Timewaster's Guide Archive
Games => Role-Playing Games => Topic started by: Mad Dr Jeffe on May 12, 2003, 11:48:11 AM
-
I saw a copy in the store the other day and really considered it on a purely coffee table level that is. Let me say I hate In Nomine- style games... where players are the god of XXXX or the servents of XXXX. I hate them because its way too hard to get a group made and have them stay together especially when you have two or more competing ideologies. Thats one of the reasons I dont like Unknown Armies even though the system is so well designed, and the reason I sold Demon a few days ago. And Man is the price STEEP, granted its a beautiful 300+ page book with glossy pages and a gold bookmark. But still.
Anyhow I am trying to talk myself into it if only for the conversational value so those of you who own the game please tell me I can be wrong about the servents of god/ Devil/ Beer style play.
-
Dude... i blathered non-stop about it and posted links to various infosheets in the "what are you playing now" section.
And from what you say... you would apparently hate most RPG's.
Paladin. Law and order are king.
Thief. Law and order are bad.
-
Oh and I read your stuff in the other thread, missed it the first time. Thanks.
I feel that I need to respond to your comment about hating other RPG's though.
I like most RPG's.
I just dont like the Archtype phenomenon lately.
The Paladin/ thief concept is not a good example to use for all roleplaying.
It all goes back to the debate on alignment we had a few weeks ago.
It is possible to be a thief who doesn't stand for chaos and against law. They are called Lawyers ;D. Seriously though even in D&D you can have a Lawful Good thief. Whats your take on them? Who do they steal from and for? What was Robin Hood? Depending on the story he wanted a return to law and order rather than to destroy iit.
Being a paladin isn't all roses either... what if the community your in doesn't belive in your pantheon or ideals, is forceing another person to worship your way neccisarilly "good"
I dont see life in absolutes and never did, which is why the concept of alignment, and archtype never appealed to me.
Lets say you decide to play an angel in Nobilis and your friend wanted to play a demon. (Correct me if Im wrong but this is well within the scope of the game) what do your players have in common. How would a GM keep them together for more than a one shot. Comound that by having someone play the archtype of a mercury, or aphrodite etc... Where and how does a GM develop that and branch the story out from there.
-
Well Entropy, I think Im going to buy it. I ordered a copy from Game Parlor here in VA and it will arrive on thursday.
$50.00 for the main book and 16.00 for the game of Powers supplement.
-
Seriously though even in D&D you can have a Lawful Good thief. Whats your take on them? Who do they steal from and for?
Uhm... if they are lawful good, they do not steal.
Good move...
What was Robin Hood? Depending on the story he wanted a return to law and order rather than to destroy iit.
Robin hood was a fighter/ranger multiclass. He never actually stole as in broke in silently etc... he did the highwayman approach.
Being a paladin isn't all roses either... what if the community your in doesn't belive in your pantheon or ideals, is forceing another person to worship your way neccisarilly "good"
The idea behind a paladin sucks. By their definition, half the crusaders would be paladins. Yeah. Those same crusaders who murdered babies and butchered entire cities. Uh huh.
I dont see life in absolutes and never did
Whoops. Nobilis deals very heavily in absolutes - the game system is based upon absolutes. You either can, or you cannot. No place for random or wiggly elements.
Lets say you decide to play an angel in Nobilis and your friend wanted to play a demon. (Correct me if Im wrong but this is well within the scope of the game)
Yes. The GWB (great white book - nickname for the rulebook) says that powers will often be the same alignment as their imperiator... but not always.
Oh, but a Demon and a Angel are actually imperiators - not player characters. The PC's can assume angelic qualities upon their rise to noble status though.
I do not think the judao-christian god is present - there is a creator, but no God as in old testament. In the game world, Jesus was probably just a PC of heavanly alignment.
How would a GM keep them together for more than a one shot.
Nobilis is rather iffy for a one shot. In a 300 page rulebook, there is perhaps 30 pages of rules and character creation. Everything else is background. It can be done though.
Comound that by having someone play the archtype of a mercury, or aphrodite etc..
I am not sure i understand what you are talking about here. Please explain.
Where and how does a GM develop that and branch the story out from there.
Be aware, nobilis has a very good way of making the characters work together : reality, and the powers the characters have power over, are under direct assault by gods from outside creation. Either the PC's get along, or they die.
Or lord Entropy has his wicked way with them.
It is also worth noting that it is just like amber in many ways. The characters are a family of supreme beings. They may have divergent beliefs. It is part of the game.
And besides, the GM can always say "you will choose the alignment of heavan, and you shall play with concepts about beauty, love or goodness" if it is a major problem.
16.00 for the game of Powers supplement.
Uhm... that supplement is the Live Action Roleplaying rules i think...
-
Lawful good thieves can actually steal, except they have to rationalize their thefts into terms of law. Robin Hood is my idea of a Lawful good thief and not a ranger in the sense of D&D terms. He's good with ranged weapons and woodland weapons. He steals, from oppressive tyrents who in his mind have already stolen from the poor (thus breaking the law in the first place) and then he redistributes the wealth back to the poor. And saying that Robin never stole is a little Naive. Being a highwayman as close to a modern day bank-robber/ stickup man as you can get. Add to that theft of horses, community property and valuable military hardware and you have an ancient John Dillenger, or John Wesley Harding.
"The GWB (great white book - nickname for the rulebook) says that powers will often be the same alignment as their imperiator... but not always.
Oh, but a Demon and a Angel are actually imperiators - not player characters. The PC's can assume angelic qualities upon their rise to noble status though.
I do not think the judao-christian god is present - there is a creator, but no God as in old testament. In the game world, Jesus was probably just a PC of heavanly alignment. "
And thats good to know because it puts a more human face on the game.
"Be aware, nobilis has a very good way of making the characters work together : reality, and the powers the characters have power over, are under direct assault by gods from outside creation. Either the PC's get along, or they die.
Or lord Entropy has his wicked way with them.
It is also worth noting that it is just like amber in many ways. The characters are a family of supreme beings. They may have divergent beliefs. It is part of the game.
And besides, the GM can always say "you will choose the alignment of heavan, and you shall play with concepts about beauty, love or goodness" if it is a major problem. "
Now see I don't like saying to my PC's that they have to choose a particular alignment. I like to see what they come up with. I do like the assualt on reality by outside forces though and I'll see what I come up with after reading it.
-
And thats good to know because it puts a more human face on the game.
Heh. You do realise that sample characters in the book include a chinese dragon (power of tibet) and a collection of nanobots?
Robin Hood is my idea of a Lawful good thief and not a ranger in the sense of D&D terms. He's good with ranged weapons and woodland weapons.
No... a thief has skills that enable him to break and enter. A ranger has skills that enable him to sneak up on and murder intruders into a wilderness area. Think about it.
And why would a rogue use woodland weapons?
Now see I don't like saying to my PC's that they have to choose a particular alignment. I like to see what they come up with.
Ok. But sometimes, you have to do so. It is an option if you feel that it may be a problem. Try asking the players, and then making them all go for powers and factions that work well together. Heavanly peace and demonic murder are not going to like each other much. Heavanly peace, and heavanly euthanasia might. (Note... heavan = beauty in this game. Not good. You could easily justify it by saying to are making humanity more pleasing by removing the ugly elements. Hey, nobody said it was a nice game...).
-
And Robin often breaks and enters, Strongboxes, caches, and Nottingham castle anyone?, ... but a thief also has skills and feats like climb walls, move silently that 2e rangers did not always have. A woodland thief would use woodland weapons, an Urban thief would use urban weapons.
And no I did not know of the nanobots or Chinese Dragon.
But that sounds interesting.
Like I said Im going to buy it.
-
Actually, by the D&D def. the crusaders were NOT Paladins. Sir Gaharis of Arthurian fame would be. A Paladin is required to not only ACT in the name of a deity, but to fully live by that deity's ideals.
But I also have to agree. Robin Hood is MUCH closer to a ranger than a thief/rogue in D&D terms. The emphasis is on his archery and woodland familiarity. The fact that he incidentally took things without permission does not make him a thief.
Just to add my $.02. I really thing strict alignment systems are silly, but I've said that before. I've also said, but it bears repeating, that for some styles of play and characterizations, there does need to BE a code of behavior that the character lives by. If you have opposites alignments contending, then you have a story telling problem, not a mechanic problem. The gm should be more adament about the types of characters and the players should be less stiff-necked when it comes to what type of character they'll play. Compromise is the art of universal fun.
-
Maybe its just alignment thats my sticking point then. Especially since I always thought of it as stupid. I kind of disagree with you about the whole ranger thing, but I think its because you, Entropy and I have different Ideas about the RH myth.
-
Well, I have read some of Chapter 1 and Chapter 7 (Downloaded from Gurdians of Order) and I like how the book is written so far. Smart , but not smarmy. I like the short fiction too.
-
I wonder id it anyone here would find it confusing that I'm entering a thief/paladin into my DnD campaign?
My thought is that archetypes only exist if you chose to buy into them. I've sort of noticed that not everyone agrees that a particular idea could or should be considered an archetype. Like the concept of paladin, which I have found many people have different opinions. I knew a player who played a very blood-thirsty paladin who killed just about everything she met, but in the player's mind her character was very much the embodiment of Lawful Good.
-
I kinda like EUOL's idea of making a paladin-like champion of each alignment. Not just the Paladin and the Blackguard prestige class. I'll have to consider developing that
-
Or you just play your paladins differently than the obvious presentation given to you in the book. Something I've noticed about EUOL is that he really only has one character idea.
-
Well, it does also require altering the powers. It makes little sense to have a detect evil alignment on Lawful Evil character. Well, no, that's not true. You can still use that. And if you did change it, certain changes would be obvious and easy. However, it would require some thematic changes to the idea of the class as well.
-
Or you just play your paladins differently than the obvious presentation given to you in the book. Something I've noticed about EUOL is that he really only has one character idea.
you obvisly don't play with him much. His current character is compleatly different from past ones.
-
No it's not, as far as I can tell. Plus I've read his novels where it becomes even more apparant.
-
Yay, a EUOL-bashing thread! Maybe if we insult him enough, he'll come back to defend himself.
-
I don't mean to be insulting. In fact, I've have clinical studies clearing showing I am incapable of malice or any sort of cruel intention. I'm just stating things as I percieve them.
-
You're free to be peaceful if you want, but I'm out for e-blood.
-
See what happens when you go to see the Matrix. A definite rise in aggressive behavior and violent tendencies.
-
Sure, blame it on time wasting.
-
So, back on topic >.<
ElJeffe, what did you think of this then?
-
Well its a beautiful book and the rules are innovative and fresh. I like the way it reads but I found myself frustrated by the layout which didn't seem to flow, and the ambiguity for creating a power. For example I wanted to make Gregory Gareth the Power of English Tea, but found myself hampered by the broadness of the game. Im not sure I "got" the limitations because they seem like they should give you more than just miricle points. I despised the term Hollyhock God, HG and some of the lamer Powers. Lord Entropy struck me as particularly stupid.
Still the Art and layout were neat as was the sample of play. The fiction was a lot of fun too. Im not sure how feasible it would be to get a player who doesn't have the book create a character and since its so expensive I wouldn't recommend my players buy it. In fact the book is so nice looking that I would have a problem with anyone else touching it. I wish more time had been devoted to explaining the mechanics and putting them firmly in one place because they seemed a little spread out... All in all its an innovative game with the potential to be great. But not for beginners hack and slashers or occasional weekend warriors and while nothings wrong with that I'm not sure it will help the games audience grow.
-
This, incidentially, is what the Nobilis mailing list came up with for running a Matrix game:
At 08:27 AM 5/9/03 +0000, Charlie Mitchell wrote:
>Any thoughts?
Well, IMHO you aren't running Nobilis if you aren't working with
the Restriction system to have PCs regenerating MPs.
I was thinking about it, and an amusing concept is whether Neo's
quest to free his mind is a growing Power, or just a Restriction
that keeps haunting him. It would be amusing to have some
characters generating and storing MPs by spending their time
discussing the philosophy of the Matrix when they -should- be
kicking booty. You also have more latitude than normal to
relate psychological Restrictions (Arrogant, Indecisive, etc.) to
in-game power. Knowing your own mind -is- power in the matrix.
Also, I will recommend that you think carefully about whether
you -want- Neo's powers to be Domain, rather than Aspect. It
seems a little counter to the theme of the movie... the whole
point (to my eyes) was that he -understood- that all of the phyical
actions were his minds interactions with the Matrix, and he just
stopped limiting himself that way. "Do you really think that's air
you're breathing right now?" Instead you could go with a single-stat
system and Gifts (Trinity's Perfect Timing, as an example), and
leave Domain/Realm for the type of "Recode from the outside"
tricks that they pull in the Loading programs (and in the
Deja-Vu scene where the Agents fiddle a building).
If it were me (and now that you've got me thinking about it,
I may try running a one-shot at a party I'm going to tomorrow)
I would say that the single stat ("There Is No Spoon")
represents how far your minds influence can bend or break
the rules of reality, as -precipitated- by your physical actions.
I would make the TINS miracle levels like this:
"There Is No Spoon" levels:
0 - Your previous abilities, without mistakes, doubt or hesitation
Ex.: Trinity sprints across uneven rooftops without slowing
or stumbling
"Don't think you're faster... -know- you are."
1 - Jackie-Chan reflexes and acrobatics
Ex.: Switch and Apok shooting coppertops through
smoke and fog and every bullet finding its mark
"Kung Fu.... I know... Kung Fu...."
2 - Impossibly fortuitous -sequences- of moves
Ex.: Trinity's flip around one cop's attack puts that
cop -between- her and the next one who
fires on her.
3 - Gravity and inertia are less rules than... guidelines
Ex.: Running up walls.
"Some rules can be bent... others can be broken."
4 - Gravity and inertia are the tools you work with, not the
rules you have to live by.
Ex.: Leaping a ninety foot chasm.
"Nobody ever makes the first jump."
5 - You are an artist with the tools of the rules of physics.
Anything they can do, you can do.
Ex.: Trinity leaping a ninety foot chasm in -order- to
punch through a small window and tuck into
a diving roll down some stairs.
6 - Reality is tissue paper that you tear through.
Ex.: Agents punching through concrete, dodging
bullets, delivering Mach-3 punch sequences.
7 - Reality is only what you perceive it to be. Physics has
sway on you only if you decide it does.
Ex.: Neo's flight.
"Because they live in a world of rules, they will never
be as strong, or as fast, as you can be."
8 - Reality is... you. Physics is your heartbeat, inertia is the
blood that courses in your veins. They do what is
needful to obey your will.
Ex.: Neo, at the end. 'Nuff said.
"You mean I can dodge bullets?" "I mean that when
the time comes... you won't have to."
9 - There is no you... reality... is...
Ex.: You want an -example-? Look to mythology...
Buddha for instance.
"Have a cookie."
-- Tony
-
This is the second part:
> I'm currently preparing for a one shot matrix game. I was considering what
> rules to use - D20 is out the window, ditto for StoryTeller. I considered
> pure diceless, but i realised that Nobilis would work perfectly.
My very first thought when I got the book and started reading the Aspect
description was "This is what you use to run The Matrix."
> THe PC's have Aspect - 2/3, with lots of miracle points.
Sounds like... 10-12 character points to build with, one stat to buy if
you're someone who's "got holes" (Tony's recommendation is solid, but
doesn't apply to a True Child of Zion) with remainders going to a specific
list of Gifts you design and/or extra MPs.) The thing to remember is that,
like any of the "(s)he is the One" movies and tv shows, the power balance
between characters is shot to hell -- people are making a Trinity, not Neo.
There's a good argument for giving them a few more points (maybe 16) and
also having them spend at least one point on Spirit -- there is another
perfectly logical argument (which I'm currently on board with) that says
"Can't be possessed" is a definition of a PC by default -- a free gift --
and that Spirit is something you only get if you're The One.
Anyway.
> The operator has aspect 0 but domain : matrix 2/3 with a few miracle
points.
I'd say about a 2, for lesser divinations... can't think of anything that
Minor Preservations would get you.
He should also be buying a good high Realm, maybe 4 (and might be an NPC, I
would think -- on the other hand, that's not necessary and there might be
players who would jones on that role.)
Reason I mentioned the Chancel (what's more of a 'secret place' than a
hovercraft flying through abandoned sewers?) and Realm is because of the
Construct's ability to load the characters up with all manner of toys that
they can take into the Matrix. Considering that no one but the Operator has
Realm, you'd probably have to take some downsides to get things like
"mobile" and "Convenient" and being able to take good gear into the
Matrix -- but something tells me that penalties for the Chancel will present
themselves. Banes are obvious, Important (to the bad guys), and how about
"we don't have our Aspect in the Chancel"?
Hmm, actually, maybe that's a Restriction on Aspect that lets you get back
MPs whenever you're faced with a dangerous situation in the "real world" and
have to rely solely on the 'lightning in the meat'.
Yeah, downsides.
> The Agents have aspect 3/4 with lots of miracle points, doman : matrix 2/3
> with a few miracle points. Maybe also durant. Maybe spirit level 1/2.
> Neo would probably have domain : matrix 5.
I wouldn't say Durant -- generally, they don't soak bullets -- if you can
HIT them, they react just like anyone else -- the problem is, of course,
hitting them.
The ability to spend points on Spirit when the PCs can't is devastating
enough. They don't even need to get that many more points than the PCs with
that advantage.
Heh. Funny: Here's how Trinity kills the Agent on the top of the
skyscraper: knowing she can't get through the Auctoritas and still hit, she
uses her Aspect Miracle for her turn to move up incredibly quickly/quietly,
then uses a Mundane action to shoot him at Very Close Range and bypass it --
even with Rite of Holy Fire (which I wouldn't use anyway), his Spirit's not
high enough to affect plain old pistols.