Tabletop Roleplaying Games (D&D, Pathfinder, CoC, ETC.)

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
I know this might be a stupid question but can someone sell me on ACKS? Can you get physical books of it currently or is this something that you have to wait for reprints of crowdfunding/print-on-demand from DriveThru etc.? How does ACKS compare to B/X, 5e, 3.5, OSE? Do any of you guys actually play it or is it like all these other mythical RPGs that sound great but no one ever plays because your groups only can handle the World's Greatest?
the buildbase and economics seems solid, like the design. the combat seems quick, and the emphasis of how long should an exploration be is good becuse most rpg players after 5e are oblivious to dungeon exploration and timing. i will dm it on monday, see you then.
 
When we were running ToA, my bard got cheated by a tabaxi in the opening town before we ventured out into the jungle, and from that point on he was very racist towards tabaxi. We didn't run into too many before we stopped that campaign, but every time we did, I played the Kill Bill siren on my phone as my bard gave them a death glare. Ah, fantasy racism.

It's not so much that the Tabaxi's lore is underdeveloped for me; frankly, it makes them a good deal easier to slot into a plot when you have enough freedom to write them wherever. It's the furfag shit that kills them for me, what with how the fanbase tends to immediately use them for coomer shit. Like I've said several times previously, I've got quite a few ideas for running one of them, but the extremely negative reputation the typical furry has given them makes them so hard to enjoy.

To vent about things a little bit - because fuck it, I'm a bit at wit's end right now:

I've been wanting to design a character for a long-term campaign my IRL DnD group is planning; we're all long-term friends, and we all decided to go with whatever character builds we thought would be the most entertaining. I was wanting to run a beast race, as I'd always enjoyed running monster designs in other games, and I figured it would be simple to come up with one here. Unfortunately, that's not the case; just about every option I've had so far has been shot down due to various issues that they all have. To break things down:

- Minotaur: Cool option, had a Barbarian or a surprising Bard design in mind based off of a few old games, but they feel more like a simple one-shot option rather than a long-term investment.

- Vulpin: Good set-up for a mage build, but the questionable balance makes me not want to use them.

- Aarakocra (and other birds): Couldn't really come up with any decent builds for a bird character as of yet; I've had a few ideas, but nothing concrete as of yet. Still an option for now, though; leaning towards a Tank build, frankly.

- Bearfolk: Probably one of my favorite ideas, and I had a very fun spellsword design in mind for making one, but the race is simply too overpowered; they've got far too many bonuses that run the risk of breaking the campaign balance in half and making encounters frustrating for everyone else.

- Dragonborn (and other reptiles): Here's where it gets complicated; I've had an absolute fuck-ton of ideas for a dragon character, owing to the common usage of them in fantasy and sci-fi, not to mention them being a common race in DnD's post-apocalyptic settings, which are my personal favorite settings. Also, reptiles are weirdly common for anti-furfag characters; see: the Palemen in HSD. Issue is, I find them to be rather boring for whatever reason; no idea why, I just have a lot of difficulty getting any sort of long-term investment in a lizard, probably partially because of just how watered-down the "play as a dragon" concept is in DnD. Doesn't help that we've already got a Dragonborn character in the group... and he's using the near-exact same design I wanted to run.

- Tabaxi: As we all know, this race got completely butchered by the constant usage by furfag sex pests; even at my own table, surrounded by my own friends, I'm hesitant on using one because of the stigma. "Suffer not the furry to live", as @Ghostse rather agreeably said. The issue is, I've had far too many ideas for playing one; there's multiple ideas I had in mind for playing one, as the in-built dexterity bonuses and movement options are exactly what I was wanting and there's a "stealth/mage" Bard build that my group's been outright encouraging me to run as a Tabaxi. Running one sounds like a genuinely fun prospect, and it's not like I've ran monster races heedless of stigma before (I run a Hrothgar in FFXIV, for fuck's sake), but there's just so much shit that it makes me hesitant regardless. Granted, I think Leonin is still a less-notorious option, but...
 
Any beast race will have the 'furfag stigma', period. If you have a good idea for a character then use it - I wonder how many good Tabaxi characters were shot down because of people afraid of being called furries. If you are amongst friends then I see no issue, as long as it is easy to insert the race in the world.

Dragonborn
I played a one-shot a long time ago where everyone needed to be a dragonborn loyal to their empire. To avoid copying my friends making paladins and warriors, I made a weird salamander-like dragonborn rogue. The guy was clearly batshit crazy, but a very effective infiltrator and spy. We had a good time and I stored the sheet to use again someday, I liked how the caracter turned out. I used to think like you, 'they're just weak dragon spawn', but a little imagination and a good backstory can make wonders from a seemingly generic staple.

This is a race I always wanted to play, but never found a campaign where it's easy to insert - minotaurs are usually the big bad savages of the games I played. I would make some kind of 'chosen one' from a tribe, searching for a magical item that will save his tribe from some kind of looming danger. Simple, yes, but open enough to play as any non-human race, and easy to plop in any conventional fantasy setting.
 
This is a race I always wanted to play, but never found a campaign where it's easy to insert - minotaurs are usually the big bad savages of the games I played. I would make some kind of 'chosen one' from a tribe, searching for a magical item that will save his tribe from some kind of looming danger. Simple, yes, but open enough to play as any non-human race, and easy to plop in any conventional fantasy setting.
In my 4e dark sun a player of mine played a minataur who was hailing the spirits and weeping for mother nature. Druidic minataur types fit well in dark sun
 
Honestly, if your group isn't verbally raising objections to your idea (and I mean in an "oh HELL naw" way), just roll with whatever you want, stigma be damned. As long as you're not acting like a fag, nobody will care regardless of what you choose to run. Stereotypes may have a core of truth to them, but that doesn't mean you have to live up to them.

Hell, it sounds like your group is openly encouraging you to roll the tabaxi idea, so I don't see why there would be any issues. Play your catman.
 
I know this might be a stupid question but can someone sell me on ACKS? Can you get physical books of it currently or is this something that you have to wait for reprints of crowdfunding/print-on-demand from DriveThru etc.? How does ACKS compare to B/X, 5e, 3.5, OSE? Do any of you guys actually play it or is it like all these other mythical RPGs that sound great but no one ever plays because your groups only can handle the World's Greatest?
Do you enjoy studying bronze age infrastructure? Do you want to learn about roman tax returns? Does your dick get hard on the thought of making domestic political decisions in an ancient world? If yes then you're autistic and perfect for ACKS.

It's a game meant for long campaigns that get very involved in domain play where players keep towers and strongholds. Literally in the title: You go from Adventurer to Conquerer to King in this System.
To showcase how deep you can get, I dove into the well of autism that is the ACKS forum for a thread on the cost of building roads: https://forum.autarch.co/t/cost-of-roads/2322
Did you enjoy reading that? ACKS is for you!

Compared to B/X, 5e, 3.5, OSE? It's basically B/X with better domain play and structured for campaigns that last years. Macris wrote a good book on his game philosophy called Arbiter of Worlds. In there he argues for sandbox games with high agency that last many years and are taken fairly seriously by the people involved.
Sidenote: Macris is considered persona non grata by trannies because of some involvement with Milo a decade ago. It's a fairly chuddy community.
 
I wonder how many good Tabaxi characters were shot down because of people afraid of being called furries.

Probably quite a few, honestly; furries are known for inserting their crap into settings and plots where they don't belong. Just take a look at the World of Darkness.

If you are amongst friends then I see no issue, as long as it is easy to insert the race in the world.

Oh, inserting them into the plot's no issue; my DM tends to be pretty loose with story restrictions, so it's no difficulty bringing in new characters from all over.

I played a one-shot a long time ago where everyone needed to be a dragonborn loyal to their empire. To avoid copying my friends making paladins and warriors, I made a weird salamander-like dragonborn rogue. The guy was clearly batshit crazy, but a very effective infiltrator and spy. We had a good time and I stored the sheet to use again someday, I liked how the caracter turned out. I used to think like you, 'they're just weak dragon spawn', but a little imagination and a good backstory can make wonders from a seemingly generic staple.

A Dragonborn Rogue was what I was thinking as well; a poison one maybe, giving it a slight snake design. Or maybe a fire one, for the "dragon ninja" archetype; Ninja Gaiden shit, you know?

This is a race I always wanted to play, but never found a campaign where it's easy to insert - minotaurs are usually the big bad savages of the games I played. I would make some kind of 'chosen one' from a tribe, searching for a magical item that will save his tribe from some kind of looming danger. Simple, yes, but open enough to play as any non-human race, and easy to plop in any conventional fantasy setting.
In my 4e dark sun a player of mine played a minataur who was hailing the spirits and weeping for mother nature. Druidic minataur types fit well in dark sun

I've got three minotaur ideas: one's the classic maze-dweller, one's taken from Guitar Hero, and the third is a samurai-esque design taken from Dark Souls 2. There's plenty of ideas, it just... takes some time coming up with any.
 
In my 4e dark sun a player of mine played a minataur who was hailing the spirits and weeping for mother nature. Druidic minataur types fit well in dark sun
My favorite 5e character was a Hexblood (minotaur) warlock of the archfey. The backstory is kinda complex, but basically he was adopted by 2 gay Eladrin lords out of their court wizard's minotaur eugenics pet project. They groomed him to be an adventurer and keep their eyes on the prime material plane, but he was everything that a normal minotaur isn't. Skittish, soft spoken, gullible and always rambling on about what his dads would think of things.
He was good fun, the other players and DM loved him too.
 
I know some people have had bad Dragonborn characters but I've never encountered one. Dragonborn in my experience aren't lizard enough for scalies and aren't Dragon enough for Dragon fuckers.


I wonder how many good Tabaxi characters were shot down because of people afraid of being called furries.
> Tabaxi
> Good Character

pick one.
 
How many other classes or races are there where you've found they invariably attract a bad element so you just don't allow them at all?
 
How many other classes or races are there where you've found they invariably attract a bad element so you just don't allow them at all?

Kender. Gnome. Goblin (fuck pf). I have second hand stories of Drow enough I'd cast a hairy eye on anyone wanting one that I don't know. I've had bad halflings but I still allow them since they are usually at least fun for everyone even when they are retarded.

I hear bad things about Tieflings but I have never had a Teifling player so maybe its just my Faggot Exclusion Process working?

For classes: Gunslinger, Alchemist/Artificier. Assassin. I have banned Druids but that's not a global ban. Necromancer if we get down to it.
 
Why gnome in particular? I know I banned gnome illusionist/thief specifically, after having made insanely broken builds in other people's campaigns using it and deciding I didn't want to allow it in my own (one of the GMs was mad at me enough to ban me and only forgave me after a year or so). In a non hack-and-slash setting, the combo of stealth mechanics plus illusion magic could be massively exploited.

But why gnomes as a race generally?
 
How many other classes or races are there where you've found they invariably attract a bad element so you just don't allow them at all?
I'm open to any race but the Krynn ones, since all of them are terrible in their own ways, and I just plain dislike them.

I tend to be pretty open with character race, but it's the concept that truly activates my suspicions, though that only applies to new players or people I don't know. A tiefling by itself will not proc much of a note, but it will if they are a rogue or warlock or something that favors angst. That's asking for main character syndrome. A racial template variant will not make me notice, unless I know that it's to powergame like hell and they aren't likely to help others with their stuff. If you rock up with a bastard sword rekitted as a Katana and are making some anime character, I'll raise a brow, but let you go and see if you don't fuck it up.

Ironically classes make me more suspicious than race. I'm more cautious of the bard, the sorcerer, and the barbarian alone than I would be for someone rocking up with a tabaxi. It was never specifically the race that caused a problem for me and my player group, it was always the player getting their hands on a class they fucking suck with.

I just tend to operate on vibe checks, and it works when you cut that shit early.
 
Ironically classes make me more suspicious than race. I'm more cautious of the bard, the sorcerer, and the barbarian alone than I would be for someone rocking up with a tabaxi.
I get all those others, but why barbarian in particular? I always thought every party needed at least one of those dudes, and nobody wanted to play one. So I'd always have a barbarian type NPC, typical sword-wielding murder asshole. And when one of the other idiot classes got killed, you can sit out or a while, or take over this NPC.

People actually enjoyed being the murder asshole. But somehow never actually wanted to start out as one.
 
Why gnome in particular? I know I banned gnome illusionist/thief specifically, after having made insanely broken builds in other people's campaigns using it and deciding I didn't want to allow it in my own (one of the GMs was mad at me enough to ban me and only forgave me after a year or so). In a non hack-and-slash setting, the combo of stealth mechanics plus illusion magic could be massively exploited.

But why gnomes as a race generally?
Personally, I'm just racist against the dysgenic midget fucks. Same goes for halflings, and infinitely more so for kender. All my niggas hate kender.
 
Why gnome in particular? I know I banned gnome illusionist/thief specifically, after having made insanely broken builds in other people's campaigns using it and deciding I didn't want to allow it in my own (one of the GMs was mad at me enough to ban me and only forgave me after a year or so). In a non hack-and-slash setting, the combo of stealth mechanics plus illusion magic could be massively exploited.

But why gnomes as a race generally?

They seem to be exclusively the domain of obnoxious minmaxers. I'm trying to remember exactly what the 3.5 gnome paladin meta was, but I had several IRC games with them and they were all annoying, but they didn't want to play a gnome they wanted to be a paladin with racial bonuses since their summoned mounts would be medium-sized. (And they didn't want to actually be paladins they wanted to be fighters with spells)

I guess I'm just racist against small, grubbing races.
 
I get all those others, but why barbarian in particular? I always thought every party needed at least one of those dudes, and nobody wanted to play one. So I'd always have a barbarian type NPC, typical sword-wielding murder asshole. And when one of the other idiot classes got killed, you can sit out or a while, or take over this NPC.

People actually enjoyed being the murder asshole. But somehow never actually wanted to start out as one.
Simple: people often underestimate just how much trouble a low INT chaotic stupid barb can cause for a party if in the hands of a shitty player. Aggro'ed early fights that may be funny for me but causing player bitching when it fucks them, causing them to get thrown out of safe ports and towns by playing up being a retard to cause trouble, and sometimes just being used to fuck over stories due to not wanting to be "railroaded".

People usually let them get away with it since the damage is fixable, but it's something I always keep in mind. Gained that perspective due to my time STing, since a very minmaxed Brujah and a barbarian retard are very similar, and I dealt with a pretty shitty Brujah character and player.

Even then I only invite suspicion if they pick CN and Barb.
 
> Tabaxi
> Good Character

pick one.
I once played a Tabaxi Hexblade Warlock for a few months before it met an untimely demise. The premise was that it was a native of Kartakass in the Domains of Dread and struck a deal with one of the Dark Powers (its patron) in exchange for power and a way out of the Ravenloft setting with a catch: he had to hunt down creatures/individuals and use his available forms of banishment spells to send them to his patron. Mechanically fun, plotwise he had hooks, and Tabaxi are 0% furbait in our group since we're all cat owners and have no desire to fuck our pets.
 
Goblin (fuck pf).
I personally am a fan of the Golarion goblin design if only because it isn't another semitic small guy. I also like their being essentially the clowns of Pathfinder where they're often evil and an easy early mark but when you encounter them they tend to have a "good idea" for a weapon or tactic usually involving fire. It's very basic and dumb but that's somehow charming. And the whole bit about being autisticly illiterate because of superstition.

All of that being said I would approach a random player bringing a goblin character with extreme skepticism because I can't hope that they'd appreciate my same desired level of mild but ridiculous antics and would be hardcore randumb redditor tier shit, like the aforementioned barbarian characters causing issues because they play the unstable low int retard but worse because "OH I'M SUCH A SILLY LITTLE RAGAMUFFIN AIN'T I LOOK I'M PISSING IN THE BEER MUGS AND SHOUTING AT WORDS WORDS EVERYWHERE AAAA I CAN'T READ."

P.S.: I did not mention short stack goblin fetish shit but this is implied and that pisses me off for the simple reason that there is no realm where Pathfinder goblins are sexy and making sexual/attractive goblin art for your character triggers my autism because a Pathfinder goblin is basically Stewie from family guy with big ears and they're breaking the physical description/canon appearance for their fetish
 
Back
Top Bottom