PDA

View Full Version : Converting shows to DND



Jayngfet
2008-10-17, 05:51 PM
I was in the middle of science class when I had a wierd thought:

Every day in greyhawk, fighting villans from afar. You gotta find first gear in you're giant robot wagon!

So aside from Megas Xlr what shows would be cool converted to DnD?

Siegel
2008-10-17, 06:03 PM
Sky Knights (or how it's called)
Everything with lots of Mecha

Dora the Explorer :belkar:

crimson77
2008-10-17, 06:58 PM
So aside from Megas Xlr what shows would be cool converted to DnD?

Dawson's Creek

Actually, there are some good homebrewed worlds based on shows. I have seen cool battlestar glactica, firefox, etc. Before you start making one check the net, often people have started. Additionally, the homebrew section of this site would be a good one to post any material you convert.

Tengu_temp
2008-10-17, 07:19 PM
Converted to a roleplaying game? A lot of shows. I'm running a M&M Nanoha game on these forums, in fact.

Converted to DND? Bleach. The mechanics are godawful for everything else I'm familiar with. DND 3.x is the least cinematic system I've seen in ages.

Pie Guy
2008-10-17, 07:21 PM
Heroes.


stupid limit.

EvilElitest
2008-10-17, 07:51 PM
Buffy/Angel
Supernatural
Avatar (check)
Berserk
Record of the Lodess War

Can we do video games too?
from
EE

charl
2008-10-17, 08:03 PM
Heroes.


stupid limit.

I'd really say no to this one. While the Heroes universe could easily be adopted to a roleplaying game, DnD is way to bulky and puts way too much emphasis on the GAME instead of the roleplaying. Someone in Heroes, no matter how much they have run around saving the world, can still be killed by a single gunshot (some guys you may have to take unaware to stop them from using their powers, and then there's the healing factor people). Imagine trying to make that work with game mechanics when your character is a level 14 police officer with telekinesis and super-strength.

Actually, DnD should never be adapted for any serious TV-show.

EvilElitest
2008-10-17, 08:12 PM
I think Heros would be more Gurps, but D&D 3E, if properly written could make an amazing TV show/anime. If i wrote/direct/produced it of course
from
EE

Beleriphon
2008-10-17, 08:45 PM
I think Heros would be more Gurps, but D&D 3E, if properly written could make an amazing TV show/anime. If i wrote/direct/produced it of course
from
EE

Heroes is more M&M. Best system for it really.

EvilElitest
2008-10-17, 08:49 PM
Heroes is more M&M. Best system for it really.
oh touche

Would Xena make a good D&D convert, i never saw it
from
EE

doliest
2008-10-17, 08:51 PM
Although not a show would D&D third edition would be great for Greek Mythology since the myths seem to be made with D&D in mind.

EvilElitest
2008-10-17, 08:54 PM
Although not a show would D&D third edition would be great for Greek Mythology since the myths seem to be made with D&D in mind.

i've never thought of that actually
from
EE

imperialspectre
2008-10-17, 08:59 PM
Most movies and TV are better made with White Wolf. WoD for supernatural stuff, Exalted for kung fu movies and anything over-the-top, and kind of throwing the two together for a sci-fi feel (I think there's an Exalted splat specifically for making it into a sci-fi kind of game).

D&D could be made into a fairly good series or movie, but only if a) the writers and directors were familiar with the game and put effort into making a really compelling story and b) the actors were actually good. The D&D movies almost fell into So Bad It's Good territory, but not quite, so just Bad.

I suspect that a lower-HP version of 4th Edition could be used for a media conversion much more easily than the previous editions.

EvilElitest
2008-10-17, 09:01 PM
no 3E/2E would be the best for a film, more detail to work with. I think a show could be quite good, the same way Goblins is quite a good comic
from
EE

Thane of Fife
2008-10-17, 09:02 PM
Would Xena make a good D&D convert, i never saw it

Like this? (http://www.xena.nu/dnd.html)

EvilElitest
2008-10-17, 09:09 PM
Like this? (http://www.xena.nu/dnd.html)

hey cool, wish i could check it out but i'd most likely spoil something
from
EE

Xenogears
2008-10-17, 10:32 PM
Lucky Charms Commercials. Have you seen the new one where he gets a "charm" that lets him reverse time from some ancient leprechaun. He is clearly a beginner wizard that periodically receives new magical powers from his ancient masters.

"Here Lucky. Have a Delayed Blast Fireball Charm" "I can blow these annoying kids up? WOW!"

Jayngfet
2008-10-18, 02:14 AM
Actually, DnD should never be adapted for any serious TV-show.

It was, years ago in the 80's. Dispite having the game's and it's own set of Moral Guardians breathing down it's neck it was decent despite it's cultural attitudes and Lolth getting reguced into a one shot villan with no drow or demons and getting offed by her web breaking.

But hey, they managed to think about killing the villan in a TV show.

Drascin
2008-10-18, 03:25 AM
Converted to DND? Bleach. The mechanics are godawful for everything else I'm familiar with. DND 3.x is the least cinematic system I've seen in ages.

Personally, I always thought Berserk read like a mid-high level D&D campaign. At some places, I was even naming feats to myself as I went :smalltongue:.

Tengu_temp
2008-10-18, 06:34 AM
Personally, I always thought Berserk read like a mid-high level D&D campaign. At some places, I was even naming feats to myself as I went :smalltongue:.

Well, I've never seen/read Berserk so I can't tell.

Another show that works well in DND is Slayers, but that goes without saying.

elliott20
2008-10-18, 06:58 AM
most shows, I think, just wouldn't work very well with D&D. D20? maybe, but not necessarily D&D. to make the d20 system work with a show, you need to have a couple axioms set:

1. characters of increasing competence also has increasing stamina, endurance, and just all around skills.

in shows where even the great hero can die from a single fatal blow, this falls apart. however, a surprising number of anime and mythic heroic legends can work amazingly well with it.

2. real world defying physics

at some point, D&D and D20 characters will start outstripping all human limits in the real world, with ease no less. again, this makes it very suitable for a lot of shonen animes.

3. the show needs to support a party structure

let's face it, as cool as shows like Dresden Files are, the majority of the time is spent on Dresden himself. Besides, that show is better done with WoD anyway. Shows that have characters grow in ways that mimic each other are simply not that good of an idea since it doesn't promote party play.

for d&d specifically

4. magic. it needs to be there, it needs to be accessible, it needs to be powerful, and needs to be instaneous in a lot of cases. shows that feature ritual magic will quickly fall apart with D&D due to the fact that most of the time the power to stop requires a mere 8 hours sleep.

Nerd-o-rama
2008-10-18, 12:40 PM
Converted to DND? Bleach. The mechanics are godawful for everything else I'm familiar with. DND 3.x is the least cinematic system I've seen in ages.Ahem, Super (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=39518) Robot (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=39617) Wars (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=77721)? (Not an actual show, but the games are too much of a mashup to be described as anything else).

I maintain my stance that shoehorning is inefficient, but fun! Really, though, pretty much anything works in M&M except some anime, where you want to go with BESM (same thing, different dice, no damage/save/attack/defense caps).

Pyredup
2008-10-18, 02:49 PM
A friend of mine is DMing a DND game where his players found themselves on the Island from Lost.

Tengu_temp
2008-10-18, 03:05 PM
Ahem, Super (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=39518) Robot (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=39617) Wars (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=77721)? (Not an actual show, but the games are too much of a mashup to be described as anything else).

I maintain my stance that shoehorning is inefficient, but fun! Really, though, pretty much anything works in M&M except some anime, where you want to go with BESM (same thing, different dice, no damage/save/attack/defense caps).

Well, if we include games too, not only shows, than there are several other things DND might be good for. For example... gah, I knew it when I was writing my previous post, but can't remember for the life of mine now. Surely not Final Fantasy, however.
EDIT: I'm pretty sure it was Disgaea. As my signature indicates... I must revive this project one day.

The Rose Dragon
2008-10-18, 03:08 PM
I maintain my stance that shoehorning is inefficient, but fun! Really, though, pretty much anything works in M&M except some anime, where you want to go with BESM (same thing, different dice, no damage/save/attack/defense caps).

We'll see how they handle the mecha rules in Me&Ma. And the standard shojo anime where only mundane drama happens ever. Not something fancy like Card Captor Sakura, which is all about gaining a lot of Alternate Powers. Or Sailor Moon, which is...

Huh. I realized I never watched Sailor Moon. :smallredface:

Nerd-o-rama
2008-10-18, 03:17 PM
I believe it's the Super Sentai/Power Rangers formula only with frilly dresses instead of spandex. And no MegaZords ;_;

And Tengu, when I used Super Robot Wars as an example, I only meant that I (can't speak for Magnus_Samma) was ripping from many different mecha anime, as well as the original stuff in SRW games. With a little effort, I've put in stuff from Super Robot Wars Alpha/Original Generation, Zeta Gundam, Martian Successor Nadesico, Gurren-Lagann and
SDF Macross
with more to come.

Tengu_temp
2008-10-18, 03:26 PM
Well, I'd say BESM or Exalted are still better for mecha. Or that game whose sole purpose is to represent mecha games - Mekton Zeta?

Nerd-o-rama
2008-10-18, 03:27 PM
Probably. This is more a "dare to be stupid" kinda thing (sorry Magnus). And you have to admit, the feel of giant robots definitely fits Eberron.

Tengu_temp
2008-10-18, 03:31 PM
Well, there is a reason why Eberron is the best official DND setting.

Okay, reason other than the alternatives being "generic high fantasy land where Marty Stus romp, which doesn't make any sense at any single layer" and "a fantasy land with less Marty Stus, but even more generic - so generic it can kill you, in fact".

Morty
2008-10-18, 03:58 PM
Well, there is a reason why Eberron is the best official DND setting.

Okay, reason other than the alternatives being "generic high fantasy land where Marty Stus romp, which doesn't make any sense at any single layer" and "a fantasy land with less Marty Stus, but even more generic - so generic it can kill you, in fact".

It's always good to see people being open-minded and not judging things based on what they've seen on forums.:smallsigh:

Starsinger
2008-10-18, 04:14 PM
What edition are we talking about? Because I have to echo Tengu's statement. 3.5 is not cinematic at all.

Satyr
2008-10-18, 04:19 PM
3.5 is not cinematic at all.
How would you describe it instead?

The Rose Dragon
2008-10-18, 04:22 PM
How would you describe it instead?

I know the question is not directed at me, but my own feelings are "booooooo-ring".

Spiryt
2008-10-18, 04:25 PM
What edition are we talking about? Because I have to echo Tengu's statement. 3.5 is not cinematic at all.

What do you understand by "cinematic" anyway?

RPG with very fluent action? Very descriptive?

Starsinger
2008-10-18, 04:31 PM
How would you describe it instead?


RPG with very fluent action? Very descriptive?

Sure, fluent and descriptive action is a part of it. Another part is putting "realism" on the back burner, and putting most of the effort on "telling the story". A Cinematic game should feel pulpy, or like an action flick. You know it's ridiculous, and improbably and/or impossible, but you enjoy it because it's an interesting visual.

Spiryt
2008-10-18, 04:36 PM
Sure, fluent and descriptive action is a part of it. Another part is putting "realism" on the back burner, and putting most of the effort on "telling the story". A Cinematic game should feel pulpy, or like an action flick. You know it's ridiculous, and improbably and/or impossible, but you enjoy it because it's an interesting visual.

Well, 3.5 tend to have some problems with fluency (at least in my experience, but as a lazy GM I'm never too well prepared so...).

But overally, such things are more players and GM things that system traits.

As for "realism", 3.5 definetly puts it's on the back burner in most ways (although not in the very good indeed, things that could use a bit more of it are ridiculously dumbed, and some things are too complicated).

Drascin
2008-10-18, 04:37 PM
Sure, fluent and descriptive action is a part of it. Another part is putting "realism" on the back burner, and putting most of the effort on "telling the story". A Cinematic game should feel pulpy, or like an action flick. You know it's ridiculous, and improbably and/or impossible, but you enjoy it because it's an interesting visual.

I enjoy M&M and BESM as much as the next guy, and know D&D is flawed, but really, whatever your complaint with D&D is, it cannot be "it's too realistic" :smalltongue:

Starsinger
2008-10-18, 04:57 PM
I enjoy M&M and BESM as much as the next guy, and know D&D is flawed, but really, whatever your complaint with D&D is, it cannot be "it's too realistic" :smalltongue:

No, I wasn't necessarily talking about D&D with that, I was asked what Realism was... but I seem to have lost half of Spiryt's quote.

Nerd-o-rama
2008-10-18, 05:02 PM
Quoting the whole conversation to make my context clear.
What edition are we talking about? Because I have to echo Tengu's statement. 3.5 is not cinematic at all.

What do you understand by "cinematic" anyway?

RPG with very fluent action? Very descriptive?

Sure, fluent and descriptive action is a part of it. Another part is putting "realism" on the back burner, and putting most of the effort on "telling the story". A Cinematic game should feel pulpy, or like an action flick. You know it's ridiculous, and improbably and/or impossible, but you enjoy it because it's an interesting visual.Well, that's exactly how I enjoy D&D (I believe Eberron was mentioned earlier, and this is exactly the encouraged attitude in that particular campaign setting).

It's something that depends on the people playing, not the campaign setting or system, though some might be biased in certain ways.

Starsinger
2008-10-18, 05:04 PM
Well, that's exactly how I enjoy D&D (I believe Eberron was mentioned earlier, and this is exactly the encouraged attitude in that particular campaign setting).

It's something that depends on the people playing, not the campaign setting or system, though some might be biased in certain ways.

Never played Eberron myself, but I've been told that Eberron has a natural pulp feeling to it despite of the d20 mechanics, and not enhanced by them.

Satyr
2008-10-18, 05:09 PM
Okay, but when D&D is not cinematic, how would you describe it instead?
I find this quite interesting, because I always thaught that D&D was one of the flashy, 'cinematic' games contrary to the more realistic and more heroic fantasy games like Harnmaster or our beloved Kraken of the German roleplaying world, The Dark Eye...

Morty
2008-10-18, 05:12 PM
Okay, but when D&D is not cinematic, how would you describe it instead?
I find this quite interesting, because I always thaught that D&D was one of the flashy, 'cinematic' games contrary to the more realistic and more heroic fantasy games like Harnmaster or our beloved Kraken of the German roleplaying world, The Dark Eye...

D&D is heroic and unrealistic, but this doesn't equal "cinematic". A cinematic game would be one Starsinger describes, that actively tries to make a game look like an action movie. D&D doesn't directly discourage that, but it's not a default style there either, which is why I like it, since I don't want my games to be cinematic.

Drascin
2008-10-18, 05:16 PM
Quoting the whole conversation to make my context clear.

Well, that's exactly how I enjoy D&D (I believe Eberron was mentioned earlier, and this is exactly the encouraged attitude in that particular campaign setting).

It's something that depends on the people playing, not the campaign setting or system, though some might be biased in certain ways.

Same here, actually. Only, with a slight dash of Exalted's over-the-topness added to it, in my particular case (I feel compelled to mention that one of the high-points of last campaign was a swordsage FALCON-PAWNCHING a creature basically equivalent to a demigod in... well, I was going to say the face, but given it was a Daelkyr creation gone uber, saying "face" might not be too applicable...)

Tengu_temp
2008-10-18, 05:20 PM
It's always good to see people being open-minded and not judging things based on what they've seen on forums.:smallsigh:

I'm judging these settings based on what I've read about them, in their respective sourcebooks.

Morty
2008-10-18, 05:21 PM
I'm judging these settings based on what I've read about them, in their respective sourcebooks.

I must've bought some other FRCS then, because my group have run enjoyable, Mary Sue-free FR games that made perfect sense.

Tengu_temp
2008-10-18, 05:26 PM
I must've bought some other FRCS then, because my group have run enjoyable, Mary Sue-free FR games that made perfect sense.

I'm pretty sure you can run an enjoyable campaign in every setting. However, FR is chock-full of Mary Sues (you can't deny that Elminster is Greenwood's author avatar), and the setting does not make sense - a world with so many epic mages around, many of which are good-aligned and running their own communities, should look like Tippyverse, or at least Earthdawn. Not your typical Medieval Fantasy with magic added.

Morty
2008-10-18, 05:34 PM
I'm pretty sure you can run an enjoyable campaign in every setting. However, FR is chock-full of Mary Sues (you can't deny that Elminster is Greenwood's author avatar), and the setting does not make sense - a world with so many epic mages around, many of which are good-aligned and running their own communities, should look like Tippyverse, or at least Earthdawn. Not your typical Medieval Fantasy with magic added.

Noone forces you to use Elminster. The setting itself helps you ignore him by saying that he sits in his tower and doesn't want to be bothered. As to the second argument: um, why not? The places where there are epic mages are very often quite non-medieval, such as Thay or Harlua, or heavily influenced by magic, such as Silverymoon. The world is constantly referred to as "run by spellcasters". Maybe FR aren't as influenced by magic as they should be, but they nevertheless are. Besides, to I'll use your own argument: when the alternative is Eberron(with magic trains by the love of the gods), I can accept some inconsitencies, especially when they're not as big as they're cracked up to be.

Innis Cabal
2008-10-18, 05:40 PM
I'm pretty sure you can run an enjoyable campaign in every setting. However, FR is chock-full of Mary Sues (you can't deny that Elminster is Greenwood's author avatar), and the setting does not make sense - a world with so many epic mages around, many of which are good-aligned and running their own communities, should look like Tippyverse, or at least Earthdawn. Not your typical Medieval Fantasy with magic added.

Except their are laws where magic is concerned. Its not like we don't have the Netherese to look at when you get to insane. There is also Shade and some other places that are way past High Fantasy. Lets not forget also when one good Epic level does something a bad Epic level will probably take exception to it and do something back, and its at that point you get into dangerous world ending terriorty. Though no one will argue against Eli...he is exactly that, but...you know...he has the money and the fan base to get away with it. People who don't like something for that simple reason are just jealous, even if its a little and even if they won't admit it.

Friv
2008-10-18, 06:17 PM
Okay, but when D&D is not cinematic, how would you describe it instead?
I find this quite interesting, because I always thaught that D&D was one of the flashy, 'cinematic' games contrary to the more realistic and more heroic fantasy games like Harnmaster or our beloved Kraken of the German roleplaying world, The Dark Eye...

I can give my reply: I would qualify D&D as primarily Tactical, according to a three-way split of Tactical, Realistic, or Cinematic.

Specifically, it's Tactical first, Cinematic second, and Realistic in a distant third. For obvious reasons, most TV and movies are Cinematic first, Realistic second, and Tactical far in third.

For reference, these would be my signs of each of those three things being prominent:

Tactical: A desire for rules balance and enough complexity to create interesting tactical options outweighs other considerations. Ideally, most interesting options should be equally valuable (there shouldn't be one or two tactics that are more powerful), and events tend to be portrayed directly in order to permit a tactical response to a situation. Many tactical games prefer to dial down moral ambiguity (although others portray it as one other tactic you have to balance, so it's far from a set rule).

Cinematic: A desire for interesting story permutations and character development to take precedence. Cinematic games prefer to give avantages to people for doing interesting things, make it hard for PCs to die off the cuff, and create distinctions between important and unimportant characters.

Realistic: A desire for a world to run as much like the real world as possible, including consistent and realistic portrayal of whatever fantastic elements might be present. In such games, the players are not special, and play by the exact same rules as everyone else. Injury tends to be serious, and innovative ideas are only acceptable if they could reasonably work.

(As another example of a somewhat similar game, White Wolf's Exalted is Cinematic, then Tactical, then Realistic coming up in the rear.)

Tengu_temp
2008-10-18, 06:45 PM
I can't help but see parallels between Tactical and Gamist, Cinematic and Narrativist, and Realistic and Simulationist. Coincidentally, in both cases I believe the game should be most importantly Narrativist/Cinematic, a bit less (but still rather highly) Gamist/Tactical, and Simulationist/Realistic in the distant third - just enough to keep the world consistent.

In other words, Exalted is the game for me. And indeed, I love it. Yay.

EvilElitest
2008-10-18, 08:02 PM
Well, there is a reason why Eberron is the best official DND setting.

Okay, reason other than the alternatives being "generic high fantasy land where Marty Stus romp, which doesn't make any sense at any single layer" and "a fantasy land with less Marty Stus, but even more generic - so generic it can kill you, in fact".

Not at all. FR is no less diverse and in depth than Ebberon. It isn't any cliche any more than ebberon, it just focuses upon a different styles of playing. They aren't that different in many ways, and most of the FR mockeries are totally unfounded, because the cool kids are doing it.

Really, how is ebberon make more sense on single layer any more than FR. It makes somewhat less sense in some ways, in FR at least somebody got around to inventing guns.

They are both good editions, just focused on different things


Anyways, the claims that 3E can't handle drama is absurd. How does the game prohibit story teller or drama any more tha n2E or 4E? how does it limit quality back ground. I mean, Goblins pulls off a great story.

Actually i htink 3E would do it better beacuse it is more diverse
from
EE

EvilElitest
2008-10-18, 08:07 PM
Sure, fluent and descriptive action is a part of it. Another part is putting "realism" on the back burner, and putting most of the effort on "telling the story". A Cinematic game should feel pulpy, or like an action flick. You know it's ridiculous, and improbably and/or impossible, but you enjoy it because it's an interesting visual.

thats not true. What about M? Great film, and very realistic. What about Song of Ice and Fire? What about the Belgariad? Yojimbo? Master and Commander? Seven Samerai? Pretty realistic stuff and very dramatic. unrealistic absurdities only lead to sloppy story telling, and tend to be very shallow. Like say, most actions flicks, they have little depth. Notice how the best tend to contain parody/comedy that makes them good, like Kung Fu Husle. Realism is a better grounding because iti s more relatable, where the audience can feel more immersion in the world. Same reason why Rome is better than Gladitor, and why Gladitor is better than Troy.
from
EE

edit
name more than three FR mary sues. Elminster check. Drizzt close......anybody else?


Also it isn't middle age fantasy with magic added, its high fantasy
from
EE

Starsinger
2008-10-18, 08:08 PM
Anyways, the claims that 3E can't handle drama is absurd.

Who said 3e can't handle drama? The thing is that 3E is about as cinematic as a truck full of bowling balls... that... doesn't do cinematic things.

Tengu_temp
2008-10-18, 08:10 PM
Anyways, the claims that 3E can't handle drama is absurd. How does the game prohibit story teller or drama any more tha n2E or 4E? how does it limit quality back ground. I mean, Goblins pulls off a great story.


I don't think if anyone made that claim.
Ack, ninja-ed!

EvilElitest
2008-10-18, 08:14 PM
Who said 3e can't handle drama? The thing is that 3E is about as cinematic as a truck full of bowling balls... that... doesn't do cinematic things.

you have a very narrow definition of cinimatic things? A wizard can destory whole cities, fighters can bring down hundreds of guys, you can fight demon lords and break towers? What, it doesn't work because you can destory the wall by frowning at it (well technically you can with a spell but still)
from
EE

Tengu_temp
2008-10-18, 08:26 PM
I know I'm not the one to talk, but maybe we could return to the original topic? We could start a new thread regarding the topic this one got derailed into.

EvilElitest
2008-10-18, 08:51 PM
I know I'm not the one to talk, but maybe we could return to the original topic? We could start a new thread regarding the topic this one got derailed into.

fair enough, i think Baldur's gate would be a wonderful show
from
EE

elliott20
2008-10-18, 09:56 PM
I always thought Baldur's Gate would make a better mini-series or a multi-movie franchise than a TV show though...

Jayngfet
2008-10-19, 12:16 AM
I'm pretty sure you can run an enjoyable campaign in every setting. However, FR is chock-full of Mary Sues (you can't deny that Elminster is Greenwood's author avatar), and the setting does not make sense - a world with so many epic mages around, many of which are good-aligned and running their own communities, should look like Tippyverse, or at least Earthdawn. Not your typical Medieval Fantasy with magic added.

Seriously. Drizzt, the seven sisters, Elminster, Did I miss anyone else who's supposedly boring but pretty and powerful somehow?

And then there's plain boring characters like Quenthel or Lolth herself.

Or character actions or deaths that make no sense whatsoever *cough*RyldxHallistra*Cough*

EvilElitest
2008-10-19, 12:24 AM
I always thought Baldur's Gate would make a better mini-series or a multi-movie franchise than a TV show though...

if done in any great detail i think a tv show would be needed, maybe an anime
from
EE

RPGuru1331
2008-10-19, 12:52 AM
It's something that depends on the people playing, not the campaign setting or system, though some might be biased in certain ways.

You seem to be a cool guy who doesn't afraid of anything (Solid Snake Boxatar? Rock) and all, but you couldn't be more wrong here. Systems and settings can support cinematic feels, and 3.5 doesn't. Cinematic is when your books look at.. how do I put it. The feel of a movie, or something else story-based, and saying "This is how they did it, and here's something, either advice or mechanics, that can help you do that".

EvilElitest
2008-10-19, 12:55 AM
how come these claims that 3E isn't cinimatic basically boils down to "I don't think it is" can we have than "because i think so"
from
EE

RPGuru1331
2008-10-19, 01:02 AM
how come these claims that 3E isn't cinimatic basically boils down to "I don't think it is" can we have than "because i think so"
from
EE

Look, I don't have the inclination to read two entire books to you to compare a cinematic and uncinematic system. It's very simple; Nothing in base 3.5 will promote things that are like movies, like tales. (Eberron has Action Points, for instance, which are to be used at times when a story would say you put your all into it). White Wolf games have something similar, with Willpower. Hero Points. Etc.

What, in 3.5, makes it cinematic? You're laying a heavier burden of proof on others then you're willing ot offer. Do you have some passage where they say, point blank, that "This is done to make the game feel more awesome, feel more like a drama movie" or "To give the heroes a way to go even further all out when the supervillain brings out a brand new superweapon and they need to combat it NOW"?

Nerd-o-rama
2008-10-19, 01:30 AM
Aha! An actual definition of "cinematic system"! Thank you for actually explaining your side of the debate, RPGuru.

Sorry for the facetiousness. I'm just a very literal-minded man, and I don't like arguing when I don't have a clear idea of what's being talked about. It's why I work with computers for a living; they're also literal-minded.

Anyway, by your definition, I guess D&D is not a cinematic system. There's no rules for "this would make the story cooler" or "this would produce an appropriately dramatic effect", except for the optional Action Point rules. Being AWESOME or dramatic is based mainly on roleplaying (which there are no rules for, really) and "gamist" use of resources - for example, pulling off a sweet combo of spell effects, or using tactics to pull of sweet moves. There's nothing in the rules to encourage this, I admit. D&D rules are, as stated before, heavily Tactical, more concerned with a (futile) attempt at competitive balance and giving people a framework to work in than in making things TOTALLY SWEET. That is left, for better or worse, to the parts of players' imaginations unregulated by the ruleset.


I guess, on analysis, this is slightly relevant to the topic. I still dislike "D&D vs. everything else" fanwankery on principle, though.

RPGuru1331
2008-10-19, 01:40 AM
I guess, on analysis, this is slightly relevant to the topic. I still dislike "D&D vs. everything else" fanwankery on principle, though.

Oh sure. Mascot-tan's portrayal of D20 could not be more accurate. It's just that on cinematic, they're going to do it with some accuracy, since most people don't remember the games that compete with DnD (Hackmaster, the finest social experiment in roleplaying, for instance), and nobody's going to say.. ah crap, GURPS basic is based on the idea.

Nerd-o-rama
2008-10-19, 01:57 AM
That's why these arguments start up, isn't it? The boards are D&D-biased, and folks like you and Tengu feel an obligation to make sure we're all aware of other games?

I guess I just get annoyed because I'm the choir being preached to, yet I don't like the random thread derails.

RPGuru1331
2008-10-19, 02:01 AM
Eh? Not really. I might consider it on a site that isn't clearly DnD biased, but there's no point here. I'm actually just trying to get a frankly silly argument down; DnD isn't cinematic, which is fine and all, obviously (It'd have to be, given the popularity) but is still going to be the case.

EvilElitest
2008-10-20, 09:05 PM
Look, I don't have the inclination to read two entire books to you to compare a cinematic and uncinematic system. It's very simple; Nothing in base 3.5 will promote things that are like movies, like tales. (Eberron has Action Points, for instance, which are to be used at times when a story would say you put your all into it). White Wolf games have something similar, with Willpower. Hero Points. Etc.

Actually considering your definition of cinematic is self made, yeah, yeah you do. What in 3E doesn't promote "cinematic". By your definition, that means "Being awesome" fine, you can do that in 3E, it certainly isn't a realistic game. Fighters can smash down half a hundred guys in a single fight, wizards can decimate cities, there is virtually limitless amount of monsters with their own unique powers and abilities. Gods and greater spirits directly effect the earth. There is magic, characters, weapons and numerous fight scenes involved. It certainly can be cinematic, and a game doesn't need a action points or anything like it to be so.




What, in 3.5, makes it cinematic? You're laying a heavier burden of proof on others then you're willing ot offer. Do you have some passage where they say, point blank, that "This is done to make the game feel more awesome, feel more like a drama movie" or "To give the heroes a way to go even further all out when the supervillain brings out a brand new superweapon and they need to combat it NOW"?
No, becaue that isn't needed to make it cinematic. Really, it doesn't. i don't need to offer that sort of proof because i challenge your definition of cinematic. You don't need the game to paint out a mechanic to make you feel cool, you can do it on your own without a problem. Your narrow minded view of the word cinematic simply doesn't prove anything. Its again just you saying "No, its not cinematic, because i say so" despite the fact that not having action points or anything related isn't required to be cinematic, you just need the game to be able to make the possible through its own merits. I deny your definition of what is needed to make the game cinematic because having action points or not doesn't make a different in that sense, you can still have that sort of drama without it.

Basically, i deny your definition of cinematic
from
EE