[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [SPAM] Re: Steve Jackson - major change to TFT.



:-)


From: "raito@raito.com" <raito@raito.com>
To: tft@brainiac.com
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 5:43 PM
Subject: Re: [SPAM] Re: Steve Jackson - major change to TFT.

Well, that would be completely the opposite, wouldn't it? :)

Neil Gilmore
raito@raito.com

> I don't think he was responding to your game per se -- he was just
> expressing the belief that a lot of what Steve has changed seems to be
> influenced by what Dark City Games did.
>
>      From: "raito@raito.com" <raito@raito.com>
>  To: tft@brainiac.com
>  Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 12:29 PM
>  Subject: Re: Steve Jackson - major change to TFT.
>
> I, and my campaign, predate Dark City by decades.
>
> Neil Gilmore
> raito@raito.com
>
>> Uh, this seems to be heavily influenced by Dark City Games mechanics.
>> __________________________________________
>> David O. Miller
>> Miller Design/Illustration
>> www.davidomiller.com <http://www.davidomiller.com/>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Jun 12, 2018, at 10:26 AM, raito@raito.com wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> Ultimately, the rules are whatever the GM wants. But I wonder that
>>> perceived 'problems' this solves. I can guess at some of them. And you
>>> long-time readers will already know my opinions. They haven't changed.
>>>
>>> 1. Monty Hall/Haul There's not a problem is characters don't get
>>> obscene
>>> attribute numbers. And you only get obscene attribute numbers if the GM
>>> hands out XP like candy.
>>>
>>> 2. Playing the sheet rather than the character. There's an awful lot of
>>> players out there who seem to want extremely minute detail on what
>>> their
>>> character is capable of, mostly so they can min/max everything. This
>>> runs
>>> counter to any idea that a campaign or even a single adventure is a
>>> story.
>>> Remember that the literary double-0 agents were all min/maxers who were
>>> so
>>> conservative that they lived, but were dull. The only reason Bond got
>>> anywhere was that he was reckless.
>>>
>>> 3. Not playing with the full set of rules. There's already mechanisms
>>> to
>>> keep characters from becoming obscene. Combat and aging.
>>>
>>> 4. Having to keep track of who killed what. Not a problem for me. But
>>> then, I also use the detailed shield and armour degradation rules, and
>>> keep track of encumberance.
>>>
>>> Now on to opinion.
>>>
>>> These rules, if I cared to use them, would completely destroy my
>>> campaign.
>>> Part of the point is that once characters get personally powerful
>>> enough,
>>> they really should consider not exposing themselves in petty combat and
>>> instead build up a base of temporal power. I don't care how many points
>>> you have, you're not really going to defeat an army. Far, far better to
>>> grab the reins of power and multiply it by how many followers you can
>>> attract. Besides, one of the basic tenets of TFT is that any character
>>> can
>>> try anything. Choose and attribute and number of dice, and have at it!
>>>
>>> Years ago here, I recall calculating attributes for characters who just
>>> had jobs. They got pretty powerful, but ultimately died off. Adding
>>> adventuring doesn't really skew things, except at younger ages. The XP
>>> from combat isn't that much in the scheme of things, and the
>>> disincentive
>>> of being killed is one of the charms of TFT. How many combats does it
>>> take
>>> to gain all those points? More than you can run...
>>>
>>> I've always been a fan of TFT as a sort of less-is-more approach to
>>> roleplaying. Your sheet doesn't have much. 3 basic attributes, MA,
>>> Spells
>>> and Talents. Race. And that's about it for the character himself. And
>>> even
>>> Spells and Talents only amount to a handful. Are there really IQ60
>>> figures
>>> around who know everything? Not in my game.
>>>
>>> As for Mana, again, one of the charms of TFT is that doing magic is
>>> powerful, but weakening. Essentially doubling the amount of ST skews it
>>> up
>>> quite a bit.
>>>
>>> Neil Gilmore
>>> raito@raito.com
>>>
>>> =====
>>> Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
>>> Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
>>> "unsubscribe tft"

>>
>>
>
>
> =====
> Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
> Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
> "unsubscribe tft"
>
>
>


=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"