Why is this allowed

>>54932823
What? It looks like a normal intro page common to just about any RPG. Am I missing something strange?

>>54933275

I think he's asking why Paizo was allowed to make another game system.

>>54933329
Because there is no justice in the world. I thought we already established that.

>>54933329
>paizo make another game
>It's just fucking pathfinder

>>54933275
He may be a turbo grog, like myself, that remembers the days when these "what is an rpg" intros were nonexistent. It was assumed that if you even got your hands on the book you already knew damn well what one was.

And I find thus remains true. I have never heard of or seen someone who hadn't already known what they were getting into before having the book/pdf in their hands.

So they are absolutely arbitrary as far as I care.

>>54933426
Of course the reader knows what an RPG is, but it can be helpful to know what the developer thinks one is.

>>54933426
>>54933440
I'll be honest, when I picked up my first rpg book way back in the day and barely understood what they are or how they worked, the "what is an rpg' segment that was written on it helped me to understand, and actually set me on the path of tabletop gaming I practice today

Regarding the GM being referred to as "she" for no particular reason? Could have just as easily been "they" or "he/she" I guess.

>>54933600
Would you have preferred the modern nongender pronoun so the reader wouldn't assume the sex of the hypothetical GM like some ignorant cis-scum?

>>54933600
The GM being a "she" and the player "he" makes it easy to differentiate maybe?

>>54933600
>Could have just as easily been "they"
This

>>54933693
>"They" as a singular neutral pronoun
>Modern

>>54933426
30 years ago? The ad&d 1989 rule book has an intro to roleplaying.

>This section is intended for novice role-players. If you have played role-playing games before, don't be surprised if what you read here sounds familiar.

>Games come in a wide assortment of types: board games, card games, word games, picture games, miniatures games. Even within these categories are subcategories. Board games, for example, can be divided into path games, real estate games, military simulation games, abstract strategy games, mystery games, and a host of others.

>Still, in all this mass of games, role-playing games are unique. They form a category all their own that doesn't overlap any other category.

It goes on from there.

>>54933426

How far back are we fucking going? Because even the WEG D6 Star Wars corebook has one of those intros.

>>54933600
I think the pathfinder system uses she in all their class skills. Though it seems somthing a little sad to get bent out of shape over.
>It says she , so this must not apply to me. Dam femniz rinning everthanf

>>54933777
Nice digits, but you're replying to a typical /tg/ poster, he's likely never owned, read, or played an rpg
>>54933830
Same for you, without the nice digits

>>54933600
Even some really old RP systems switch to using she occasionally.

>>54933426
>the days when these "what is an rpg" intros were nonexistent
When was that? Because the oldest RPGs I know had them and needed them so much more than nowadays when the hobby's relatively popular and you can look up stuff on the internet.

>>54933897
It uses he or she depending on the iconic for that class.

The wizard is all male because the iconic wizard is male, meanwhile the rogue is female because the iconic rogue is female.

>>54934037
Hmmm... so I guess when they talk about the example gm she's a girl. somthing like "Peter, Lynda and James are going to play in a game run by Mary"
I think people are just too touchy now-a-days

>>54934178
News at eleven.
What I don't get is what the person posting this is getting out of this. I refuse to believe that it is only for yous

>>54932823
Starfinder could have been decent
It could have gotten more people playing sci-fi rpgs
It could have been a change in the right direction
Instead it's just fucking pathfinder in space

And don't get me wrong
Pathfinder was decent at one point
So was 3.5
So was 3
But it's been too long
We need something different
And we need it fast

>>54936003
Let's hear your riveting ideas that are certain to be fresh and new, and not tired retreads of failed attempts.

>>54936045
Never stated anything of the sort
RPG companies need to move towards innovating their systems, not using the same shit for two decades.
Sure, you might anger some of your fans, but you might also gain other players by offering something different.

>>54936185
>innovating their systems
And what would you suggest?

>>54933600
>>54933693
>>54933701
>>54933739
>ITT people who are annoyed at people who bitch about gender for no reason, pathetically begin to bitch about gender for no reason, proving horseshoe theory correct for the thousandth time

>>54936222
Well, as a large company they should diversify their assets to make more money. How about an RPG with no GM? Maybe like a card game that plays through an adventure path. It would go after a new market.

>>54936185
This is a faulted idea, but it's also the same one that lets you have the "show-business" aspect that lets LotFP exist so I'll allow it.

>>54936045
Not who you were talking to but here's a concise wishlist
- Action economy that isn't simultaneously overcomplicated and waffling; that is, complete utter garbage.
- Feat system that doesn't make implicitly subtract from what you can reasonably do as a competent individual, making shit like disarming or wiping your own ass a "feat tree" that everyone is inexplicably incapable of doing well enough for it to be ever worthwhile, unless they're level 12 and balls deep into learning only that specific thing.
- Scaling that isn't ridiculous anime "YOU CAN NEVER HARM ME, PEASANT!" bullshit whenever the GM doesn't bust his ass to scale everything to the party's level fucking always.

>>54936329
Sounds like you should try the Cypher System.

>>54936248
Now that we don't have quest threads to entertain us, bait threads get bumps because the posters on /tg/ don't have anything better to occupy their time.

>>54936270
>How about an RPG with no GM?
Been done. /tg/ hated them.

>>54936329
>here's a concise wishlist
Action economy: Easier said than done. I've seen far too many people fail at this than succeed.
Feat System: You'd have to elaborate, I'm not understanding what you mean here, but admittedly my mind is going straight to 3.5/Path.
Scaling: Also very very hard to get right.

I do some programming work, I've done some game development, it just seems a lot of people say "Fix the bugs!" or "Improve the AI" without any idea of how complex it all is.

At least you gave a wishlist!

>>54936479
5e does points 1 and 3 better than 3.5e/Pathfinder/Starfinder

>>54936601
imo

>>54936479
>How about an RPG with no GM?
Been done. /tg/ hated them.


Bullshit. /tg/ is not some gestalt creature. every group is different and some enjoy this kind of game

>>54936222
We've seen the same old stuff time and time again, but some games have good ideas buried within.

Here's my pseudo RPG wishlist:
Players having more agency over their actions, IE more options without spending feats/xp/using class options. Combat should be more than move, attack, I'm done.
The damage systems need a rework, but hitpoints or whatever need to be lowered overall. Combat should be dangerous, not HP battles. This can be done simply by having scaling attack damage based on the hit roll. There are other methods, but this is what I settled on.
The game shouldn't require a grid to play on. Having the option is nice, but being able to play on any open space with a simple tape measure would solve some issues and allow for better immersion. Many people have terrain for wargames and other things, why not let them make use of it?
Give classes more life by having unique benefits, but also varying and equally optimal options for advancement.
Rework weapons so no weapon is "The best". This might involve removing crit values, changing dice used, or even adjusting modifiers.
In the same line, rework and balance magic. The holy grail of RPGs and quite the high thing to shoot for, but keeping mages from outpacing fighters with everyone being one the same level of sorts hasn't been done, or done well before?
This means spells need a change, but they also need the same ability for players to have more agency over them.

I don't mean to posture about this, nor draw attention, but I have been working on something with this in mind. Partially due to the axing of the 40k-RPG books those many months ago, partially as a solution to problems I've seen in my 1.5 decades of being a GM.

I have no illusions about making an RPG that will be "The Best" or "The Greatest" or "The Most Popular", I just want to solve issues I've seen by making something intuitive, but different.

>>54936802
i'm not saying this to be mean, but it sounds like you need to play something else than DnD/pathfinder maybe?

Warhammer fantasy and dark heresy does the dangerous battle well, and the weapon grades are well balanced by the outrageous cost of good equipment. But i agree than more combat move that matter would be much appreciated.

>>54936887
Problem is, I have played other games
All the 40k rpg lines, and I mean all of them
WOD
Riddle of Steel
Traveller
Rifts
And many more that I've dabbled in or read about

It always seems like these game systems try to address one or two issues, but not how RPGs work overall.
There's always little things that I find issue with. On their own it's not a big deal, but they add up. They find themselves in other game systems. No attempt, failed attempts or useless complexity plague these game mechanics.

I could just be my and the several groups I play in/GM for preferences, it could be that was are just jaded over being screwed with splatbooks and rules changes, it could just be we hate minmaxers, or it would be we are just tired of what's offered.

If anything, I'm tired of needing to wait several levels to do anything reasonably special in most RPGs. This is probably why people play spell casters, or start at higher levels, or whatever.

My thoughts are pretty simple, have engaging, dynamic and player choice dependent combat that can be deadly, and everything else can fall into place reasonably well. RPGs are about more than combat, but if the game doesn't do combat well... you might as well not be carrying weapons.

>>54933398
>In Space

>>54936479
Alright, to compare. Fantasy Craft is a 3.5 derived game that alters the action economy and feat system (FC scales just as hard and tries to course-correct with the Threat Level system, so I'll ignore that point for now)

1. Action Economy. DnD has a weird setup, where you have a convoluted cavalcade of Move, Standard, Full, Bonus, Reflex, Free. FC simplifies it to Two Half Actions/1 Full Action, and an unlimited amount of Free Actions. I could spend both half actions on attacking to do the equivalent of a Full Attack (though it's only 2 attacks). I could move and attack. I could spend both on a special full round action like a bull rush or charge. In melee, I could do a half action feint, then a half action attack. Etc.

2. Feats. PF assumes every character is incompetent until proven otherwise. To summarize the difference in Feat Design, let's compare the Grappling Feat Chain from PF to the Wrestling Feat Chain from FC. Pathfinder begins with Improved Unarmed Strike. Purchasing this feat means that you can do Lethal or Nonlethal, your choice, and more importantly, that you don't provoke an AoO when you try to punch someone. The second feat, Improved Grapple, makes you no longer provoke an AoO when you grapple, gives a +2 to grapple, and +2 to defend grabs. The capstone, Greater Grapple, gives another +2 to grab, and allows you to spend both actions per turn on grapple actions. The problem is thus; without investing Feats, IE, a heavy specialization, as characters only gain a feat every 3 levels, means that the earliest I can grab someone without eating a mace to the face for my trouble is Level 3 as a Monk. I'm not buying a new ability; I'm buying the ability to do a basic combat action that's already in the system, but without eating shit for attempting to do so.

>>54938575
They've set the default as "Fuck you for trying to punch someone. Fuck you for trying to grab someone" and let you buy the ability to ignore the Fuck You. The only bandaid is a small mechanical number bonus, and then the ability to actually do a good amount of actions per turn in a grab.

Compare FC: Wrestling Basics gives a stance where, in said stance, you are immobile save for 5 Foot Steps, but get to make a free grab or trip if someone attacks you and misses. Additionally, +1 AC vs adjacent opponents. Wrestling Mastery gives +1 STR or CON, and a modification to your attacks; Clothesline, which means if you hit someone, they make a fort save or get Sprawled. Finally, Wrestling Supremacy lets you Coup De Grace a pinned character, and lets you, a limited number of times per combat, do a modified Trip, the Piledriver; 3x Damage, plus a chance to blind and/or deafen the opponent.

FCs feats don't let you do the action; ANYONE can successfully grapple in this game without any investment. The feat chain merely gives you new ways to apply that same ability, and cool modifiers to basic actions. This is the problem with PF and 3.5 feats. My amazing warrior can't disarm people. He can't trip people. He can't grapple. He can try, but he'll be goddamn terrible, even though he's a master swordsman, because for some reason being a master swordsman/fighter only applies to having a high BAB. I have to specialize in what should be universal, basic maneuvers. And that's a failure of the system. It's part of why playing a Martial is fun in FC (I don't have a full spell list, but I have a handful of Tricks and Stances I can apply no matter what core class I'm playing, and can use any of the maneuvers like Trips, Feints, Disarms, Distracts, etc) vs PF/3.5 (I guess I'll move or attack, or stand in place and attack a bunch! If I've built for it, maybe I'll be able to do my One Special Maneuver, but it'll suck against anything bigger than me)

File: 119elderbrain.jpg (111KB, 749x533px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 749x533px

>>54936699
> He's not part of the hive mind

>>54938575
Sorry, a correction, I forgot feat distribution for a second; you could have improved grapple at level 1 as a Monk, and not eat shit when you try to grab, Level 1 as a Fighter with your level 1 feat+level 1 bonus feat, or level 3 as any other Martial .

>>54933426

Have you never played an rpg?

Why are you posting about this if you don't know what you are talking about?

>>54938689
AKCUYALLY Illithids are not a part of Elder Brains. Moreover, Elder Brains consume small illithid larvae (whatever they're called) during their gestation period. Dead illithids are returned to Elder Brains so they may consume them and their memories, but living illithids are really afraid of being fed to the brain, as it's a typical punishment for treachery.

>>54938575
In relation to >>54937210

3.5 derived doesn't go far enough for me. Some of the ideas within Fantasy Craft are good, but hampered by the specter of still spiritually being 3.5 in a sense.

Getting rid of the feat progression bullshit is a big plus though. Feats for improvement or special tricks is fine, not feats that say "If you don't have this don't bother"

File: eldebrai[1].gif (87KB, 300x360px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 300x360px

>>54939285
>The elder brain is the center of its illithid community, serving as an advisor and, most importantly, the living repository of the community‘s technology, history, and psionic expertise. It is the right and obligation of every illithid to merge with the elder brain after death – living in exalted mentality while guiding and shepherding its erstwhile community. While most illithids believe that their personality will survive the transition, individual egos are suborned to the gestalt consciousness suffusing the tissue mass.

>>54940404
>elder brain defence force is at it again
Literally read Lords of Madness. Illithids are paranoid fucks.

File: Pool-Safety.jpg (92KB, 579x271px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 579x271px

>>54938689

>>54940425
>When a mind flayer dies, its brain is removed ceremonially and cast into the pool, whereupon it sinks to the bottom to be absorbed into the greater mass. This melding of an individual’s brain into the communal elder brain is a fate to which mind fl ayers aspire; they do not fear or regret their passing. If anything, they fear a death that prevents them from becoming a part of the elder brain.
That bit, on page 65? Was that the part you meant?

>>54933426
>pretending to be an oldfag
This is some next level shit.

>>54940533
No, it's the bit about the guy who survived the illithidification process and started doing guerilla warfare stuff.

Still, individual illithids do communicate with brains, but they're not part of it until they die.

Also, there's those bizarre mutated illithids that use biomechanical creations with fucked up minds in some other book.

>>54933329
>>54933398
>>54937231
Came here to basically post this

>>54940585
Oh, I'm not the guy talking about hive minds. Just wanted to correct the bit about illithids being afraid of joining the Brain, because you were WRONG ON THE INTERNET.

>>54940592
I still can't really believe they think continually milking their player base will serve them in the long run.
Maybe the desire for 3.5/3.75/pathfinder game systems is strong enough to support that, but it seems highly unlikely. It's probably just a few loud retards screeching for "Muh system" or something

>>54933426
>a turbo grog like myself, that remembers the days when...
sure you are, anon