machfront
11th level Troll
Stalwart of the Trollbridge
"Let's go dark!"
Posts: 2,147
|
Post by machfront on Jul 11, 2009 20:40:37 GMT -5
I just have to wonder if he knows. As time has gone on and the big and small wonders of T&T pile on with reading and experience and tweaking and so forth, it continues to amaze me. It's pretty clear to me that Ken is a bright guy in general. It's also known that OD&D confused and irritated him (in that it didn't need to be as convoluted as it was at the time...in his opinion). From what I read, he sat down that very night to write what was the first edition of the rules (or perhaps the skeleton of the first edition, be it either which). Now, certainly this was transformed over time through others opinions and experience through play, but I'd wager that the core ideas stayed much the same. Heck, we can see that between 1st ed., 1st UK ed., 4th, and 5th that the core mechanics were virtually the same. That engine is still present even with the unnecessary additions to 7.x. I have to wonder... Did Ken have an epiphony that evening so strong that he was able to design something that was so well-made and so stong and at the same time so malleable that it would/could last so long without signifigant change? Was it a high Luck score? I wonder sometimes if he realizes just how...well...brilliant the T&T design really is. It's simple, sure. But I think it's d***-near genius. I really do. Some parts are obvious. The SR in general. The combat system in general. Some are very subtle. That attributes, being flexible and changable reflect ability so much more than other games usually do with attributes, that other 'special abilites' and skills can be quite superfluous. (I like skills, however.) Someone said somewhere, either here or on a blog or another forum, that in T&T, your attributes are your skills. But if it's just raw ability or just seen as such, it still stands. Someone with a greater inate ability may very well be better at something than another who has a skill but a lower attribute score. Things like that, and many others that are small and sort of lost, but describing them and their implications could fill a few pages. Genius, I tell ya. It can't just all be a happy accident.
|
|
|
Post by feldrik on Jul 12, 2009 9:55:26 GMT -5
I keep coming back to T&T and trying to introduce it to other people because it is so straight forward. Other games do a lot to dicourage many would be gamers from getting into the hobby because after a look at the second rule book it is apparent to the would be gamer that us active gamers are just stroking our ego and intellect (which is also often true, we all know the exploit expert and rules lawyer). If I can get a foothold with T&T I think my friends and the would be gamers we know will see the light...I just can't get a solid commitment...probably because it is new to them and people are resistant to change.
|
|
|
Post by djacknh on Jul 12, 2009 19:59:21 GMT -5
I started with T&T. Played a little Warhammer years later. Bought the 3rd Ed. AD&D books and came back to T&T. I'd much rather play with a clean, simple set of rules and let players and GM expand and expound. In version 5.5 of the rules there is a section on skills.
|
|
Hogscape
11th level Troll
Stalwart of the Trollbridge
It's not the years, it's the mileage.
Posts: 2,126
|
Post by Hogscape on Jul 12, 2009 23:21:39 GMT -5
Thanks for the reminder Djacknh - I really must get hold of 5.5... How do skills work in 5.5?
T&T was the third game I ever played (first, traveller; second, Runequest 2). Played it solidly for 2 years, drifted back throughout the decades and I'm back now, playing a mix of 7th and 4th editons.
|
|
unclecranky
5th Level Troll
(mutter...grumble)
Posts: 657
|
Post by unclecranky on Jul 13, 2009 4:02:12 GMT -5
He is a genius, who got lucky. He found a publisher with the foresight to both copyright and trademark his invention and do so (fortuitously) before Gary Gygax trademarked HIS invention. He had a group of friends who were willing and able to help him improve his invention, and it was a great product to begin with-probably because he knew more about some of the subject matter than Gygax did to begin with...
|
|
machfront
11th level Troll
Stalwart of the Trollbridge
"Let's go dark!"
Posts: 2,147
|
Post by machfront on Jul 13, 2009 4:09:54 GMT -5
How do skills work in 5.5? It's in the back with the other extra stuff. Ken's House Rules from back in the day, Sorcerer's Apprentice articles, of which this is one (from Mike Stackpole). It's...clunky. Proto-MS&PE. Starting skill points = IQ. Using APs to increase the skills, so you have to keep track of them as well as the character's AP progression. 50 APs with every use of the skill. Plus the skills are seperated by minimum required IQ, etc. Not very T&T-ish, imho.
|
|
Hogscape
11th level Troll
Stalwart of the Trollbridge
It's not the years, it's the mileage.
Posts: 2,126
|
Post by Hogscape on Jul 13, 2009 9:10:08 GMT -5
Hmmm thanks Mach, I think I prefer talents but will still pick up 5.5
|
|
|
Post by djacknh on Jul 13, 2009 10:07:11 GMT -5
Ver. 5.5 has some nice additional rules in the back but the game is still clean and simple. The first 75% of the rules is 5th Ed. with the same exact typeset and layout and the additional rules are tacked on at the end.
|
|
machfront
11th level Troll
Stalwart of the Trollbridge
"Let's go dark!"
Posts: 2,147
|
Post by machfront on Jul 15, 2009 7:05:43 GMT -5
I keep coming back to T&T and trying to introduce it to other people because it is so straight forward. Other games do a lot to dicourage many would be gamers from getting into the hobby because after a look at the second rule book it is apparent to the would be gamer that us active gamers are just stroking our ego and intellect (which is also often true, we all know the exploit expert and rules lawyer). If I can get a foothold with T&T I think my friends and the would be gamers we know will see the light...I just can't get a solid commitment...probably because it is new to them and people are resistant to change. Selling folks on T&T isn't easy. I have a number of buddies who play games like the new World of Darkness and D&D 3.5 and so on. There's been a handful of times I've heard them talk about 45 min to a hour long combats with only a handful of combatants. They're always shocked to hear that I could handle the same (with the same sort of results, mind) in just a few minutes. You'd think that would be enough. But it usually comes down to folks wanting to know why there aren't more "classes" and why aren't there skills, and how would one know what one could and could not do and what differentiates one character (or one warrior) from another and so on. I don't have to tell any of you here the answer to these questions, because you already know. You're T&T players. Suffice it to say, the questions are answered. Seemingly satisfactorily. But it always ends with the last word of some sort of: "Well, I like having the options/detail/parameters.", showing that they didn't really listen, or that they don't (or won't) 'get it'. Most gamers won't try it no matter how well the "sell" goes. My players are not gamers. They were complete newbies when we started (with D&D via the Rules Cyclopedia) and though they love playing, they're still not 'gamers', so they're not good examples. But they are best cases. T&T is difficult for most gamers because gamers, especially ones who are enamoured of more rules-heavy and regulated games, have certain set-in-stone expectations and also they can't seem to, to paraphrase Yoda, unlearn what they have learned. More's the pity. But newbs don't suffer that unfortunate malady. T&T is easy to sell on folks who've never gamed before. It makes a lot of sense to them somehow, whereas the games ask all sorts of questions about things that should be imagination-oriented. Where has the imagination gone? Did it leave the scene sometime in the early 80s? Was it tired of being ignored and just offed itself? It seems so.
|
|
|
Post by feldrik on Jul 15, 2009 18:41:46 GMT -5
I think there are very few 'gamers' in reality. Long ago (pre D&D 3.0) I expressed that I preferred T&T to a friend that I had been gaming with for a long time. He said...get this..'it was not complicated enough'. Now with D&D 4.0 (soon to be some other money grab edition) he must have gotten his wish. I will admit that 4.0 is somewhat simpler than 3.5 but still a rules lawyer/exploiter dream come true (and that is what many players are looking for, I call it Smartest Guy in the Room Syndrome). Below is what I wrote in my Even Odds RPG rules on characters and kindreds but it comes from my experiences with T&T vs other systems. "A method that is more fitting with the idea of character development is that the players will role-play the race and class as they see it, complete with quirks, cultural taboos and prejudices. They will make choices based on what they want the character to be, not as a loosely contrived set of stats that give them a perceived advantage over the other characters."
The D&D players must also be reminded that even in that system it states that a character can attempt any skill or feat even if they do not have it listed. And, as a GM you can include only those races and classes that YOU decide are appropriate to the game YOU are running...it is NOT up to the players regardless of how many books they own. But, as you say they are not gamers.And I say D&D is not an RPG. By the way, I do not like the T&T 5.5 skills. It seems like a different system tagged on. If I use skills I will simply state that a character gets 3-6 at level one. The bonus is equal to their level current number. They can gain a new skill at the next odd level that is greater than the original number of skills they chose. OK, not that simple. This means if they chose 3 skills then they get their next one at level 5. Thereafter they get a new one every odd level. Or I will go with something else, or nothing (preferred) and have them role play.
|
|
machfront
11th level Troll
Stalwart of the Trollbridge
"Let's go dark!"
Posts: 2,147
|
Post by machfront on Jul 17, 2009 5:10:02 GMT -5
I think there are very few 'gamers' in reality. Long ago (pre D&D 3.0) I expressed that I preferred T&T to a friend that I had been gaming with for a long time. He said...get this..'it was not complicated enough'. That's pretty more or less what I thought when I was first exposed to T&T. But I was young and stupid. Then, I (and many folks then and now do as well) confused simple with simplistic. Pity. And I say D&D is not an RPG. Well, not the game they're selling that's simply called D&D nowadays anyway.
|
|
|
Post by feldrik on Jul 17, 2009 9:22:47 GMT -5
A simple game system lends it self to complex and indepth role playing. Not many people are up for the impromtue theater of real RPG gaming. It takes a lot out of you and can expose parts of youre inner self to scrutiny.
A complex game system lends it self to detail oriented mechanics with class and kindred aspects reduced to flavor text. These are easier to handle because they are an intellectual exercise. There is a trend towards 'pulp gaming' that I want to try and has better mechanics than D&D and are a bit cheaper as well (like free on line in some cases).
To turn this away from a D&D bash (my fault it went that way) I would say for complex gaming there are many tactical and stratgey games that I enjoy and so would other gamers, the 'Pulps' alluded to above, tactical level navel or space craft games, that have the theme that some gamers are looking for. It is getting them to realize the difference between the RPG and the strategy game that is the trick. We used to mix it up with different games each week.
|
|
unclecranky
5th Level Troll
(mutter...grumble)
Posts: 657
|
Post by unclecranky on Jul 17, 2009 11:10:35 GMT -5
Imho, Feldrik, imagination (by and large) went the way of the dodo when video game systems introduced FRP-Style games which could be purchased and run. No more need for a tedious pile of papers, books, dice, and pens on a table. Instead, you could simply fire up the ol' NES, and start in gaming by yourself-it even said how many hits you were taking, whether you saved against an attack or not, and showed you the dragon you were getting slain by, so that you didn't have to (gasp) picture it in your head anymore! Of course, the side effect of all this is that players got bored fighting such simple things as 'dragons' 'trolls' and 'ogres' and had to have NEW monsters, all nicely pre-pictured for them. Min-nmaxers everywhere rejoiced, because they could min-max away at the stats to their heart's content, picking just the 'right' (meaning nastiest) weapon/armor/spell combo they could think of to kill off everything.
|
|
|
Post by feldrik on Jul 17, 2009 11:31:51 GMT -5
I think you are correct unclecranky. The computer/console game that calls itself an RPG has had a lot to do with dumbing down the average game player. Some of my friends have never played more than WoW and D&D, and the D&D was run by their WoW buddies. Min/Max is the greatest problem of the real RPG GM. It is easy to thwart by simpley limiting what is allowed in your game...unfortunately that can keep a game from ever getting off the drawing board. I also think min/max players do not know the rules as well as they think they do. The simple rule that 'any character can try any skill' and 'what the GM decides is in the game is what you get' is never accepted by them. Maybe we are a dying breed. I hope to get my game going this weekend but it always seems that something comes up and we have to cancel.
|
|
machfront
11th level Troll
Stalwart of the Trollbridge
"Let's go dark!"
Posts: 2,147
|
Post by machfront on Jul 18, 2009 4:50:20 GMT -5
feldrik, I didn't think you were bashing D&D. I figured you were bashing those two versions of the game that is D&D in name only and nothing like the light and easy freeform rpg that actually was (and still is) D&D. ;D
One odd thing to me (and though this may be better served as it's own thread, it's pertinent here): T&T's old-school credentials absolutely can not be denied. The second rpg. As far as I know, the longest still in print. Also, if there's another rpg out there that has all of it's major revisions/editions in print at this moment, other than T&T, I don't know what it is.
One major philosophy of old-school gaming concerns player skill being tested rather than character skill. That is to say, the player role-plays a bit to convince the guard that he belongs where he is and that he is who he says he is (and thus, the GM -of course, a good GM will give the player the benefit of the doubt for the sake of the game rather than just say: "Nope. I'm not convinced."-). Or describing how you are either searching for or safely removing a trap. Things like that. Oddly, T&T, old-school though it is doesn't quite work like that. Ok. Maybe not the best way to put it.
T&T players, by and large, don't seem to work like that.
Most seem to think it's standard a-ok to have the player make an SR for all such activities, and while this can be done, it takes away (in my opinion) some of the old-school-y-ness.
Also, min-maxing is pretty easy to do in T&T. The advancement of LK is even built in for goodness sake. The weapons. The spells. The multipliers for the different attributes of various kin.
I'm ok with all this, though. I make an effort to have a nice balance of testing player skill and still making use of various SRs to keep 'the game' present, for instance. (I've also given 'downsides' to the kin multipliers, etc. Dwarves are less dextrous for example.)
|
|