the Story Elements swing to a Space Opera set in a distant star system with giant space smurfs then so be it. Ya, it's going to be difficult to get new interest swiftly, however that's the joy of having this thread. The older characters can easily make their characters here and then we can see what comes out of the blender. Then we make a recruitment thread. I am more opposed to trying to set up even baselines and so early at that than anything else really.

I agree to some points and disagree to some of what you said here.

I think I get what you mean by setting baselines. I think this comes down to how do we start a game given a type of game we have decided to play.

Let's take the sci-fi thing for example. I'm thinking you mean that giving the description of our sci-fi game as a space game is already cornering ourselves into that particular style of play, yes?

Now, here is my question. How do we start it then? This part is unclear to me. And maybe, just maybe, it could resolve the issue of the game being restrictive and such.

Xondoure
2012-10-13, 01:52 PM
Has anyone put some thought into tightening the recruitment requirements? As I see it the world is going to be as good as what the players bring to the table, especially at the beginning. In that sense, forcing the players to make good use of their story elements, find connections with fluff previously established, and write characters they really want to play could go a long way to boosting the longevity of these games.

Along the same vein, we've increased the starting advantages somewhat for a while now, and in some ways I'm not sure that's a good idea. Perhaps scaling back to four or five might actually open up the need to really think about the character, and how they want to play it.

Starsign
2012-10-13, 02:01 PM
Has anyone put some thought into tightening the recruitment requirements? As I see it the world is going to be as good as what the players bring to the table, especially at the beginning. In that sense, forcing the players to make good use of their story elements, find connections with fluff previously established, and write characters they really want to play could go a long way to boosting the longevity of these games.

Along the same vein, we've increased the starting advantages somewhat for a while now, and in some ways I'm not sure that's a good idea. Perhaps scaling back to four or five might actually open up the need to really think about the character, and how they want to play it.

Tightening requirements can boost the longevity of the game, but it could also shun out future players depending on how tight it goes. In fact it might even be worse than what we have now if any players currently in burn out for any reason. Tightening restrictions may help but it may also kill the game even faster if new players are too intimidated by the requirements to join. (I was intimidated as hell when I first joined Playground 3)

Xondoure
2012-10-13, 02:46 PM
Tightening requirements can boost the longevity of the game, but it could also shun out future players depending on how tight it goes. In fact it might even be worse than what we have now if any players currently in burn out for any reason. Tightening restrictions may help but it may also kill the game even faster if new players are too intimidated by the requirements to join. (I was intimidated as hell when I first joined Playground 3)

Mostly, I'd suggest people make an effort to use all their story elements, and then maybe answer a few questions on them so that the story elements themselves have a bit of depth.

Tebryn
2012-10-13, 02:49 PM
Has anyone put some thought into tightening the recruitment requirements? As I see it the world is going to be as good as what the players bring to the table, especially at the beginning. In that sense, forcing the players to make good use of their story elements, find connections with fluff previously established, and write characters they really want to play could go a long way to boosting the longevity of these games.

The object should be not to bar people out, but to bring people up. As it were. It's up to everyone to do this, not just the new players.


Along the same vein, we've increased the starting advantages somewhat for a while now, and in some ways I'm not sure that's a good idea. Perhaps scaling back to four or five might actually open up the need to really think about the character, and how they want to play it.

Don't have a problem with this either way really.

Xondoure
2012-10-13, 02:56 PM
The object should be not to bar people out, but to bring people up. As it were. It's up to everyone to do this, not just the new players.

Don't have a problem with this either way really.

Exactly my line of thinking.

GuyFawkes
2012-10-13, 03:10 PM
Suggestion on Story Elements and Character Creation:


Upon creation of character and using your starting story elements, only a maximum of half your story elements should be related directly to your own character. The rest should be devoted to something else entirely. Also, make it mandatory to provide all of the allotted number of story elements.

My reason for this is so that everyone would balance creating a world for themselves as well as for others. Of course the catch phrase of creating a world of your own liking is the selling point of this game, but let's face it. That's not gonna happen.

You are playing this game with other people, regardless of whether your characters ever meet each other or not. The mere fact that you as a player have the power to create story elements means you can affect how the other players will play the game in one way or another. It can't be helped that sometimes some story elements come out to be too tailor-made to one player's preferences and it may not be so appealing to others. In some cases, they clash with other player's interests.

With this in effect, I think it would mitigate a little of that and promote the mindset of building not only for your own, but for others as well.

Jade_Tarem
2012-10-13, 08:34 PM
It's not even that. I don't mind games set on space ships or things like that. I mean, I just praised FTL: Faster Than Light as being jolly good fun but...perhaps it's the context of putting it to the forums or even pen and paper where it simply starts to break down for me. I've been doing Play By Posts for a long time and while a whole lot of games just belly up, I've never seen them go into the ditch as fast as Space Travel games. Now, that's just personal experiance but we're the sum total of all of that so my gut reaction to seeing "Playground: In Spaaaaaaaaaaace" is....avoid it. I'd rather make Playground 5 work than have to discuss why it didn't work while we plot out Playground 6 if we plot it out at all.

Sure, that's a little pessimistic and maybe not fair to what very well could be a spectacular game where everyone enjoys themselves and everyone finishes what they intended to do. That's a possibility. However, another part of me is leery when we start this by saying "Less defined aspects of the game" and then go and start defining aspects of the game. That's what Playground 4 was going to be when we first discussed it and it was much more restrictive than Playground 3.

Generic should be what we focus on and let the starting story elements decide what we do. If the majority of story elements swing towards a High Fantasy game then that's what we play. If the Story Elements swing to a Space Opera set in a distant star system with giant space smurfs then so be it. Ya, it's going to be difficult to get new interest swiftly, however that's the joy of having this thread. The older characters can easily make their characters here and then we can see what comes out of the blender. Then we make a recruitment thread. I am more opposed to trying to set up even baselines and so early at that than anything else really.

I'm having some difficulty coming up with a response to this, because it's a just a reiteration of all of your previous points - or rather, just the one point. Right down to stating that space travel can't/won't work because it's gone badly for you in the past, which is a non sequitur. We've had a Fantasy Playground game go down the tubes in under five pages, but no one is claiming that fantasy games can't work out because of it.

Nobody is "clamming up" on anything. This futuristic game? It can take on any format. Do we want a deep space Station with aliens popping in and out? A Gundam-style game where the space colonies are all in one system trying to overthrow a tyrannical Earth government? Humans fleeing from the robot overlords they inadvertently created? Something Firefly-ish, with slower travel and terraformed faux-western worlds? All that and more can be decided by the story elements.

The one thing we're trying to establish is what era we're in, tech-wise, because getting everyone on the same page where that's concerned is not just polite but vital. And frankly, I'm more than a bit tired of games where the most advanced form of non-magic travel is the caravel and weapons technology stops with the arabesque - which is why I'm pushing for something, anything, different.


Has anyone put some thought into tightening the recruitment requirements? As I see it the world is going to be as good as what the players bring to the table, especially at the beginning. In that sense, forcing the players to make good use of their story elements, find connections with fluff previously established, and write characters they really want to play could go a long way to boosting the longevity of these games.

Along the same vein, we've increased the starting advantages somewhat for a while now, and in some ways I'm not sure that's a good idea. Perhaps scaling back to four or five might actually open up the need to really think about the character, and how they want to play it.

In this specific case I'd agree. For a high fantasy game, I'd prefer to keep the higher number. Again, it's a case of what's been done already. The other advantage of the more futuristic game is that the characters can be brought down a bit on the overall power scale - we aren't just going to assume that 5% of the player base is Eldritch horrors. We all bleed here. :smallamused:

Tebryn
2012-10-13, 09:43 PM
I'm having some difficulty coming up with a response to this, because it's a just a reiteration of all of your previous points - or rather, just the one point. Right down to stating that space travel can't/won't work because it's gone badly for you in the past, which is a non sequitur. We've had a Fantasy Playground game go down the tubes in under five pages, but no one is claiming that fantasy games can't work out because of it.

Pretty sure I freely admitted that point right out the gate that it really wasn't an argument against it. Merely a personal reservation. There's also the point where I simply stated I didn't want to play a game set is space. That one merely comes down to personal preference.


Nobody is "clamming up" on anything. This futuristic game? It can take on any format. Do we want a deep space Station with aliens popping in and out? A Gundam-style game where the space colonies are all in one system trying to overthrow a tyrannical Earth government? Humans fleeing from the robot overlords they inadvertently created? Something Firefly-ish, with slower travel and terraformed faux-western worlds? All that and more can be decided by the story elements.


Quite well aware of that. I do believe I was one of the few who spoke up for quite liking the idea of a Gundam Style game when 4 was on the table as well. You'll note that the only Sci-Fi style game I've well and truly come out against is FTL Space Opera-esque style settings.



The one thing we're trying to establish is what era we're in, tech-wise, because getting everyone on the same page where that's concerned is not just polite but vital. And frankly, I'm more than a bit tired of games where the most advanced form of non-magic travel is the caravel and weapons technology stops with the arabesque - which is why I'm pushing for something, anything, different.

Which is the one point you're coming from, and I understand it. You want to do something other than Fantasy low tech. I don't think anyone is fighting you on that. I've already voiced that I really liked the idea of the Afterlife setting that was brought up as a potential for Playground 4 as well as a modern or War Era style game.

If I had to vote, I'd say the Modern World Afterlife setting for...what ever we do. It was what most interested me in 4 and I was really disappointing that the High Seas game won out.

Jade_Tarem
2012-10-13, 10:20 PM
That all sounds reasonable. But that still doesn't answer the question of how we proceed without a known basic level of technology...

Tebryn
2012-10-14, 12:05 AM
There are two ways to do it really, that would be less messy than any others as far as I can see.

1. We agree on a set tech level and go from there.

2. We have everyone make the character -they- want to play in the current thread before we open it up to the public. What ever the overarching theme is strongest...we go with that. If the majority lean to High Fantasy...we go with that. ETC.


I am, as it were, in favor of option 1.

Kasanip
2012-10-14, 08:02 AM
In this specific case I'd agree. For a high fantasy game, I'd prefer to keep the higher number. Again, it's a case of what's been done already. The other advantage of the more futuristic game is that the characters can be brought down a bit on the overall power scale - we aren't just going to assume that 5% of the player base is Eldritch horrors. We all bleed here. :smallamused:

I didn't think it was a problem of 10 advantages for Playground 4. So, I don't think it is necessary to reduce advantages. I am curious how it is expected to try Sci-Fi Fantasy with few advantages.


I've already voiced that I really liked the idea of the Afterlife setting that was brought up as a potential for Playground 4 as well as a modern or War Era style game.

If I had to vote, I'd say the Modern World Afterlife setting for...what ever we do. It was what most interested me in 4 and I was really disappointing that the High Seas game won out.

What is this setting? I don't remember such a suggestion.

Tebryn
2012-10-14, 12:34 PM
What is this setting? I don't remember such a suggestion.

That's as far as the suggestion got but it was on the list the Mods offered up. Search functions on the board are down so I don't know if I will be able to find the post in question.

TechnOkami
2012-10-14, 05:12 PM
What is this setting? I don't remember such a suggestion.

There is no setting so far, and all there's been is a lack of desire to play either a Steampunk-esque or a Space-esque sort of game.

Starsign
2012-10-14, 05:26 PM
There is no setting so far, and all there's been is a lack of desire to play either a Steampunk-esque or a Space-esque sort of game.

Well more like some people not wanting to play a Steampunk/Space-esque game.

What was P1's tech level? Did it have anything set in stone or was it up to the players to come up with it themselves using their Story Elements?

Jade_Tarem
2012-10-14, 05:38 PM
Playground 1's tech level was Renaissance. Crossbows and Arabesques, no actual bans on anything. At one point we did zap the suggestion of a nation with access to revolvers by asking how it hadn't conquered everyone around it yet, but for the most part people just stuck to Renaissance tech.*

*Specific tech varied from one country to another, but no established government had technology lower than Dark-Ages (The elves, actually) and the gunpowder-countries didn't have anything beyond Renaissance.

Starsign
2012-10-14, 05:48 PM
Playground 1's tech level was Renaissance. Crossbows and Arabesques, no actual bans on anything. At one point we did zap the suggestion of a nation with access to revolvers by asking how it hadn't conquered everyone around it yet, but for the most part people just stuck to Renaissance tech.*

*Specific tech varied from one country to another, but no established government had technology lower than Dark-Ages (The elves, actually) and the gunpowder-countries didn't have anything beyond Renaissance.

Speaking of bans, why was guns banned in Playground 3 again? This one slipped my mind regrettably. :smallredface:

TechnOkami
2012-10-14, 06:10 PM
Speaking of bans, why was guns banned in Playground 3 again? This one slipped my mind regrettably. :smallredface:

Basically because if ppl had Guns, Murdok would be at a disadvantage with his hefty two handed sword in a fight (applied more to other people than Murdok solely, but the point is made). Also because Telarys would mass manufacture guns and start a weapons revolution.

Jade_Tarem
2012-10-14, 06:23 PM
Speaking of bans, why was guns banned in Playground 3 again? This one slipped my mind regrettably. :smallredface:


Basically because if ppl had Guns, Murdok would be at a disadvantage with his hefty two handed sword in a fight (applied more to other people than Murdok solely, but the point is made). Also because Telarys would mass manufacture guns and start a weapons revolution.

Well, in-game it was because gunpowder would not combust in that particular world.

Out of character, I couldn't tell you because I didn't come up with that rule. If I had to guess, it was an expansion of what TechnOkami said with respect to Murdok - gunpowder is one of the mainstays of modern weapons tech and we felt it would almost certainly push Taelar out of the Steampunk age and cause a total industrialization of the arms race.

TheDarkDM
2012-10-14, 06:40 PM
Exactly right, Techno. If you allow guns, the only logical conclusion is for a vast swath of other weapon types to die out due to obsolescence, much like in the real world. Obviously, we could say the math could remain unchanged, but there's no way of avoiding the disconnect when a sword fighter goes up against a gunfighter and this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anEuw8F8cpE) doesn't happen.

Tebryn
2012-10-14, 07:11 PM
Basically because if ppl had Guns, Murdok would be at a disadvantage with his hefty two handed sword in a fight (applied more to other people than Murdok solely, but the point is made). Also because Telarys would mass manufacture guns and start a weapons revolution.

See....I don't get point 1 with Murdok and all. Because Repeating Crossbows should do the same thing yet...they don't. In fact, them not being mass produced and handed out to every available guardsman was rather odd, what with Steamtech and all that running about.

Jade_Tarem
2012-10-14, 08:16 PM
Have you ever fired a repeating crossbow? They are... not all that great. And they are not a substitute for gunpowder, rifling, and exchangeable parts, the weapons constructed thereof can punch right through a tower shield and a suit of plate mail with enough force left over to kill someone.

The primary advantage of a crossbow over a compound longbow is that the crossbow requires much less training. You'd think it would be the opposite - the crossbow is the more complex weapon, after all - but that's not true. Once you've learned the basics of both weapons, you can load and fire a longbow faster and more accurately (usually with more force), to the point that the British Longbow remained in use right up until gunpowder weapons became a thing. Crossbows did not render them obsolete - guns did.

TechnOkami
2012-10-14, 08:38 PM
Well, in-game it was because gunpowder would not combust in that particular world.

Out of character, I couldn't tell you because I didn't come up with that rule. If I had to guess, it was an expansion of what TechnOkami said with respect to Murdok - gunpowder is one of the mainstays of modern weapons tech and we felt it would almost certainly push Taelar out of the Steampunk age and cause a total industrialization of the arms race.
I tend to know keenly well about facts that affect me and mine, for some odd reason.

Exactly right, Techno. If you allow guns, the only logical conclusion is for a vast swath of other weapon types to die out due to obsolescence, much like in the real world. Obviously, we could say the math could remain unchanged, but there's no way of avoiding the disconnect when a sword fighter goes up against a gunfighter and this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anEuw8F8cpE) doesn't happen.

It's true q-q.

Tebryn
2012-10-14, 09:07 PM
Have you ever fired a repeating crossbow? They are... not all that great. And they are not a substitute for gunpowder, rifling, and exchangeable parts, the weapons constructed thereof can punch right through a tower shield and a suit of plate mail with enough force left over to kill someone.

The primary advantage of a crossbow over a compound longbow is that the crossbow requires much less training. You'd think it would be the opposite - the crossbow is the more complex weapon, after all - but that's not true. Once you've learned the basics of both weapons, you can load and fire a longbow faster and more accurately (usually with more force), to the point that the British Longbow remained in use right up until gunpowder weapons became a thing. Crossbows did not render them obsolete - guns did.

My main point was that ranged weapons don't somehow instantly invalidated a character who focuses on melee combat. Techno said that someone using a gun greatly disadvantaged his melee two hander when the use of a fast reloading crossbow should do the same yet they're not banned.

Starsign
2012-10-14, 09:13 PM
I see the issue with guns more from the story standpoint than gameplay standpoint. Frankly gameplay-wise I shouldn't see TOO many problems. I mean for Playground 4 there are guns and that doesn't do much worse than a sword; at least in Drallic's case :smalltongue: Unless we're talking about things like full-auto assault rifles, then... Yeah. Though I frankly see anything other than manual pistols and rifles in a Steampunk setting a little out-of-place.

Story-wise however I can understand the ban on it even if I think players can be lenient on making sure gunplay isn't too developed to avoid a need to make things so revolutionary.

TechnOkami
2012-10-14, 09:24 PM
My main point was that ranged weapons don't somehow instantly invalidated a character who focuses on melee combat. Techno said that someone using a gun greatly disadvantaged his melee two hander when the use of a fast reloading crossbow should do the same yet they're not banned.

It's easier to block crossbow bolts versus bullets with a sword.

BladeofObliviom
2012-10-14, 09:28 PM
It's easier to block crossbow bolts versus bullets with a sword.

This is true. Bolts move at a much lower velocity, are less effective at penetrating armor, and move slowly enough to actually be tracked with the naked eye, at least enough so to put a shield in front of you or move before you die.

With bullets, not being hit is more a matter of finding cover and hoping your opponent doesn't have incredible aim.

Kasanip
2012-10-15, 05:49 AM
To speak about this, it isn't a problem, I think. I think that from a Player perspective, it is a situation of [no desire of compromise, or player agreement of no use]. Many such a setting like TenraWAR and NIGHT WIZARD can use guns and swords of no trouble in fighting.

The compromise must be that if character has [Gun-fu] +2 (uncommon), to fight a character of [Swordsmanship] +2 (uncommon), it is an equal fight. Because it can be easily seen the advantage, of course it can be understood.

Probably people are thinking too much [real world situation]. Because it is heroic characters, dodge and defense against guns is as possible. It can be seen in many movie or cartoon or comics in this way, too. It hasn't been seen, but such a fight of Non with Mystletinn against Clive would be such a situation. Of course because of this, character who uses a sword of course seems much more exciting and cool than gun character, I think. If it is desired of such a real world style, then it seems like it is trouble, but the rules of this game system do not support such a [real world play], since advantage is equal.

GuyFawkes
2012-10-15, 09:22 AM
To speak about this, it isn't a problem, I think. I think that from a Player perspective, it is a situation of [no desire of compromise, or player agreement of no use]. Many such a setting like TenraWAR and NIGHT WIZARD can use guns and swords of no trouble in fighting.

The compromise must be that if character has [Gun-fu] +2 (uncommon), to fight a character of [Swordsmanship] +2 (uncommon), it is an equal fight. Because it can be easily seen the advantage, of course it can be understood.

Probably people are thinking too much [real world situation]. Because it is heroic characters, dodge and defense against guns is as possible. It can be seen in many movie or cartoon or comics in this way, too. It hasn't been seen, but such a fight of Non with Mystletinn against Clive would be such a situation. Of course because of this, character who uses a sword of course seems much more exciting and cool than gun character, I think. If it is desired of such a real world style, then it seems like it is trouble, but the rules of this game system do not support such a [real world play], since advantage is equal.

Basically this. It just depends on how you want to picture your setting. In high fantasies or even in steampunk, you have melee characters that are capable of doing feats way over the human limits, such that powerful tech such as guns could be trivialized. If you can have a setting where you have a kingdom whose main forces are composed of knights and they can put a kingdom of magic wielders in check, it's fairly easy to picture them easily defending themselves against a force using gunpowder technology.

@Kasanip I have to disagree on one point though. Clive is still badass. :smallbiggrin:

Jade_Tarem
2012-10-15, 10:08 AM
I think the contention was not that guns shouldn't be balanced mechanically, but that if crossbows were allowed, guns should be too.

The response is - versimilitude. While we're willing to say that guns can be the same boost to combat as a sword, we're not as willing to accept an entire society that's willing to forego production of what we know to be superior weaponry in our heart of hearts in favor of more swords. We can suspend disbelief when it comes to crossbows, but once guns enter the equation we have a really hard time taking an army seriously that's armed with anything else.

That said, we've sort of drifted off topic, which was setting. Could we, perhaps, settle on a more late-gundam-series-level of tech if space travel is so heinous? I don't mean the giant robots, I mean Space-platforms, massive colonies in our solar system (in Earth orbit?), slower than light travel, etc? Our city could be one of the massive stations, or even a planetary city. Travel anywhere is a matter of hours rather than weeks. An entire market has sprung up concerning something we've never had before - the creation of real estate and speculation concerning same. Weapons technology is like this, but with energy weapons fairly viable. Supernatural stuff, theme, grimdark level, etc. can be established with or derived from story elements.

How does that sound?

TechnOkami
2012-10-15, 10:38 AM
Obviously we must make Gunblades and bring this argument to rest...

Er- yes, Guns OP, Nerf Nao & whatnot. :smalltongue:

As for the proposed tech-world, I have 1 question: could I be an alien entity if I so desired?

Jade_Tarem
2012-10-15, 10:47 AM
It's still playground. You can be whatever you want as long as you have the story elements for it. And you can do whatever you want as long as you've got the advantages to back it up.

It would be worth considering what effect an actual alien entity would have on the world - discovering intelligent life on other planets would be a huge, huge thing, easily the most important discovery of that century and probably the millenium. Adding elves or whatnot to our world is a big social adjustment (unless they've been there all along) - adding aliens is an enormous one.

VonDoom
2012-10-15, 11:04 AM
Wow, you guys have been really active. Err. Rather than respond to everything that's been said or any specific points, I just wanna add:

I have nothing against sci-fi in itself, or sci-fi games, and I certainly think they can be done and done well. I'd rather stick to a general Fantasy-theme for Playground, however, so I'm going to throw my hat in with 'no sci-fi'.

Also not really interested in modern day/cyberpunk-type stuff. I could go for a steam-tech sort of fantasy and I'm also -fine- with early gun technology.

Just make it -rare-. 'Gunpowder' is not nearly as much of a problem if it can't be mass-produced. And that still leaves things open for magic-users who simply use guns as a focus to shoot magic beams in place of wands -- or their hands, for that matter.

TheDarkDM
2012-10-15, 04:59 PM
While we're throwing out setting ideas, I figure I might as well add something. While I have a character prepped for a space faring game, and could throw something together for whatever, what would you guys think of no-magic dieselpunk?

BladeofObliviom
2012-10-15, 05:01 PM
While we're throwing out setting ideas, I figure I might as well add something. While I have a character prepped for a space faring game, and could throw something together for whatever, what would you guys think of no-magic dieselpunk?

I am totally cool with that. Expect technology to stand in for it, though. :smalltongue:

Kasanip
2012-10-15, 05:39 PM
What is [no-magic dieselpunk]?

TheDarkDM
2012-10-15, 05:41 PM
This is Diesel Punk. (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DieselPunk)

Tebryn
2012-10-15, 05:46 PM
I'd rather have magic as an option. The idea of less constraints is a big thing. If people want magic...they should be allowed to have magic. The last two games have been restrictive on magic as it is.

TheDarkDM
2012-10-15, 05:48 PM
I'd rather have magic as an option. The idea of less constraints is a big thing. If people want magic...they should be allowed to have magic. The last two games have been restrictive on magic as it is.

An excellent point. I suppose I should clarify my desire as no/low world magic. People are free to have magic, but we avoid justifying things with "a wizard did it" when it comes to architecture, social engineering, warfare, etc.

Tebryn
2012-10-15, 05:50 PM
An excellent point. I suppose I should clarify my desire as no/low world magic. People are free to have magic, but we avoid justifying things with "a wizard did it" when it comes to architecture, social engineering, warfare, etc.

Ah, that's less of a problem for me. So long as the magic that could be in the game is up to the players to set out. Not saying that Magic even may be a thing. I'm merely voicing the "Less Control over the World." aspect here. As it stands however, I would be fine with a Dieselcraft World in that vein.

Xondoure
2012-10-15, 06:23 PM
What is [no-magic dieselpunk]?

Think Castle in the Sky, or Porco Roso.

Tebryn
2012-10-15, 06:38 PM
What is [no-magic dieselpunk]?

This is totally nothing to do with the game, but your Avatar is amazing.

Starsign
2012-10-15, 07:48 PM
I'll be alright with Diesel Punk though I've barely been in such a setting before. (closest thing is the Fallout series) Not a big fan of -Punk really but as they say, nothing ventured, nothing gained. Would there be a big focus on guns or is swords and melee weapons still practical?

That said, I would prefer fantasy or Jade's sci-fi idea over a Punk setting; I'm rather open to space travel now. (rewatching Star Trek II and Galaxy Quest may or may not have influenced this :smalltongue:) even if my planet and species-building skills are a mess at best.

Or if you want to be absolutely crazy, we can have a Diesel Punk setting that spans the Galaxy :smallbiggrin::smalltongue:

TechnOkami
2012-10-15, 09:05 PM
Looks at camp A.) for Sci-fi.

Looks at camp B.) for Fantasy.

Hm...

Why not a Spelljammer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spelljammer) theme for Playground V?

Tebryn
2012-10-15, 09:23 PM
Looks at camp A.) for Sci-fi.

Looks at camp B.) for Fantasy.

Hm...

Why not a Spelljammer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spelljammer) theme for Playground V?

Because that would still fall on the "I'd rather we not do a Space Ship Game" stance. :smalltongue:

Starsign
2012-10-15, 09:48 PM
Looks at camp A.) for Sci-fi.

Looks at camp B.) for Fantasy.

Hm...

Why not a Spelljammer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spelljammer) theme for Playground V?


Because that would still fall on the "I'd rather we not do a Space Ship Game" stance. :smalltongue:

Oh come on; Bastion, as far as I know and heard, is similar to Planescape. (well minus an Absolute Authority like the Lady of Pain) We could probably edit Jade's sci-fi idea a bit and go with a Spelljammer-ish idea. :smalltongue:

...Even if Spelljammer has a radically different feel from Planescape, or so I've heard. Never played a Spelljammer game sadly; did play a long-running Planescape game on Skype for a good year or two though. Probably one of, if not the best game I've ever been in :smallbiggrin:

Tebryn
2012-10-15, 10:02 PM
Oh come on; Bastion, as far as I know and heard, is similar to Planescape. (well minus an Absolute Authority like the Lady of Pain) We could probably edit Jade's sci-fi idea a bit and go with a Spelljammer-ish idea. :smalltongue:

...Even if Spelljammer has a radically different feel from Planescape, or so I've heard. Never played a Spelljammer game sadly; did play a long-running Planescape game on Skype for a good year or two though. Probably one of, if not the best game I've ever been in :smallbiggrin:

Took me a moment to parse that out, thought you meant the Indie hit game Bastion. I'd be happy to play in a world like that.

It does have a wildly different feel from Planescape however. Is it so wrong that I would rather not play in a game where a major part of the focus will be on Spaceships, Fantasy Style or otherwise? If boredom is enough to warrant a defense for ones position against elves and low tech guns and such, I find such games boring and have no interest in playing a game based around them.

I am with VonDoom for the most part. Sticking to a general Fantasy theme is what I'd rather play though I'm more than happy to entertain the Diesel Craft idea. In fact, I'm growing more fond of the idea the more I think about character concepts and such. It isn't like I am saying no to every option proposed. The only one I've said outright "I'd rather not." is Spaceships.

Jade_Tarem
2012-10-15, 10:38 PM
As an alternative to all of the above, have we considered the ultra-high fantasy, such as the later versions of Final Fantasy? Before people get their undies in a twist, it wouldn't be Final Fantasy, just a reflection of that style of setting - magic is everywhere, even more accessible than in, say, Eberron. Magical constructs and items are abundant, as is heavier-than-air airship travel. Most technology up to and including guns can be justified somehow. There is no space travel.

I suggest this simply because it seems to meet everyone's use cases:

1. No Space Travel
2. Haven't done it before in Playground
3. Still General Fantasy
4. Guns and other tech allowed
5. Not really punk
6. Fast Travel Available (We can even have a bullet train or something)
7. Can centralize in one City of Adventure
8. Lots and lots and lots of character options. Anything is available.
9. The game doesn't undergo a grim apotheosis into booooring sci-fi
10. We can have a castle in the sky.
11. The cheese stands alone.

How does this sound? :smallamused:

I would also be willing to play in the Indie-Bastion universe. Dibs on Mancer.

Tebryn
2012-10-15, 10:39 PM
As an alternative to all of the above, have we considered the ultra-high fantasy, such as the later versions of Final Fantasy? Before people get their undies in a twist, it wouldn't be Final Fantasy, just a reflection of that style of setting - magic is everywhere, even more accessible than in, say, Eberron. Magical constructs and items are abundant, as is heavier-than-air airship travel. Most technology up to and including guns can be justified somehow. There is no space travel.

I suggest this simply because it seems to meet everyone's use cases:

1. No Space Travel
2. Haven't done it before in Playground
3. Still General Fantasy
4. Guns and other tech allowed
5. Not really punk
6. Fast Travel Available (We can even have a bullet train or something)
7. Can centralize in one City of Adventure
8. Lots and lots and lots of character options
9. The game doesn't undergo a grim apotheosis into booooring sci-fi
10. We can have a castle in the sky.
11. The cheese stands alone.

I can agree with all of this except number 11. The Cheese never stands alone.

Starsign
2012-10-15, 10:44 PM
As an alternative to all of the above, have we considered the ultra-high fantasy, such as the later versions of Final Fantasy? Before people get their undies in a twist, it wouldn't be Final Fantasy, just a reflection of that style of setting - magic is everywhere, even more accessible than in, say, Eberron. Magical constructs and items are abundant, as is heavier-than-air airship travel. Most technology up to and including guns can be justified somehow. There is no space travel.

I suggest this simply because it seems to meet everyone's use cases:

1. No Space Travel
2. Haven't done it before in Playground
3. Still General Fantasy
4. Guns and other tech allowed
5. Not really punk
6. Fast Travel Available (We can even have a bullet train or something)
7. Can centralize in one City of Adventure
8. Lots and lots and lots of character options
9. The game doesn't undergo a grim apotheosis into booooring sci-fi
10. We can have a castle in the sky.
11. The cheese stands alone.

With the criteria stated here, I think I'd be up for this. Though you CAN do a setting like this without guns if we still decide that. (ever played the 360 RPG Lost Odyssey? About only one character actually has a gun, everything else is fought with swords and sorcery alongside other technology and it works)

Could I ask for what you mean by "grim apotheosis" Jade?

Jade_Tarem
2012-10-15, 10:50 PM
Could I ask for what you mean by "grim apotheosis" Jade?

It's my final hyperbolic dig at Tebryn and VonDoom. By "grim apotheosis," I'm implying that they view Playground's foray into science fiction-fantasy as the rising of a dark god, a horrifying event of tremendous import. Really, their reasons for wanting to not play a game with space travel are exactly the same as my reason for wanting to do so in the first place - it does/doesn't sound fun - and they've been pretty civil about it. So the short answer is - I'm being goofy.

Tebryn
2012-10-15, 10:54 PM
It's my final hyperbolic dig at Tebryn and VonDoom. By "grim apotheosis," I'm implying that they view Playground's foray into science fiction-fantasy as the rising of a dark god, a horrifying event of tremendous import. Really, their reasons for wanting to not play a game with space travel are exactly the same as my reason for wanting to do so in the first place - it does/doesn't sound fun - and they've been pretty civil about it. So the short answer is - I'm being goofy.

I'm going to find a horde of beautiful gun hating elves for you. And probably keep a few for myself.

Nefarion Xid
2012-10-15, 11:29 PM
Final Fantasy-ish sounds fun. The twelve year old in me would be ecstatic.

Xondoure
2012-10-15, 11:31 PM
I'd be up for an "anything goes" setting. Expect absurdity.

Kasanip
2012-10-15, 11:52 PM
This is totally nothing to do with the game, but your Avatar is amazing.

Thank you, but it is not very good. :smallredface: It is old PIXIVFantasia event last year. Because it became halloween avatar time, but I don't know what to do, so using until a good idea can be decided.


As an alternative to all of the above, have we considered the ultra-high fantasy, such as the later versions of Final Fantasy? Before people get their undies in a twist, it wouldn't be Final Fantasy, just a reflection of that style of setting - magic is everywhere, even more accessible than in, say, Eberron. Magical constructs and items are abundant, as is heavier-than-air airship travel. Most technology up to and including guns can be justified somehow. There is no space travel.

I suggest this simply because it seems to meet everyone's use cases:

1. No Space Travel
2. Haven't done it before in Playground
3. Still General Fantasy
4. Guns and other tech allowed
5. Not really punk
6. Fast Travel Available (We can even have a bullet train or something)
7. Can centralize in one City of Adventure
8. Lots and lots and lots of character options. Anything is available.
9. The game doesn't undergo a grim apotheosis into booooring sci-fi
10. We can have a castle in the sky.
11. The cheese stands alone.

How does this sound? :smallamused:

I would also be willing to play in the Indie-Bastion universe. Dibs on Mancer.


It seems it is desired to play Alshard ff. I don't mind, it is nostalgic.

What does [The cheese stands alone] mean?

Tebryn
2012-10-15, 11:55 PM
What does [The cheese stands alone] mean?

It's a line from a children's song (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_cheese_stands_alone) from the United States. It's called The Farmer and the Dell. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxJMerBpitk)

VonDoom
2012-10-16, 12:59 AM
Well, it's early, I gotta get to work soon, but I am curious about one thing:
What's Alshard FF?


And ... 'which Final Fantasy'-esque are we talking about? 'cuz 7 had a very Punk-y (6 - Steam, 7 - err ... Materia-Punk?) feel to it and 6 featured Steam technology very prominently.

TheDarkDM
2012-10-16, 01:07 AM
Well, it's early, I gotta get to work soon, but I am curious about one thing:
What's Alshard FF?


And ... 'which Final Fantasy'-esque are we talking about? 'cuz 7 had a very Punk-y (6 - Steam, 7 - err ... Materia-Punk?) feel to it and 6 featured Steam technology very prominently.

Diesel Punk is the one you're looking for with 7.

But back on track, I think Jade's referring to FF IX-XIII. You know, abundant sources of magical energy from...because. Floating cities, airships as aerodynamic as a baleen whale that still fly, guns that fire magical bullets that apparently hurt as much as a knife.

But seriously, I'd be down. Not my favorite setting, but I can cope.

Xondoure
2012-10-16, 01:12 AM
Diesel Punk is the one you're looking for with 7.

But back on track, I think Jade's referring to FF IX-XIII. You know, abundant sources of magical energy from...because. Floating cities, airships as aerodynamic as a baleen whale that still fly, guns that fire magical bullets that apparently hurt as much as a knife.

But seriously, I'd be down. Not my favorite setting, but I can cope.

I'm still really feeling dieselpunk (with or without magic) Mostly because thinking of all the great media present in that sphere (from Indiana Jones to Castle in the Sky) has gotten me really excited.

But yeah, up for anything.

TheDarkDM
2012-10-16, 01:16 AM
I'm still really feeling dieselpunk (with or without magic) Mostly because thinking of all the great media present in that sphere (from Indiana Jones to Castle in the Sky) has gotten me really excited.

But yeah, up for anything.

My god, Xon, you and me having similar stylistic preferences? STOP THE DAMN PRESSES.

:smalltongue:

BladeofObliviom
2012-10-16, 01:19 AM
I'm still really feeling dieselpunk (with or without magic) Mostly because thinking of all the great media present in that sphere (from Indiana Jones to Castle in the Sky) has gotten me really excited.

But yeah, up for anything.

I am totally cool with low-magic Dieselpunk, by the way. Doesn't hurt that I've always secretly wanted to play Nikola Tesla in a game. :smalltongue:

Not really into the later FF games, but I'll live.

TechnOkami
2012-10-16, 01:40 AM
If this is going to be Playground Final Fantasy style...

...

can...

...can I be Kefka? :'D That or Jecht, or Ultamecia, or Gabranth, but mostly Jecht.

TheDarkDM
2012-10-16, 01:45 AM
If this is going to be Playground Final Fantasy style...

...

can...

...can I be Kefka? :'D That or Jecht, or Ultamecia, or Gabranth, but mostly Jecht.

******* bad father Jecht, or demon Jecht?

VonDoom
2012-10-16, 01:46 AM
I'll be Kefka. And also running the Shinra Corporation. :smallamused:

But I could go for a FF7-esque feel, if that's what Diesel Punk is. Haven't played most of the newer games that are all 'sort of the same setting'. Newest one I played was 10, which had a lot of annoyances. By which I mostly mean Tidus, Blitzball and Wakka, in that order, because Wakka at least didn't have a whiny voice in the US version.

(I found the Japanese voice track much more agreeable, though the character design of Tidus itself and the whole Blitzball thing ... eh.)

I'll give you that Jecht was awesome, though. All the more because he was always mocking Tidus for being a whiny brat. :smallbiggrin:

Jade_Tarem
2012-10-16, 01:53 AM
After reading up on it, Diesel Punk appears to include Indiana Jones and Final Fantasy 7 (Actually, I can't see that it does include FF7) only because it is very, very loosely defined. As far as I can tell it's just Steampunk but with gas motors. Am I wrong about that?

If that's true, I'm wondering if the current Dishonored craze has anything to do with that - and you should consider what will happen when that craze dies down. Are you still going to love it in December?

Xondoure
2012-10-16, 01:56 AM
After reading up on it, Diesel Punk appears to include Indiana Jones and Final Fantasy 7 (Actually, I can't see that it does include FF7) only because it is very, very loosely defined. As far as I can tell it's just Steampunk but with gas motors. Am I wrong about that?

If that's true, I'm wondering if the current Dishonored craze has anything to do with that - and you should consider what will happen when that craze dies down. Are you still going to love it in December?

Barely heard anything about Dishonored. And because I love the film, I'm going to once more bring up Castle in the Sky as a paragon of diesel punk.

The difference other than gas motors, is that dieselpunk get's it's flavor from the roaring twenties to world war II. Giving it a distinctly different feel from steampunk's 19th century.

Jade_Tarem
2012-10-16, 02:00 AM
Yeah, Dark and I were talking about this on AIM. The Aesthetic and base tech come from 1918-1939. FMA, as it turns out, would also qualify.

I could do this. It's not my first choice but I won't start a fight over it.

Xondoure
2012-10-16, 02:05 AM
Yeah, Dark and I were talking about this on AIM. The Aesthetic and base tech come from 1918-1939. FMA, as it turns out, would also qualify.

I could do this. It's not my first choice but I won't start a fight over it.

Speaking of AIM, I created an account a while back and have so far only used it whenever Starsign had a question. :smalltongue:

We should probably get a list going.

TheDarkDM
2012-10-16, 02:07 AM
After reading up on it, Diesel Punk appears to include Indiana Jones and Final Fantasy 7 (Actually, I can't see that it does include FF7) only because it is very, very loosely defined. As far as I can tell it's just Steampunk but with gas motors. Am I wrong about that?

If that's true, I'm wondering if the current Dishonored craze has anything to do with that - and you should consider what will happen when that craze dies down. Are you still going to love it in December?

Ah, then let me as the first to propose it clarify. Where steampunk roots itself in the Victorian period - Empire, Manifest Destiny, war as something of a gung-ho endeavor, all that jazz - dieselpunk roots itself in the roaring 20's and the depression era. Radio and telephones are a thing, jazz is in vogue, fedoras everywhere, and the rapidly expanding technology is contrasted with spreading industrial poverty. War is a very real and understood threat, and legitimate firearms are commonplace. Perhaps most importantly, while magic can exist, it is very rarely friendly (see: Lovecraft, Raiders of the Lost Arc, Fullmetal Alchemist, Final Fantasy 7).

Of course, we can adjust any of that, but those are the broad strokes.

Jade_Tarem
2012-10-16, 02:08 AM
Ha! Your mind will be blown concerning my AIM name:

Jadetarem - spelled exactly like that.

Xondoure
2012-10-16, 02:17 AM
Recently changed mine to Xondoure

VonDoom
2012-10-16, 02:24 AM
Hmm. Dark, serious question for you. I can't entirely follow your train of thought on two of your 'unfriendly magic' examples and am wondering as to your perspective since I might well have missed something.

How was FF7 magic unfriendly, besides the fact that people were abusing the hell out of it and draining the planet as a result?

The alchemy of Fullmetal Alchemist didn't seem particularly unfriendly, either. It only screws with people who arrogantly break its widely known taboos or are too unskilled to do what they're trying to do and cause Rebound. It was just that a lot of people who used it were evil as hell.


My AIM is lokioathbreaker, same as it always was. I'm not online that often lately, but I can make an effort to remember to turn it on, if people want to talk. Though I generally prefer game and theme-related discussions in-thread, since that way it's open to other ideas and feedback.

TechnOkami
2012-10-16, 02:25 AM
I don't have Aim...

Also, considering I like Jecht with the sword (specifically from Dissidia), it would most likely be bad father Jecht.

Xondoure
2012-10-16, 02:29 AM
I don't have Aim...

Also, considering I like Jecht with the sword (specifically from Dissidia), it would most likely be bad father Jecht.

Not that hard to make an account. :smallsmile:

TheDarkDM
2012-10-16, 02:30 AM
Hmm. Dark, serious question for you. I can't entirely follow your train of thought on two of your 'unfriendly magic' examples and am wondering as to your perspective since I might well have missed something.

How was FF7 magic unfriendly, besides the fact that people were abusing the hell out of it and draining the planet as a result?

The alchemy of Fullmetal Alchemist didn't seem particularly unfriendly, either. It only screws with people who arrogantly break its widely known taboos or are too unskilled to do what they're trying to do and cause Rebound. It was just that a lot of people who used it were evil as hell.


My AIM is lokioathbreaker, same as it always was. I'm not online that often lately, but I can make an effort to remember to turn it on, if people want to talk. Though I generally prefer game and theme-related discussions in-thread, since that way it's open to other ideas and feedback.

I'll admit, my familiarity with FF7 is somewhat tangential, but I was thinking of the fact that materia was both draining the planet and the fact that the Weapons were released in an attempt to curb its consumption. Perhaps less overtly unfriendly, and more willing to react with lethal force when overused. Which is pretty much the same train of thought I had with FMA - while day to day it's fine, try and do too much and the gate will eat your soul. Again, not unfriendly day to day, but not something you want to mess with beyond proscribed limits.

VonDoom
2012-10-16, 02:42 AM
Ahh, I see. That makes sense. It was just that compared to Lovecraft, they seemed odd examples to specifically point out.

I had also forgotten about WEAPON, so I suppose overusing the Lifestream does have serious repercussions beyond climate changes and a slow death of the world. Super-powerful killer monsters are an immediately bad thing.

TheDarkDM
2012-10-16, 02:58 AM
Not that hard to make an account. :smallsmile:

Can't seem to find you, Xon...

And, to back up a bit, Jade's point about Dishonored is not without merit. My suggesting diesel punk was somewhat inspired by it, but I think the genre is broad enough to accommodate everyone.

And listen to that theme song... (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkP9XeGHvfY)

VonDoom
2012-10-16, 03:16 AM
I don't think Xon is online at the moment; I added him on my cellphone, but he's not there.

That said, Dark, I don't recall -- did you ever add me? Not seeing you on my list. :smallconfused:

Hmm. If we go with this diesel punk thing, I may seriously go for some sort of big evil company thing. But probably without insane clowns.

Xondoure
2012-10-16, 03:20 AM
I don't think Xon is online at the moment; I added him on my cellphone, but he's not there.

That said, Dark, I don't recall -- did you ever add me? Not seeing you on my list. :smallconfused:

Hmm. If we go with this diesel punk thing, I may seriously go for some sort of big evil company thing. But probably without insane clowns.

I should be. Sending you a message now to check.

TechnOkami
2012-10-16, 03:20 AM
Can't seem to find you, Xon...

And, to back up a bit, Jade's point about Dishonored is not without merit. My suggesting diesel punk was somewhat inspired by it, but I think the genre is broad enough to accommodate everyone.

And listen to that theme song... (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkP9XeGHvfY)

'Dat theme... Oh man, I like that.

Also, don't you bloody fools have Skype or something? I really don't wanna have to download AIM...

Xondoure
2012-10-16, 03:25 AM
'Dat theme... Oh man, I like that.

Also, don't you bloody fools have Skype or something? I really don't wanna have to download AIM...

You don't have to download it, it's browser based.

VonDoom
2012-10-16, 03:31 AM
I dislike using Skype for messaging. I'm only on there when I want to talk to people. You know, out loud.

TechnOkami
2012-10-16, 03:39 AM
*sigh* ok, I got this AIM thing. Username "should" be TechnOkami.

Kasanip
2012-10-16, 03:40 AM
Well, it's early, I gotta get to work soon, but I am curious about one thing:
What's Alshard FF?

Sorry, it is [ff]to not be [FF] because of the meaning for music fortissimo :smallredface: (sorry, to play violin, it is important!). Probably it is difficult to search if it was mistakenly written.

Alshard ff (http://www.fear.co.jp/old_als/index.htm)
wikipedia (http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%82%A2%E3%83%AB%E3%82%B7%E3%83%A3%E3%83%BC%E3%8 3%89)
Alshard ff is a famous and popular trpg. It is known for [SRS] system, to be [play anything style], and to be very good of such a [crossover] game. It became so famous even it can be known English Wikipedia: wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alshard)

If SRS can be learned, many fun games can be played easily. Maybe if wikipedia is read, it can be understood easily. I think desires of players are similar to this.

If it was to be chosen, probably Alshard or Night Wizard The Second Edition is my favorite trpg series.
Actually, in Summer Vacation it was thought to make such a forum game to teach the rules, but recently no time to make a translation, and became busy with Ryuutama game as GM.

Starsign
2012-10-16, 06:57 AM
Dang it. I go to sleep and you guys skyrocket without me. :smalltongue:

Anyway, my AIM is Starsign1992 if anyone wants to add me.

DM, did you mention your AIM here? I was wondering if I could add you there. :smallredface:

EDIT: On mentioning of setting, Punk isn't my thing at all, but I can work with Diesel Punk if we do go with it. Personally I enjoyed the setting of FF XII the most, mostly for being able to balance between the worlds of FF Tactics and Vagrant Story alongside FF Tactics advance.

ForzaFiori
2012-10-16, 12:14 PM
I have skype! No AIM though (and I'm not getting it. Last time I got AIM, it started downloading stuff to my computer without permission)

EDIT: Skype name is ForzaFiori (big surprise)

Tebryn
2012-10-16, 12:20 PM
I have Skype, Steam, Yahoo, AIM and MSN. Use Skype and Steam more often then not however.

Starsign
2012-10-16, 12:31 PM
I have skype! No AIM though (and I'm not getting it. Last time I got AIM, it started downloading stuff to my computer without permission)

EDIT: Skype name is ForzaFiori (big surprise)


I have Skype, Steam, Yahoo, AIM and MSN. Use Skype and Steam more often then not however.

I've got Skype as well. Do either of you mind if I add you? With TechnOkami, I'm now considering making a Skype group for us if you three are alright with it. :smallsmile:

Tebryn
2012-10-16, 01:09 PM
Similar to VonDoom, I don't use Skype to message, only for voice chat when playing video games and talking to friends. I can make exceptions however if we get a group on it.

Starsign
2012-10-16, 01:18 PM
Similar to VonDoom, I don't use Skype to message, only for voice chat when playing video games and talking to friends. I can make exceptions however if we get a group on it.

Ah, gotcha. I never use Skype for voice chat, (not a fan of it) so I probably should have mentioned that before...

VonDoom
2012-10-16, 04:20 PM
Oh, hey, kasanip. I've recently heard a fancover of the song 'Katayoku no Tori', which is from the opening of the 'Umineko no Naku Koro Ni' anime. I like it so much that I think it's actually superior to the original, but since the singer's native tongue isn't Japanese, I was wondering what you think of her pronunciation. To my (admittedly a little too practiced in hearing Japanese, since I can almost follow some conversations these days >_>) ears, it sounds pretty good, but I thought I'd ask.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDRAH9j-KQg

Also, excellent new avatar. Very witch-y.

ForzaFiori
2012-10-16, 04:58 PM
I"m fine if you wanna add me on skype. It's not like I made it to stay anti-social :smalltongue:

Tebryn
2012-10-16, 05:09 PM
I suppose then...that the next topic should be how many Advantages should players get. I was happy with ten on Playground 4 quite honestly though I think six would be fine as well.

Jade_Tarem
2012-10-16, 05:40 PM
I wasn't aware that this was an issue. I haven't heard a good argument yet for reducing the number of starting advantages. "So the characters have room to grow" is something of an invalid argument - there is no hard cap on anything, nor is there any dictation concerning how to spend advantages, so the characters effectively have infinite room to grow. Reducing it seems to me like tweaking something for the sake of tweaking something. Ten is fine.

Tebryn
2012-10-16, 05:45 PM
I wasn't aware that this was an issue. I haven't heard a good argument yet for reducing the number of starting advantages. "So the characters have room to grow" is something of an invalid argument - there is no hard cap on anything, nor is there any dictation concerning how to spend advantages, so the characters effectively have infinite room to grow. Reducing it seems to me like tweaking something for the sake of tweaking something. Ten is fine.

I agree, but I recall someone mentioning wanting to lower it.

Xondoure
2012-10-16, 06:07 PM
That was me. My reasoning was it forced more character thinking rather than being reliant on the dice, but I'm fine with being overruled.

Tebryn
2012-10-16, 06:55 PM
That was me. My reasoning was it forced more character thinking rather than being reliant on the dice, but I'm fine with being overruled.

I don't get what you mean character thinking.

Xondoure
2012-10-16, 07:05 PM
I don't get what you mean character thinking.

Basically more RP.

Nefarion Xid
2012-10-16, 07:06 PM
Along that line of thought, some of the proposals I've heard about the core mechanics include...

1) Using a roll of 2d6 + bonus from advantages instead of the current 1d10 + bonus.

2) Awarding advantages every week or two weeks and NOT at the end of a chapter.

Starsign
2012-10-16, 07:16 PM
I don't really get how lower advantages mean more RP. Frankly I never saw the problem with Playground 4 regarding it.


Along that line of thought, some of the proposals I've heard about the core mechanics include...

1) Using a roll of 2d6 + bonus from advantages instead of the current 1d10 + bonus.

2) Awarding advantages every week or two weeks and NOT at the end of a chapter.

Yeah I like the second idea; not sure on the former though. Why would that be recommended?

Xondoure
2012-10-16, 07:31 PM
I don't really get how lower advantages mean more RP. Frankly I never saw the problem with Playground 4 regarding it.



Yeah I like the second idea; not sure on the former though. Why would that be recommended?

Kasanip likes it better. :smalltongue:

Basically a 1d10 has an even probability to be any value. 2d6 means that the most probable number is seven (6 possible results add to 7) while 2 and 12 are the least common (1 possible result for each.)

Nefarion Xid
2012-10-16, 08:31 PM
I'll spare you guys the math, but in a 2d6 vs 2d6 system, it's actually more competitive for small differences between advantage totals compared to 1d10 vs 1d10. For example, if you had a +1 bonus and your opponent had +0, using a 1d10 gives you a 55% chance of winning, 9% tie, 36% of losing. But a 2d6 is more like 47%, 10%, 43%.

TheDarkDM
2012-10-16, 08:51 PM
I liked it when it was 1d6, personally, but I see how that might be less popular with more starting advantages.

Starsign
2012-10-16, 08:53 PM
I'll spare you guys the math, but in a 2d6 vs 2d6 system, it's actually more competitive for small differences between advantage totals compared to 1d10 vs 1d10. For example, if you had a +1 bonus and your opponent had +0, using a 1d10 gives you a 55% chance of winning, 9% tie, 36% of losing. But a 2d6 is more like 47%, 10%, 43%.

I actually like that. Though 2d6 isn't as common as, say 1d6, 1d10, or 1d12, the less randomized odds I think works better for a game such as this. I'll support it for Playground 5.

Also to mention, if we lower advantages down to what Playground 3 had, (4 to start with) I'd like to suggest the die becoming 2d4 instead of 1d6.

Jade_Tarem
2012-10-16, 09:46 PM
Short answer is that the more dice you stack on, the higher the bell curve of probabilities goes. You'll roll higher on average and a higher minimum on a 2d6 than you will on a d12, but the d12 has a higher chance of rolling extreme values.

The other short answer is that the smaller the max value on the die, the more a +1 means in terms of a bonus. If we have a d6 for our value then someone with a +5 can't lose to someone with no bonuses to that roll anymore.

I don't particularly care whether we have a d10 or 2d6. I'm of the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" school of thought on this.

As for a lower number of advantages leading to higher RP... I think that may be a case of correlation vs. causation. Bastion had a lot of RP going for it, but it also had a lot less in the way of rules. For those that didn't play PG1, the Bastion rules were the same for Story Elements and Plot Tickets, and advantage rules went like this:

1. Every advantage is a +1 bonus to whatever it applies to.
2. You roll a d6 for contest rolls.

That was it. You had all this discussion about whether the sword swinging guy could get over the obstacles and whack the archer, and whose background led to what incidental skills, because all of that had to be discussed. I think the lower number of advantages correlated to the higher RP OOC discussion, but did not cause it - the cause I put on the lack of rule refinement.

There's nothing stopping all the RP now, though. I don't remember roleplaying Maranis less and less as she gained more advantages - if anything, managing her increased responsibilities led to easier character development. Similarly, having more than two or three starting advantages means that you're free to spend a couple on something that isn't an advantage of Maximum Efficiency without really hurting your character - something fluffy, like musical talent or crafting, or something esoteric like a highly conductive carapace.

Starsign
2012-10-16, 09:55 PM
I don't particularly care whether we have a d10 or 2d6. I'm of the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" school of thought on this.

Well I think the question is, what ain't broke? Playground 1 is the most successful game of the four so far and there apparently were mechanical issues with Playground 1, but passed and sidestepped by the players. By what I hear, the success of P1 was contributed more by players agreeing than by players rolling dice.

I'm starting to wonder if the Playground should use dice at all. It feels and/or sounds like the Challenge system causes more problems than it tries to fix at times and I think being able to discuss, talk, and agree on an event allows player interaction and discussion in a way that rolling just cannot do.

Just my thoughts here, please don't take them too harshly.

Tebryn
2012-10-16, 09:57 PM
I don't particularly care whether we have a d10 or 2d6. I'm of the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" school of thought on this.

As for a lower number of advantages leading to higher RP... I think that may be a case of correlation vs. causation.

Hold on to your seat but for once we agree.

Nefarion Xid
2012-10-16, 10:03 PM
The Contest roll has always existed for when players A) Cannot agree on the outcome of a contest, B) They'd prefer things to be decided randomly. People have always had the option of determining how things go totally OOC.

See Anselme vs Ghedim in Playground 3.

Jade_Tarem
2012-10-16, 10:14 PM
See Claye and Chiyome in Playground 3.
Maranis and anyone in PG1.

The option to resolve without a roll was, and is, available.

Tebryn
2012-10-17, 12:56 AM
Then if number of advantages are set and the die used is more or less agreed on if only on the basis that no one really cares if it's changed or wants it changed...what is next?

TheDarkDM
2012-10-17, 01:37 AM
I'd suggest throwing out character concepts so we can form some tentative connections. Allowing them to grow organically works well sometimes (Bastion is a testament to that), and less so other times, and I think introducing a bit of relationship planning would do the game some good.

Tebryn
2012-10-17, 01:53 AM
Well, didn't get to do a whole lot with my character from Playground 3 so I'll probably bring a similar concept into this game. A rogue/fire mage of some variety though probably more on the mage and less on the rogue. Something along the Assassin line. No Follower/Locus Advantages or anything this time around unlike the last two games.

Xondoure
2012-10-17, 01:56 AM
I'm thinking hovercraft racer in a rapidly growing sports franchise, with some ties to unsavory crowds in his backstory.

TheDarkDM
2012-10-17, 02:01 AM
I was thinking of doing a guard captain who also runs a COMPLETELY LEGITIMATE arms trade.

GuyFawkes
2012-10-17, 02:12 AM
So, wait. Are we doing the Final Fantasy thing with diesel punk, or is the diesel punk out the window entirely?

The_Snark
2012-10-17, 02:14 AM
Tentative concept: a union boss and/or labor foreman at a local foundry or manufactory. Possible criminal ties.

(Also, hi folks! I am following this thread, though I haven't weighed in thanks to a lack of time and strong opinions.)

Tebryn
2012-10-17, 02:20 AM
As an alternative to all of the above, have we considered the ultra-high fantasy, such as the later versions of Final Fantasy? Before people get their undies in a twist, it wouldn't be Final Fantasy, just a reflection of that style of setting - magic is everywhere, even more accessible than in, say, Eberron. Magical constructs and items are abundant, as is heavier-than-air airship travel. Most technology up to and including guns can be justified somehow. There is no space travel.

I suggest this simply because it seems to meet everyone's use cases:

1. No Space Travel
2. Haven't done it before in Playground
3. Still General Fantasy
4. Guns and other tech allowed
5. Not really punk
6. Fast Travel Available (We can even have a bullet train or something)
7. Can centralize in one City of Adventure
8. Lots and lots and lots of character options. Anything is available.
9. The game doesn't undergo a grim apotheosis into booooring sci-fi
10. We can have a castle in the sky.
11. The cheese stands alone.

How does this sound? :smallamused:

I would also be willing to play in the Indie-Bastion universe. Dibs on Mancer.

These seem to be the guidelines for the most part Guy. So, not to much punk but technology is a-OK.

TheDarkDM
2012-10-17, 02:21 AM
I actually got a sense a lot of people were on board with the diesel punk. Though I could be wrong.

GuyFawkes
2012-10-17, 02:37 AM
I actually got a sense a lot of people were on board with the diesel punk. Though I could be wrong.

This, yeah. That's why I thought they were actually combined somehow.

Xondoure
2012-10-17, 02:39 AM
I was thinking of doing a guard captain who also runs a COMPLETELY LEGITIMATE arms trade.

A picture is already forming in my mind.

Race day, two weeks ago, a tragic accident occurred. Record crowds had come to place their bets. The weather was cloudy but the track was dry and the day seemed quite promising until hovercraft #43 and its driver went up in flames along the second lap. Officials say it was the result of faulty wiring giving the public no reason to suspect otherwise. After all the machines are quite dangerous, accidents happen all the time. And it's a good thing too, you can't imagine the problems this would raise if they suspected foul play.


Tentative concept: a union boss and/or labor foreman at a local foundry or manufactory. Possible criminal ties.

(Also, hi folks! I am following this thread, though I haven't weighed in thanks to a lack of time and strong opinions.)

Meanwhile the crime lords have been unusually demanding of late. Parts delivered here, raw materials shipped there. No pattern to trace, but everyone round these parts knows something's up.

TechnOkami
2012-10-17, 03:10 AM
I personally don't have a concept yet, though I do have a question: magic will exist exuberantly (as is the FF style) in this setting, correct?

Tebryn
2012-10-17, 03:46 AM
I personally don't have a concept yet, though I do have a question: magic will exist exuberantly (as is the FF style) in this setting, correct?

It at least exists in some capacity. My working concept is a lava slinging magesassin.

TheDarkDM
2012-10-17, 03:56 AM
Indeed, I believe the consensus is that personal magic is ok, but society is pretty exclusively tech based.

The_Snark
2012-10-17, 04:13 AM
This, yeah. That's why I thought they were actually combined somehow.

I'm not too familiar with Final Fantasy of any iteration, but it doesn't sound like there's a whole lot of difference between FF and dieselpunk+lots of magic? I guess there's the inclusion of -punk, but honestly I'm not sure what that means when you strip it down to just a suffix.

Xondoure
2012-10-17, 04:15 AM
It at least exists in some capacity. My working concept is a lava slinging magesassin.

Out of curiosity would he be conjuring lava, or melting down metal and rock to fling that?

Edit: Speaking of which brings me back to an old favorite of mine (because throwing more ideas into the pot always ends well) Superheroes. :smallcool:

Tebryn
2012-10-17, 04:19 AM
Out of curiosity would he be conjuring lava, or melting down metal and rock to fling that?

Edit: Speaking of which brings me back to an old favorite of mine (because throwing more ideas into the pot always ends well) Superheroes. :smallcool:

Probably a mix of both. I'd imagine there would be a lot more to fling after the initial conjuring. Since people keep using Final Fantasy for this, the imagine of a massive Lava Blade jutting from the ground ala Sword Magic in FFT keeps springing to mind. It can easily be changed to fire or lightning or any other wildly destructive force of nature if it's to silly however, the base idea of Blasty Mage + Stealth is what I am going after.

Xondoure
2012-10-17, 04:26 AM
Probably a mix of both. I'd imagine there would be a lot more to fling after the initial conjuring. Since people keep using Final Fantasy for this, the imagine of a massive Lava Blade jutting from the ground ala Sword Magic in FFT keeps springing to mind. It can easily be changed to fire or lightning or any other wildly destructive force of nature if it's to silly however, the base idea of Blasty Mage + Stealth is what I am going after.

I was just asking because the idea of being able to manipulate superheated materials (and use said manipulation to superheat materials) appeals to my sense of awesome greatly.

VonDoom
2012-10-17, 05:01 AM
I'm on-board with Diesel-Punk due to the comparisons that were drawn earlier, though I haven't looked into the genre by myself.

Going with my general like for scheming/charismatic leader-types, I want to make a character who runs a large company that is rather ruthless and evil in its works. I'll admit that my idea will likely be somewhat inspired by ShinRA, though due to setting and game limits will obviously not be on the scale of 'CONTROLLING AN ENTIRE WORLD', nor even a city of their own.

I'm also not entirely over my Mikado character yet since there was so much I still wanted to do with him, so I may introduce a heavily modified version of the concept.

Weapon technology and engineering is always good for an 'evil' company to focus around, so the following would be very easy to connect to my character:


Bodyguards.
Professional/armed Guards in general.
Assassins for hire, either employed or on an independent contractual basis. Could well include ninjas (and I certainly wouldn't mind seeing a revision of Chiyome if anyone's interested in taking her up again -- though I'd want at least a 'verbal' commitment to strive for regular posting -- sorry, BladeofOblivion, your writing and characterizations are awesome, but your schedule was really spotty in 3. :smallfrown: If you want to try again and have more time now, I'll be glad to see you in that role, but if your schedule is the same as before, I fear neither of us will be very happy with things.)
Civilian Employees (Scientists, Researchers, 'Magic Experts', Engineers, office workers, a Personal Assistant to my character).
Folks involved in and/or running companies that are partners or subsidiaries.
Investors (Very welcome, with other wealthy characters we might actually get to a Mega-Corporation level, which will be hard even if I put all my starting Advantages into the company itself.)
Rival Companies
Customers. Someone has to buy those weapons.
Experiment Subjects. People subjected to weaponizing and augmentation, gaining weird and powerful abilities, whether magical, technological or biological -- it's all good! Those could be cast-aways with a grudge, actual volunteers, employees who went for an upgrade to get that better paycheck, lots of opportunities.
Other stuff I haven't thought of. My character wasn't born fully-formed as a scheming mastermind, after all, and he clawed up his way there. Plenty of people to make enemies or allies of while doing things like that who don't fall under any of the suggestions above.


That said, details are still widely open, so if a lot of people are interested in one type of augmentation and want to root their character into the company, it could specialize in the related field, whichever that is, or have a more broad scope.

GuyFawkes
2012-10-17, 05:38 AM
I'm not too familiar with Final Fantasy of any iteration, but it doesn't sound like there's a whole lot of difference between FF and dieselpunk+lots of magic? I guess there's the inclusion of -punk, but honestly I'm not sure what that means when you strip it down to just a suffix.

I dunno. To me, the tech in FF seems more magitech to me than dieselpunk. But what the hell, unless nobody really is against it, maybe we can have both.

Xondoure
2012-10-17, 05:41 AM
I'm thinking of having a world war sometime in the very recent past. Warbuddies?

VonDoom
2012-10-17, 06:02 AM
To my best recall, FF7 had technology powered by magic as an energy source, but no actual 'magitek'.

They also had a tendency to have slots on their weapons into which they could slap their magic spell-granting items (MATERIA) for easier access/use, but the weapon itself didn't actually do anything magical.

That said, regarding Skype:
I was hoping to actually get to talk more in English, so I am available for that, to an extent. Not for text messaging, though, I'm keeping that to AIM and MSN.

Swordslinger
2012-10-17, 06:43 AM
Was it decided what to do with adventures/Challenges?

Jade_Tarem
2012-10-17, 07:41 AM
I'm thinking of having a world war sometime in the very recent past. Warbuddies?

I was actually planning to ask if the City of Adventure could be the capitol or largest remaining population center of a conquered and occupied nation during an on/off war. This places refugee camps and shanty towns around the edges of the city as well as an active resistance.

If that's available, then I'd probably be making a rebellion leader or agent - possibly a member of the noble family that got regime-changed for the "greater good." OR an increasingly disgruntled member of the occupying force. His particular trick would be scribing various magic onto bullets, a la the Spitfire from DFO if you've ever played that. :smallamused: Although I guess the caster shells from Outlaw Star would be the more obvious reference.


Was it decided what to do with adventures/Challenges?

Not decided just yet.

Starsign
2012-10-17, 08:22 AM
Edit: Speaking of which brings me back to an old favorite of mine (because throwing more ideas into the pot always ends well) Superheroes. :smallcool:

If this is going to be in Playground 5 Xon, I'd be all over it :smalltongue: Though I'm probably going to need a LOT of help regarding character making if I'm going this direction.

As a side note, while it might be fun to bring Alf back, he didn't turn out quite as I had wished he did. He was a little too similar to another one of my characters I made before. Alf might be fun if I semi-redid him as a mad scientist of sorts but I cannot roleplay those kind of characters to save my life :smalleek:

Tebryn
2012-10-17, 11:10 AM
I was just asking because the idea of being able to manipulate superheated materials (and use said manipulation to superheat materials) appeals to my sense of awesome greatly.

I see, well the answer is a mix of both. :smallwink:




Bodyguards.
Assassins for hire, either employed or on an independent contractual basis. Could well include ninjas (and I certainly wouldn't mind seeing a revision of Chiyome if anyone's interested in taking her up again -- though I'd want at least a 'verbal' commitment to strive for regular posting -- sorry, BladeofOblivion, your writing and characterizations are awesome, but your schedule was really spotty in 3. :smallfrown: If you want to try again and have more time now, I'll be glad to see you in that role, but if your schedule is the same as before, I fear neither of us will be very happy with things.)


I'd be happy to fill either or both of those roles :smallbiggrin:



That said, regarding Skype:
I was hoping to actually get to talk more in English, so I am available for that, to an extent. Not for text messaging, though, I'm keeping that to AIM and MSN.

Sent you my info. My work schedule is silly this week however so the weekend will be the best time to catch me.

GuyFawkes
2012-10-17, 12:21 PM
ShinRA, resistance, hovercraft racer, captain of the guards. What else is missing? Well, we can't have a FF-ish game without a Cid-ish character. So, I'm gonna go for an engineer/inventor character, but he will be young and brash, and he will make nice things for his own personal use for a change.

Starsign
2012-10-17, 12:23 PM
ShinRA, resistance, hovercraft racer, captain of the guards. What else is missing? Well, we can't have a FF-ish game without a Cid-ish character. So, I'm gonna go for an engineer/inventor character, but he will be young and brash, and he will make nice things for his own personal use for a change.

I don't think we need to follow the FF formula that closely. I'm pretty sure we're more trying to make a setting a-like Final Fantasy, not make Final Fantasy XV :smalltongue:

VonDoom
2012-10-17, 12:58 PM
Very true, I just mentioned 'that company' because Final Fantasy was brought up as an example and those who are familiar with the game series will usually get what sort of thing I have in mind by association.


Although I guess the caster shells from Outlaw Star would be the more obvious reference.

Is there a big shiny anime-style eyes smiles? If not, imagine it here. Outlaw Star, woo!


I'd be happy to fill either or both of those roles :smallbiggrin:

Sent you my info. My work schedule is silly this week however so the weekend will be the best time to catch me.

Excellent; you're hired. That said, I fear the weekend is generally the worst time for me to get onto Skype since, being the introverted person I am, I generally need at least a day to recuperate without too much personal interaction after the work week and, usually, the Friday Pen&Paper session that tends to last until between 2 and 4 in the morning. Yes, I like to brood in solitude for at least some time during the week. No, I'm not Batman.

Though if I won the lottery, I would absolutely buy a mansion and hire a butler, preferably of British stock. That's just common sense. Right next to a summer home in Kyoto.

GuyFawkes
2012-10-17, 12:59 PM
I know. But you have to admit, almost all of the character archetypes you could find in the FF series, as how I stated my previous post. One could say any sword-wielding character would easily equate to any of the protagonist, or so on and so forth.

That said, I thought about the concept before tying it up to the series, so calm down people. :smallwink:

Tebryn
2012-10-17, 01:02 PM
Excellent; you're hired. That said, I fear the weekend is generally the worst time for me to get onto Skype since, being the introverted person I am, I generally need at least a day to recuperate without too much personal interaction after the work week and, usually, the Friday Pen&Paper session that tends to last until between 2 and 4 in the morning. Yes, I like to brood in solitude for at least some time during the week. No, I'm not Batman.


It'll only be for this week and only because I have the weekend off for a change. You're...nine or ten hours ahead of me however if memory serves. So we can probably work something out as I tend to stay up late when working closing shifts.

TheDarkDM
2012-10-17, 01:18 PM
I know. But you have to admit, almost all of the character archetypes you could find in the FF series, as how I stated my previous post. One could say any sword-wielding character would easily equate to any of the protagonist, or so on and so forth.

That said, I thought about the concept before tying it up to the series, so calm down people. :smallwink:

Only if they were androgynous, needlessly grating, and complained about things most people would be happy for. Oh, and they need a cardboard cutout character they can pine after in order to add "depth".

We are talking about modern Final Fantasy, after all. :smalltongue:

GuyFawkes
2012-10-17, 01:51 PM
Only if they were androgynous, needlessly grating, and complained about things most people would be happy for. Oh, and they need a cardboard cutout character they can pine after in order to add "depth".

We are talking about modern Final Fantasy, after all. :smalltongue:

I did say any in the series as a whole, so if you chose them, well, whatever floats your boat, sir. :smallwink:

But we digress.

Going back to topic, I am thinking if I want to be a mindless slave working for Von Doom's company. Or maybe I left due to some ethical or whatever reasons. That could either put the relationship between the two in a bad light or not.

VonDoom
2012-10-17, 01:54 PM
Pfff. I'm with TheSpoonyOne, Yuna was the real protagonist of FFX. The creators just somehow screwed things up along the way. :smalltongue:

Mindless slave sounds kind of boring due to the, well, mindless part. But I wouldn't mind a slave-to-the-company in general.

TechnOkami
2012-10-17, 01:57 PM
Pfff. I'm with TheSpoonyOne, Yuna was the real protagonist of FFX. The creators just somehow screwed things up along the way. :smalltongue:

But no one could stand up to the manliness which was Jecht. I mean, those shorts, the headband, that colossal sword, the loose black locks of hair, he was a MAN of MEN (and stupidly fun to play in Dissidia).

Swordslinger
2012-10-17, 02:12 PM
Hm, diesel punk, might be fun.

Perhaps I will try to play a scientist type character this time. With thin wires for weapon… and electricity. Can’t have those research subjects running away.

Tebryn
2012-10-17, 02:19 PM
I'm thinking of having a world war sometime in the very recent past. Warbuddies?

Maybe not warbuddies, but perhaps what ever Order my character comes from could be familiar with your character?

The_Snark
2012-10-17, 02:51 PM
I was actually planning to ask if the City of Adventure could be the capitol or largest remaining population center of a conquered and occupied nation during an on/off war. This places refugee camps and shanty towns around the edges of the city as well as an active resistance.

I like this idea. Lots of possibilities for conflict in the aftermath of a war.

Starsign
2012-10-17, 02:55 PM
I like this idea. Lots of possibilities for conflict in the aftermath of a war.

Yeah, that could be interesting.

Also, I'm still zilch on ideas; my idea of Diesel Punk mostly come from the Fallout series so I'm not too experienced there. Post-apocalyptic aside, how Diesel Punk would you all say Fallout is?

Xondoure
2012-10-17, 03:12 PM
Yeah, that could be interesting.

Also, I'm still zilch on ideas; my idea of Diesel Punk mostly come from the Fallout series so I'm not too experienced there. Post-apocalyptic aside, how Diesel Punk would you all say Fallout is?

Fallout is atom punk, so it's to diesel punk what diesel punk is to steam punk.

TheDarkDM
2012-10-17, 03:35 PM
I actually really like Jade's idea of setting this in a recently occupied city after the war has ended. Imagine it, the military officer in charge of occupation and integration, the carpet bagging capitalist who opens shop in town to exploit the locals, the young man whose family was ruined by war and turns to racing, the foreman with connections to the underground, the freedom fighter and the mad scientist...

I can see this as a great setting.