Skip to content

I don't get all the rogue love kids have these days

13»

Comments

  • NukefaceNukeface Member Posts: 91
    @scriver‌

    BOOOOOOO! BOO ON YOU! I meant every last - is that a Pop Tart? HOLY CRAP I'M RICH!
    CrevsDaakBlackravenkcwisejackjack
  • skinnydragonskinnydragon Member Posts: 110
    As this seems to have become a novel game idea thread how about actual npcs rather than just extra pcs. Let the npcs do what they'd do although obviously guided by the player eg attack defend cautious aggressive etc. Maybe some things an npc won't do eg paladin attacking a child. Perhaps better relationships or a influence skill affecting how much control you have
    Nukefacekcwise
  • NukefaceNukeface Member Posts: 91
    @skinnydragon OMG! Lemme tell ya about my original idea! Seriously, funny you mention that.

    I was thinking about how it would be an interesting game world where you have no control over who you play - your character is literally a sequentially generated series of characteristics that determine their life story. The idea is a novelization a la The Sims meets Baldur's Gate versus a nitty gritty meta-game RPG system.

    No HUD, just organic characteristics to determine what your NPC is thinking, feeling, etc. You have your normal PnP inspired stats that are hidden - they're just there for the system. You might be dropped into a tale about a nobody who literally farms his life away - along the way he meets other generated NPCs and your job is to guide their story based on cues from dialogue and their emotive behaviors.

    The idea is you might have to deal with him wanting to get married, possibly go through a period where you have to decide if she's the one for you or the girl down the street is worth your while - if you get married, is she trustworthy? Does she cheat? Does your character have to make decisions that turn him into an alcoholic or do you work things through? Does your village get raided by goblins at some point and you have to help rebuild? Do you live happily ever after? Do the goblins murder your family and you become hell-bent on revenge?

    You might play a wanna-be sorcerer, or a renegade prince, or... As many back-stories and tales as you can imagine. Some might be mundane, some might be heroic. If you take your warrior into the store you might see him eyeing a particular broadsword, or a gambler might want to spend some time at the tables. That would be your indicator that the hidden stats are better, has an interesting enchantment, or maybe it just has a particular design your character likes.

    Part of the appeal would be getting to know and understand your character - you might love some and despise others. The hook is you'll never know exactly how powerful or mundane they actually are until they die - you might find that your best character was statistically incredibly underwhelming while a demi-god fell flat.

    All this could be catalogued in a journal that you could edit, upload, and share to the community to see what kinds of adventures your characters are having (or not having).

    This would be kind of an interesting take on the "Choose Your Own Adventure" novels. It's such an interesting idea that I would love to see it come to pass but I'm not sold that it would be anything more than an interesting experiment. It would really rely on how immersive the system actually was and the amount of time you could spend creating interesting dialogue based on a matrix that also determines scenario creation based on user choices.

    I would have you guide your character in combat as well - not total control but enough that you feel like your skill matters, maybe a system of divine intervention.
    kcwisejackjackNonnahswriter
  • abacusabacus Member Posts: 1,307
    I'm really enjoying reading the input from experienced PnP players and DMs... I've never really played PnP, as my best friends are all either sporting run-jump-catch-throw types or sit-and-chew-the-fat types who eschew organised activities altogether.

    My RPG side only ever got expressed in digital form, but I love the concepts and its great hearing about previous games and fond remembrances.
    BlackravenkcwisejackjackJuliusBorisov
  • NukefaceNukeface Member Posts: 91
    @abacus @grum I believe there's been discussion about running a PnP version of IWD in the Role-Playing Section of the forum to delve a little bit deeper into the scenario.

    I'm of the opinion that if someone's willing to "pseudo-DM" then it would be kind of a fun experiment for those of us who are interested to explore what a PnP version of the campaign might look like. All strictly in the interest of science, of course. SCIENCE!

    We had an interesting little discussion over the ethics of being a Paladin and how the alignment system works a little while back, that's how this came about.

    I'm of the firm belief that my bi-polar CN Gnome Thief/Illusionist would be a great asset to any party. And by asset I probably mean liability.
    kcwise
  • SquireSquire Member Posts: 511
    Nukeface said:

    It's a well known fact that if you have a bunch of men with shields the best possible usage of them is to have them stand well apart from each other - personal space should always be observed in hand to hand combat. *FACT*

    I LOLed at this one! I love how people who direct movie battles have no idea whatsoever about how they're actually fought, but rather than consult somebody who does, they just make any old crap up, because in their eyes, it "looks spectacular".

    It is also a fact that when fighting with a shield, its primary use is as a counterweight, not for protection. When swinging your main weapon, your shield must be thrown behind you to maximise your enemy's target area, and cause maximum intimidation. *FACT*

    Oh, and the proper way to attack an enemy formation is to break ranks and charge across the entire 300 yards of open ground between you, screaming as you go - honour will demand that your enemy does the same, ensuring that both armies meet in a staggered group, and not a solid line, since we don't want more than one person able to attack the same enemy at once. *FACT*
    kcwiseNonnahswriter
  • SquireSquire Member Posts: 511
    Nukeface said:

    @skinnydragon OMG! Lemme tell ya about my original idea! Seriously, funny you mention that.

    I was thinking about how it would be an interesting game world where you have no control over who you play - your character is literally a sequentially generated series of characteristics that determine their life story. The idea is a novelization a la The Sims meets Baldur's Gate versus a nitty gritty meta-game RPG system.

    This actually sounds similar to the old Traveller system! You roll up your stats, then you choose a career path, but you have to make a roll to see if you actually get that career path - you might not, and you might end up on a compeltely different path (I'm sure more than a few of us, given the choice, would not have chosen the career path we currently walk). Even once you get your career, you have to roll to see how you're employed, and what skills you learn as a result of it. You also roll for life events, which kind of generates your history. The only things you have control over is your name, gender, and how many years of service you want to add; each year gives you potential for more experience, but also increases likelihood that something bad will happen (it is actually possible to die in character creation!!).

    It's a very interesting system, and one that I'd love to explore a little more. I've only had a brief go at it, but it looks really interesting, and is far more challenging, and interesting, than "I want to be a rogue!", "*poof* You're a rogue, and have the exact background and skills that you need!".
    kcwise
  • skinnydragonskinnydragon Member Posts: 110
    @Nukeface‌ I wasn't going quite that far the main PC would be rolled and controlled normally it's just joinable npcs who would have their own minds. I also think that it your influence affected how much you could make the npcs do then that would affect play do you save the trees to makes the druid happy or get more gold for the rogue. I think it would be more worthwhile than a stat boost and one or two cutscenes and conversations. Although obviously cutscenes and. Conversations would be used both to gain influence and to show you passing a threshold.

    I do see the value of your idea and would probably play or at lest experiment with it. The problem with both our ideas is that they would take a LOT of implementation and potentially wouldn't have mass popularity for the companies to invest in
    kcwise
  • the_spyderthe_spyder Member Posts: 5,018
    Nukeface said:

    I'm of the firm belief that my bi-polar CN Gnome Thief/Illusionist would be a great asset to any party. And by asset I probably mean liability.

    Hey, I once played such a Gnome. In a role play scenario they can be endless amounts of fun. Although, to be fair after the third "Dragon attack" on the party he kind of got a reputation. But it wasn't until a real one came along that the fun really started.
    kcwise
  • NukefaceNukeface Member Posts: 91
    edited January 2015
    @skinnydragon Here's my thoughts on companies - they can't dictate what people do with their free time. While this may not be a "hugely succesful AAA" game idea, it could pave the way for new developers by introducing new ideas, create a larger skillset for the people involved, and be an interesting submission for a resume. With things like Steam's Green-Light project who's to say it couldn't be commercially viable? Do it because you love it - who wants to play games made by stuffy old geezers in suits?

    I like the idea that you might have to balance your party's expectations instead of a "morality" system - it would make having a Paladin and a Rogue in the same party a little more difficult than is otherwise the "norm".

    @squire Holy crap, that's awesome! I get the feeling that the meta-game approach can sometimes be detrimental to a truly "epic" character - just because you get the stat rolls doesn't really mean much if you're not emotionally invested in the world.

    And, yes, these are all highly significant and historically relevant *FACT*s. I have a *FACT*itious disorder wherein I must only tell things as they is. *FACT*

    @the_spyder I love these off-beat characters because you can start with them as a complete lunatic and then suddenly introduce a major swing into self-loathing and denial that has them pondering their actions and how they've hurt the people they care about. Suddenly the lunacy seems tragic and it gets harder to laugh when they're acting out. They may desperately want help and have moments of clarity that leave them paralyzed, stricken with horror at who they've become. Then the clouds roll back in and they're swinging a trout above their heads in a loin-cloth and shouting for the blood of the righteous to come raining down for divine retribution against all that have wronged them. Good times!
    skinnydragonkcwise
  • the_spyderthe_spyder Member Posts: 5,018
    @Nukeface - nah. Rablsnorvin was all about the funny. He never "Hurt" anyone, directly. At least no one important. He was one heck of a practical joker though.
    kcwisejackjackNukeface
  • The_Potty_1The_Potty_1 Member Posts: 436
    edited February 2015
    If it wasn't for bad love, I wouldn't have any love at all.

    Born under a bad sign

    I'm going to check how the strikethrough on luck looks, because that could easily look like a fairly similar word :p . EDIT and removed.
    FinneousPJ
  • the_spyderthe_spyder Member Posts: 5,018

    If it wasn't for bad love, I wouldn't have any love at all.

    Born under a bad sign

    I'm going to check how the strikethrough on luck looks, because that could easily look like a fairly similar word :p . EDIT and removed.
    "I've learned so much about love. Before I met her I never even thought about killing myself." - Steven Wright.
    lolienJuliusBorisov
  • NukefaceNukeface Member Posts: 91
    All I've learned about love can be summed up by Queensryche lyrics.

    "I! DON'T! BE! LIIIIEEEEEVE IN LOVE! I NEVER HARVE AND I NEVAR WHEEEEL!

    I! DON'T! BE! LIIIIEEEEEVE IN LERV! I JUST PERTEND SHE NEVER WAS REEEEEAAAA-UL!"

    Of course, this woman was killed in cold blood and didn't just wander off without even bothering to call me, I mean, Geoff Tate a complete waste of life, a complete failure, an utter loser, and insist that she would be much happier in the arms of another man that she just got married to without a single thought of my broken, bloody, still-beating heart. Nope. Had to find that out through Facebook. I've still completely decided it describes me perfectly, mob hitman on a mission of divine vengeance aside. I'm still way more awesome though.

    Look, guys, denial is awesome until somebody decides to rain on your denial parade, then it's a lot like de Nile in that it floods over and makes your harsh, barren desert of a mental landscape suddenly rife with the SUDDEN EMERGENCE OF A PLENTIFUL AND ABUNDANT GREEN FOLIAGE OF PAIN AND REGRET AND INTROSPECTION!

    WHERE THE F*** IS MY XANAX?!

    I'M ROLLING A BLACKGUARD AND CRASHING A WEDDING! RAAAHHHHHHHHRRRRRGH!

    It's just you and me, Yoshimo ol' buddy - you'd never turn on me, right?
    The_Potty_1lolienFinneousPJJuliusBorisov
Sign In or Register to comment.