Hogscape
11th level Troll
Stalwart of the Trollbridge
It's not the years, it's the mileage.
Posts: 2,126
|
Post by Hogscape on Sept 28, 2009 23:24:36 GMT -5
So what should and should not be included in a clone T&T rulebook?
|
|
|
Post by Toad-Killer-Dog on Sept 28, 2009 23:52:09 GMT -5
Well I must cast a vote against TARO for character generation, I would want to go with 5th edition level advancement and that just throws things out of whack for me.
I've heard a lot about it, but for me "Kremm" resistance adds a level of complexity to the magic system that I could do ( & have done! ;D ) without.
Mainly I can think of optional things I'd like to add to the "Section#3 Elaborations" more than subtractions from the existing system.
I think one of the bones of contention will be missile combat, seeing as we have so many players of 4th, 5+ & 6th on the board.
|
|
|
Post by Aramis of Erak on Sept 29, 2009 0:27:11 GMT -5
Must: Stat generation Types - at least 4 core (Warrior, Wizard, Rogue, Monster*) SR system. Rename it Stat Roll. Combat - basics, ranged and examples of "Stupid PC Tricks" in combat. Magic System core. Advancement. I'd lean towards 5.x. Some sample spells.
*Monster is almost ignored, but it really is a type; The Type ability is unarmed damage = STR multiplier, can cast like a rogue. See M!M!.
Things I would suggest: Extra Types: Paragon/WW, Citizen, Specialist Wizard, Archer, Leader. Combat Movement and the micro-melee optional mode of combat. Shoppie-store list. Spell list - full. Language list and table. Radical types: Cleric, Paladin (Paladin is to Cleric as Paragon is to Wizard). Talents (ala 7E; simplest system I've seen yet. If using 5.x advancement, gain extra on every odd level, rather than every level.) 2 weapon penalty (all weapons ST/DX req increased by number of weapons) Optional unarmed combat as stun damage Gunnes. Optional "Current x 100AP to gain a +1 to stat of choice." List of playable kindreds each with at least 2 paragraphs; one-or-two description, zero-or-one on special abilities.
|
|
|
Post by Toad-Killer-Dog on Sept 29, 2009 2:05:19 GMT -5
If we're going to suggest what to include from other additions as well it might be fun to include the optional "Monsters" experience table from "Monsters!, Monsters!". I know it might be confusing, but what about including more than one option for missile combat in the "Elaborations" section. Of course I'd love to see an expansion to the weapons, armor & equipment tables, but I imagine you could already guess that.
|
|
machfront
11th level Troll
Stalwart of the Trollbridge
"Let's go dark!"
Posts: 2,147
|
Post by machfront on Sept 29, 2009 4:38:36 GMT -5
This discussion already perplexes me. It seems pretty obvious to me what should and should not be included. This isn't...ok...well..my initial idea wasn't just a T&T clone, but rather a Fifth Edition T&T clone. Adding stuff that's the province of 7.x would be encroaching on their 'stuff' and more, would add up the 'sum' that is just as dangerous (legally speaking) as copying the rules exactly. With the exception of the Monster Type, I completely agree with Aramis' list of "musts". Renaming the Saving Roll? Absolutely. Stat Roll is a serviceable alternative. "MR" is different. That's something that could certainly be construed (and I think they'd be right) as T&T's product identity. Not the system as much as both the name and the acronym. The terms "Adds" should be renamed. The experience progression should be tweaked by a point or three. Some weapons should probably be slightly changed from the way they're presented in 5th. (short sabre being 3+2 instead of 3+1, etc.) "Hellfire Juice" should be renamed. Hobbits will have to be renamed for obvious reasons (odd how T&T has gotten away with that for so long . Hm. 'Obbits? Spells with certainly need to be renamed. At least well over half, I'd think. The spell names are inarguably an 'T&T characteristic' and thus, product identity. Though I love using a "power" stat, I don't think it's necessary. We've all houseruled it in or out for so long, it doesn't need to be a part of the clone. As close as we can cut to the original. After all, one of the main reasons for the clones is so that someone can, with the clone rules, use, play and write and publish adventures with the clone that is perfectly compatible with the original rules. One should be able to publish a clone adventure and someone with the real 5th ed. rules should be able to use that adventure with no fuss, and vice-versa. (which is also why the renamed spells will, or at least should, be 'recognizable' by their new names) Though it's never caused me any problems per say, I've always thought the organization of 5th was weird. So much stuff is spread out. I really think that needs to be cleared up and made more efficient, and more, dare I say, traditional in the organization. (that is to say, for example, Missle Combat should be in the combat section, instead of treated differently much later. In section 1.7 instead of 2.33. Know what I mean? Stuff that's dealt with in More About Monsters and Personalizing Monsters should be covered in the monster section, and so on.) Plus, that would also go a long way to steer clear of the problem of the sum of the clone looking too much like the real deal. I think it would be wise to steer clear of both the Monster Chart and the Peters-McAllister chart. It's not necessary for compatibility and, it's really just examples anyhow. Maybe a handful of 'fully statted' monsters could be shown to give a baseline, but I say delete it entirely. There is some other fluff not needed at all. "Miniatures in T&T" is one. As it is, it's a useless section. Also, there are a good number of little rules nuggets scattered here and there in the text of the rules all about the book. Some of those could be ignored. Really, what we need the most, are the core mechanics and how they each work and how they work together. Again, as I've said and as someone else noted in my clone thread, the Corgi 'lite' rules are a good outline to begin with, as the fluff text will need to be totally different anyhow.
|
|
machfront
11th level Troll
Stalwart of the Trollbridge
"Let's go dark!"
Posts: 2,147
|
Post by machfront on Sept 29, 2009 5:00:33 GMT -5
Also, I'm a little wary of the 'design by committee' approach. Not that I think we can't, and not that I think (hope) that egos would be checked at the door. But rather, the 'too many chiefs' in the kitchen issue. Plus, the different styles and approaches in writing and so on may prove problematic and result in, shall we say, quirky presentation. I mean, we'd need a strong editor to reel that in. (it's also been my experience that most rpg books written by multiple folks have less of a tone...they seem more generic)
This was why I stated we really need someone of Dan Proctor caliber in dedication and skill and raw talent, as well as a desire to bring the clone as close to the original as is possible without the gamer desire to arbitrarily change and tweak things out of their own preference. Tall order.
|
|
|
Post by Aramis of Erak on Sept 29, 2009 5:43:28 GMT -5
While I agree 5.x should be the target, I think 5.5 should be the target, not 5.0.
Tho I have serious concerns about a power stat without the balance of it providing some resistance. That said, with 5.5 8-stat and 5.x advancement...
As for MR, I think it's pretty distinctive, but it's been cloned into some other stuff... Ironically, into RPGPundit's Forward To Adventure, a d20 & T&T derivative/hybrid. He works the other direction; HP is 5+(5x HD), Pas is 3+(HD/3), Act is 3+(HD/2), Adds are 4+HD. His combat system is very T&T derived, too... but dice are based upon size, not weapon, and weapons provide adds.... so we could go the other direction, as did Pundit.
Monsters rated in CD+Adds. Toughness = Adds + (5x CD). SR's made with CD+Adds. (When adds = CD*5, Tou=MR)
|
|
quoghmyre
7th Level Troll
The Summer Troll
Posts: 1,048
|
Post by quoghmyre on Sept 29, 2009 5:44:43 GMT -5
I agree with machfront again here, less is more! Firstly the less there is the less we debate, the less time it takes, the less there is to get wrong and the more opportunities there are to add later. Remember our WTF is T&T thread, it had a purpose. Let's keep it real tight, just enough to learn and play the game, "compatible" with v5 and Blade. But with scope to "plug-in" v7 mods, TARO, Khrem, Zero lvl SR.
Add Ons could include: Additional Types, leading to more stats Additional Races, leading to types Additional Spell Books, hint hint Additional Shops with Equipment
Just freewheeling here...
|
|
Hogscape
11th level Troll
Stalwart of the Trollbridge
It's not the years, it's the mileage.
Posts: 2,126
|
Post by Hogscape on Sept 29, 2009 5:52:09 GMT -5
I agree, you can't design by committee. Meetings never get anything done. I know, I've been to enough of 'em.
However, you can set an agenda - and then, as Aramis suggested, divide up the chores.
I also agree that the mission here is undeniably to create a 5e clone to survive the nuclear winter (not to mention the 'fallout').
Here's a few points I'd like to raise: 1. The things that make character types 'different' do need to be tinkered with. 2. Character advancement/progression has never been designed to let characters, er, advance, beyond a certain stage. Like, old computer games of the 80s - the designers assumed no one would bother to finish them so never created the end screen. If there are level 20 spells, characters should realistically, one day, hope to get there. And, those spells should actually work. 3. The EP/AP advancement chart is old-school and should be maintained. It needs to be corrected (as above). 4. Also as above, GMs shouldn't have to throw in obscenely powerful magic rewards to boost character stats up to a workable level, that should be built in. 5. I am no longer convinced that a power stat of any sort is required. Playing in Burke's game leads me to believe that not only is it workable to use an existing stat but it adds a unique level of resource management that shouldn't be dismissed lightly. 6. I do like Aramis's suggestion of the monster type as per M&M - sounds like an elaboration or better still, 'book 2'. 7. Altering the spell names makes the game more accessible to a wider audience. Spell names that some would call 'a tad juvenile' dont always score points. Include a reference to some of the classics though. 8. Wandering off track a bit now but the existing costs for spells of level 5+ are nigh-on inexplicable. Have a look at Wizard's Speech and tell me why it should cost more than Hellbomb Bursts... Please. 9. Expand the Shoppe list a bit but don't go overboard, that stuff is easy to cook up yourself. 10. Keep an eye on inflation. In 5e everything doubled. Doubling everything doesn't actually change ANYTHING. There was just no point. In 7e everything got bigger again. Less is MORE. 11. Less is more can be applied to everything. No need for 12 pages of weapons when 3 will do, 30 spells that include 10 'just for laughs'... A book of 50 'new' monsters that are all the same is D&D by stealth. A few cunning critters from the mind of TKD are a wicked blessing! 12. Yeah, er. List the things you want to change then chuck out at least half of those things and you will have a better game.
:-)
|
|
|
Post by artikid on Sept 29, 2009 6:23:21 GMT -5
+1 to what Hogscape said, but I'd keep Power as a Stat and I'd drop Speed.
|
|
|
Post by jongjungbu on Sept 29, 2009 9:20:45 GMT -5
Wow so much said in this thread. I had something to say, but now I've lost my train of thought after reading all of the posts. I agree with pretty much everything Aramis has said though. And also #11 on HS's notes struck a chord for me. There are an awful lot of weapons compared to anything else in T&T. It's a bit excessive IMO. There could be some more generic shop items actually listed, maybe a couple more armor category items, and less weapons. Lastly, I always thought that 5.x could use one more character class. 7.x didn't really do a great job IMO by the way of "specialists". The broad scope of the character type being actually anything you want (for example a Rogue could be a thief or a monk or a priest if you wanted to roleplay him as that) is fine, but I still always feel like there could be one more beyond the War, Wiz, Rog, War-Wiz. Not sure what the other one would be, but that's how I felt. I know that doesn't really help LOL.
|
|
Hogscape
11th level Troll
Stalwart of the Trollbridge
It's not the years, it's the mileage.
Posts: 2,126
|
Post by Hogscape on Sept 29, 2009 9:35:45 GMT -5
I think the clone is dead in the vat. Lots of ideas, good ones too but mostly all different.
*plays funeral dirge on rusty harmonica whist shuffling away from the cooling vat*
|
|
|
Post by apeloverage on Sept 29, 2009 11:27:57 GMT -5
So what should and should not be included in a clone T&T rulebook? I don't have a particular horse in this race, but here are my thoughts. i) In 1975 there weren't any games that set out to be 'Dungeons & Dragons but with the clunky rules cleaned up'. Today there are lots, and lots of them are free. ii) There's a fair bit of intellectual property attached to Tunnels & Trolls which is 'buried' and I'd like to see made available again. Examples are modern weapons (from MSPE), Lovecraftian monsters, the optional Priest class, Teknos, extra bits from Monsters! Monsters!...all of which is 'official', and all of which distinguishes it from other rules-light fantasy games. iii) Where different editions have different rules, I'd like to see all options made available. For example "there are six core attributes, and two optional attributes, which GMs will decide whether or not to use....the cost of spells is paid from Wizardry if this attribute is used, or Strength if not..." Similar for multiple methods of missile combat and so on. I think this would reflect how the game really was/is played anyway. Most people seem to play "5th edition, but we're using Wizardry" or some other combination. iv) Fight On! might publish it as an article.
|
|
|
Post by ragnorakk on Sept 29, 2009 11:38:21 GMT -5
I think the clone is dead in the vat. Lots of ideas, good ones too but mostly all different. *plays funeral dirge on rusty harmonica whist shuffling away from the cooling vat* Don't drive a spike through it's heart yet there HScape. Obviously everyone's going to have opinions - the trick is to stay on point. Writing a simple restatement of 5th edition will not be hard to do. Once that restatement is accomplished, then there is room for others to remove/replace/tack on other rules and variations and such. One of the greatest things about the Swords & Wizardry clonegame IMO is that it is available as a Word document - you can cut from it, add directly to it, etc - makes it very easy to form a game-book exactly to your tastes from a simple core. The point of this is preservation - the vat still percolates... sometimes good clones take time, and maybe a few imperfect homonculi take shape first... but yeah, at this point, I think it is important to keep in mind the importance of simple restatement.
|
|
quoghmyre
7th Level Troll
The Summer Troll
Posts: 1,048
|
Post by quoghmyre on Sept 29, 2009 15:03:08 GMT -5
OMG, Microsoft Word, throws down tools and leaves the workroom, muttering about bad software and that he won't buy it.
Just to be clear the goal here is a PDF, not a Word Document! Until it's time to lay it up all submissions should be as straight txt documents. Then we can have it customised for the different platforms.
|
|