Does anyone else share the opinion of "I like PbtA's noncombat mechanics, but absolutely revile its (lack of) combat rules"? What PbtA games actually have good, fair combat?
PbtA's noncombat rules are perfectly fine by me. In fact, the homebrew projects I have created and contributed to have invariably used some variant of PbtA's trinary resolution system with 10+, 7-9 (often with a difficult choice), 6-, and fail forward results. It is very clean and natural.
Some PbtA versions have truly novel noncombat mechanics, like Worlds in Peril's incredible method of handling superhero clichés via unlocking new playbooks. The bonds system works well for most PbtA games depending on what they are aiming for, although Dungeon World's implementation of them is indeed rather shabby.
On the other hand, the combat is essentially a farce. No, it is not about the oft-touted "in Dungeon World, a goblin is as easy to hit as an apocalypse dragon." While that is true, the apocalypse dragon has both a mechanical 5 Armor and a narrative "inch-thick metal hide" quality, so it is not that great an issue.
Instead, what I find to be the problem with PbtA is that the action economy is decided purely by the GM's whims. In the vast majority of RPGs (yes, even "narrative" RPGs and games wherein players make all the rolls), it is fully possible to have a "fair and square" battle wherein:
1. The GM's units take actions only when they are supposed to under the game's initiative mechanics.
2. The GM can pull no punches and play enemies to the best of their hard-coded abilities.
3. The players can feel proud for winning a battle against difficult yet fairly-controlled opponents.
In Apocalypse World, when does the GM get to make a move in general? For the life of me, I truly do not know; the GM rules are very ambiguously written. This might be feasible outside of combat, but in a fight, it means enemies get to do something PC-life-threatening whenever the GM well pleases.
(Continued.)
That means that there is no such thing as a "fair and square" fight; you win only because the GM lets you win, and because the GM softballed the enemies' action economy.
In Dungeon World, when does the GM get to make a move through a monster, like "deal damage" (hard move) or "show signs of an approaching threat" (soft move, probably being followed up into "deal damage")?
1. When the players roll a 6-, usually a hard move. Okay, this is fair. It is part of the natural trinary resolution mechanics of PbtA.
2. When everyone looks to the GM to find out what happens, usually a soft move. This is fair in a sense, if you consider it a mild slap on the wrist for the entire party hesitating during a combat situation and being unable to declare any actions.
3. When the players give the GM a golden opportunity, usually a hard move. This is where things go wrong. The rules basically give no guidelines on what constitutes a "golden opportunity." It is a blank check for the GM to have the monsters act whenever something could be construed as an opportunity for them to do so.
Is a PC closing in towards multiple opponents? That could be a golden opportunity to be ganged up on, so the GM could make a soft move or a hard move.
Is a PC approaching a monster spinning around a spiked chain? Potentially a golden opportunity. (This exact example is given in the unofficial Dungeon World guide.)
Is a PC trying to cast a spell while vaguely near a monster? That might be a golden opportunity too.
Just about anything could be a "golden opportunity," and therefore the GM can activate monster moves whenever they like. The action economy is decided on purely by the GM. It is not as though the "golden opportunity" rule can be ignored either, because without it, the monsters would never get to act without players rolling 6-s or looking to the GM in unison. It is a necessary rule.
What PbtA games have more well-coded combat mechanics that can help produce "fair and square" battles?
Addendum: There is no action economy between players either.
Suppose we have two players in Dungeon World. One is playing a bard, and the other has a cleric.
The bard's player, when asked, "What do you do?" during a combat situation, declares that their character nocks their bow and looses at an enemy in range. That simply triggers the Volley move.
The cleric's player, when asked what they do, declares that they petition their deity to bless their weapon (triggers Cast a Spell: Magic Weapon), charges forward, and takes a swing at an enemy (triggers Hack and Slash).
If the GM allows both sets of actions, did the cleric not just effectively take several actions consecutively, while the bard simply was not ambitious enough?
OP your problem is you're trying to treat this like a combat game when these games aren't about "fair and square."
Have the Sisters of Battle ever actually won a battle? All the stories I see about them (except maybe excluding the part of Shield of Baal where they appear) have them lose horribly.
Plenty. Like any 40k faction however they tend to be reduced to background buttmonkey if they are not the focus of their own story.
>>46765049
In 40k lore the sisters of battle are martyrs. They win plenty of battles and keep the peace on many shrine worlds and I'm sure they have completed many successful witch hunts, cleansings and purges. When writers use Sisters of Battle they generally want to show the zealous side of the Imperial religion. They want to show people bravely throwing their lives away for the Emperor's cause which doesn't sound as awesome if the mission goes completely to plan and with minimum casualties.
>>46765049
You can thank the days of Matt Ward using the Sisters of Battle as the punching-bag of every fluff piece he wrote for that. They used to kick wholesale ass.
When was the last time you played a horror game? How did it go?
Last semester. Not well, due to magical realm.
>>46765071Tell me more, lad
So I've been playing the W40K: Dawn Of War games for a couple of years REALLY enjoying them and the lore. The thing is now that I've been interested in the W40K "board game" for a while but I have no idea how to actually start.
If you could answer some of my questions it would really be helpful
1. Do I have to get the codex/rule book or can I pirate these? (Mainly just to get started with reading)
2. I really love the Adepta Sororitas and the Blood Ravens, can I put them in the same army?
3.When I paint them, can I make them different? Let's say I make a blood raven army, could I make some units battleworn?
4. Are there stupid broken armies like in the videogames?
>>46764930
>1. Do I have to get the codex/rule book or can I pirate these? (Mainly just to get started with reading)
I dont know about all of them but you can find most of their books online. Just google for "(your faction) codex pdf"
>2. I really love the Adepta Sororitas and the Blood Ravens, can I put them in the same army?
Just do it. With unbound you can field pretty much everything and even if you want to play the more civilised way you can just get an allied detachment.
>3.When I paint them, can I make them different? Let's say I make a blood raven army, could I make some units battleworn?
Follow your dreams.
4. Are there stupid broken armies like in the videogames?
Yes but people who play them outside of tourneys can choose to play them like "the guy" or not.
Simply dont play against faggots who just play to win.
>>46764930
1. Yes, here's a resource of all of them :http://wh40klib.ru/codex/actually_codex_and_rule/
2. Yes, Allied detachment. Read the rulebooks for more information on this.
3. Of course
4. Yes. This is a matter of dispute, but most people point to the same few armies.
Further resource: https://1d4chan.org/wiki/Warhammer_40,000/Tactics
>>46764930
>1) Yes you can, however buying the book is also nice, I own more codexes than armies its nice to have solid material rather than PDF's
>2) Sororitas are the most underloved faction they dont even have a proper codex thier army models are all old outdated,
^ that being said you can play them many people do on the casual level, they are just the smallest faction played, and sure tag team them with blood-ravens they aren't really "official" but you can make your own legion and pick a "parent legion to use their rules"
>3) Painting them how you want is literally the best part of the hobby goes bananas
>4) like in Dawn o'war eldar are a bit string atm, still easily beaten, space marines are top tier as well,
Just be prepared to loose your first handful of games, you always learn more loosing than winning,
Any questions?
>The Hulk lands in the Dark Sun setting.
What happens /tg/?
Are we talking "big strong dude and little more" Hulk or "bullshit cosmic-powered" Hulk?
>>46764862
What ever you think would cause the most win.
>>46764783
You have just described the plotline for Planet Hulk.
Hulk lands on barbaric planet with super-powerful strong guys and space magic. Hulk does quite well.
40k is a mess. What does your LGS and/or basement do to sand out the rough edges? Walker/MC reworks, changes in the turn system, faction reworks, etc.
>>46764759
We play 30k. Pretty fun game.
>>46764759
No formations, no saves with rerolls, highlander with the exception of troops and horde armies.
I've been pushing to make EVERYONE allies of convenience. Nobody can quite agree on psychic powers, but limiting the amount of psykers helps.
Secretly wishing 40k would get the Age of Sigmar treatment and throw everything out the window.
>>46765546
>no saves with rerolls
Take notes gw
>I've been pushing to make EVERYONE allies of convenience
Sorry but just no. The fact that deamons and grey knights can be allies at all is retarded enough.
Would you marry a chaos god worshiping half cow if the top half was a qt dorf?
>>46764618
I thought only males turned into monsters.
>>46764618
Ha, I'd marry it without the qt dwarf, the dwarf is pure bonus.
>>46764660
Nah, that just because the dark lands are a male dominated utopia
>Oi baws, look what I found
Coal was founded in your setting, within a few decades your setting will undergo it's own industrial revolution as they discover a means to make use of this power source. Besides the obvious, what changes in your setting, and what will it become?
Elves only further establish dominance. Maybe dwarves can pose a threat to them, but that's questionable. Certainly though, elves make good use of it, and though they are at the top the gap widens still, possibly giving them the power to finally root out and kill any remaining humans assuming they haven't gone extinct already by that point.
>>46763829
>dwarves move onto blast furnace smiting and steel, clan revolution starts because labor caste replaced with mechanics
>elves reject due to elemental spirit ties and exhaust poisons; splinter revolutionary half elves defect to human lands
>steam engine/cotton ginny/flying shuttlecock spurs coal mining and humans clash with dwarves over land and mining rights. First railroad laid by men. First elemental steam engines built by men. First demonic possessed golem made by men. First demonic invasion tipped off by wealthy industrialist trying to cut out the middleman.
>>46763829
>founded
ugh
why don't people play hero system anymore?
>>46763369
Because they've gotten scared by the amount of math and tend to equate lots of factors with a poorly put together system.
>>46763742
its not that bad though. all the formulas are on the sheet or given to you right out of the book
>>46763854
Doesn't matter. Give people a lot of shit to look at and keep track of and they'll panic and call it a bad game, no matter how simply you lay out the formulae.
Thoughts on Alpharius?
>>46762683
I am Alpharius.
>>46762683
He is a meme primarch
Not big enough
Can you define a person's personality based on the main color they use, and the colors they splash it with?
Partially.
If they play blue or black, they're an asshole.
Yes, but it also says a lot about them that they choose to play MTG instead all the other superior card games over the last few years.
>>46761895
what if they play blue AND black
>Dungeon crawling fantasy game
>Instead of playing the brave and noble heroes, each player is a group of wimpy hirelings
>Goal is to delve the dungeon, get loot, survive long enough to get out, and get enough XP to become an actual PC.
Would you play it?
>>46761176
That's nearly every low level dungeon crawler, so yeah, obviously.
With a half-decent system, it sounds fun for the occasional one-shot.
>>46761176
>Would you play it?
Only after many campaigns of playing as PCs who take similar NPC hirelings into the dungeon.
For this kind of subversion, you need extensive experience from which you can build a proper appreciation of the horrors these poor guys would deal with.
Hey /tg/ I'm thinking of running a Persona based RPG campaign but I'm not sure what system I should use. Generally I'm thinking of having it be relatively rules-light. Does anybody know of a good system to use?
Unisystem, maybe?
That's the system the fate/sn RPG is based on.
>>46760979
I see, I've never heard of it. I forgot to mention that I'd like to have social links cause some mechanical benefit. i.e. Sun arcana social link adds x to fire spells or something.
>>46760900
OVA is good for anime bullshit. I once tried to homebrew a %rpg for VN and Social Sin based games, but I never finished it.
Which rpg system is best for a beginning group of friends
>>46760558
GURPS
D&D 5 is fine
D&D 4 has really good DM advice, even if you aren't playing it
DO NOT FUCKING PLAY D&D 3RD OR ANYTHING BASED ON IT
Or are you looking for something non-D&D?
(Do you want to play something besides high-magic sort-of-medieval fantasy?)
>>46760558
It really depends a lot on what you (or they) want to play.
i'm painting my marines to be scythes of the emperor and i'm curious if anyone has good paint scheme for termies because cannon ones look like ass
>>46759837
I gotchu covered, f@m
>>46761698
holy shit thanks
>>46759837
Man I love old 40K art
That dude about to shank the Nid looks so fucking stoked
