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

[Hikaru86]

Even then I only invite suspicion if they pick CN and Barb.

CN and Rogue or Barb are my pessoal Red Flags for shit characters. CN is general are, my friends loved to make CN characters that are absolute annoying and murderhobos of the worst kinda. At least I had some self control with my CG character and the more Edgylords ones I used to make in WoD. Now let my gays one to ChatGTP to deal, let the AI deal with the cringe and faggotery, even its a pain in the ass with things like hand holding or wanting my character begin emotional mess instead of just in the closet.

 

[Scream Aim Fire]

Only red flag class my group has is Necromancer, and that's more from when one of our players accidently caused a full party wipe through a spectacularly unlucky set of rolls. Good times!

 

[King Dead]

CN and Rogue or Barb are my pessoal Red Flags for shit characters. CN is general are, my friends loved to make CN characters that are absolute annoying and murderhobos of the worst kinda. At least I had some self control with my CG character and the more Edgylords ones I used to make in WoD. Now let my gays one to ChatGTP to deal, let the AI deal with the cringe and faggotery, even its a pain in the ass with things like hand holding or wanting my character begin emotional mess instead of just in the closet.

There's a reason people refer to chaotic neutral as chaotic stupid. Nine times out of ten (or more), anyone who says they're making a CN character is just using it as an excuse to be an utter retard at random, inopportune times. I'm not against humor, but trying to actually move the plot along only to get interrupted yet again by the party retard gets old really quick. God help you if you have multiple CN tards and you're the only party member focused on the task at hand (ask me how I know).

That's part of why I played my minotaur barbarian differently in the campaign I was using him. He didn't have INT as a dump stat (all his stats rolled at least somewhat decent), and due to his upbringing he was a lot calmer and more level-headed than one would expect. Obviously not trusted at first glance due to his race, but it usually wouldn't take long for people to warm up to him. Didn't stop him from being fearsome when enraged, of course, but I played it like a "when the Saxon began to rage" thing. Pleasant to be around, but push him too far, and you'll regret it.

That game also had a halfling cleric that was the epitome of chaotic stupid, to the point my barbarian had to repeatedly apologize for "my mentally challenged friend." He eventually toned it down, but that story's on hold so it doesn't really matter. Definitely want to bring him back at some point, I was really enjoying the simplicity of just swinging a big axe around.

 

[The Ugly One]

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?

It's B/X with extra widgets and more classes. The core gameplay is mostly unchanged. Basically, imagine if somebody wrote a massive expansion for B/X encompassing trade economics and conquering kingdoms and stapled it to the back of the blue book. Or, as I put it before, imagine if AD&D had been written with the benefit of the hindsight the next 40 years of RPG gaming would have given.

 

[Fuck Bankers]

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?

It has a really good combat system. Each level your class has an "attack throw". Most classes start at "10+" which is greater than or equal to 10. You add the target's AC to your throw. The orc has an AC of 4 your attack throw would be "14+". So there are no arbitrary "difficulty checks" like in 5e. I also think it is more simple than Thac0, while having similar benefits to Thac0.

All time increments are measured in game. While trekking to the dungeon you would use "Expedition" movement measured in miles per day or per hour. While in the dungeon but out of combat you would measure time in "exploration" movement measured in ft per 10 minutes. Then when in combat you would use "combat" speed in ft per 1 minute.

Speed is affected by encumbrance in stones. Armor is AC equals weight in stones. Most weapons are 1 stone. Smaller items are 1/6th Stone. Coins are 1000 equal one stone.

The big take away I've had running the game is there are a lot of systems, but each system is made to be as light weight as possible. All of the different procedures have lists within the Rule book and the Judges Journal. The list to make a character is 11 points, the first of which is getting a character sheet.

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!

Your portrayal is simplistic. It would be like showing all the things autists have done with redstone in minecraft and say that's the whole game. This is one of many different things you can do late game. You don't have to do any construction if you don't want to, but it is there if you do. If you want to run an adventurer's guild, or thieves guild, or become a priest at a temple, or run a trading caravan or become a monster farmer, or research magic. There's a lot of options but all of that is for mid to late game.

 

[AnOminous]

Even then I only invite suspicion if they pick CN and Barb.

My second most obnoxious character was one of these to the point he was banned from anything involving going into town. They'd assign him "guard the camp" duty.

God help you if you have multiple CN tards and you're the only party member focused on the task at hand (ask me how I know).

In any "mixed alignment" party I had, I pretty much insisted someone be the paladin and so the tard antics didn't bother me, it was up to that guy to wrangle the tards. Even the tards knew that everything would fall apart without the paladin so they were amenable to wrangling (to some degree).

 

[Halbschwanz]

My second most obnoxious character was one of these to the point he was banned from anything involving going into town. They'd assign him "guard the camp" duty.

In any "mixed alignment" party I had, I pretty much insisted someone be the paladin and so the tard antics didn't bother me, it was up to that guy to wrangle the tards. Even the tards knew that everything would fall apart without the paladin so they were amenable to wrangling (to some degree).

I've never specifically had to be a paladin for this purpose, but I get having a leader character with one foot in reality. I remember when my flind gnoll rogue/ranger had to be that for a mid-high level group because I had the most initiative at the table and was the only one who bothered to strategize. He was a chaotic neutral braggart, but hated demons and undead enough that he was willing to focus and take the lead on a mission to siege down a necromancer's fortress. There was an IRL 90 minute argument at the table because the player of a cleric of St. Cuthbert was pissed that we snuck around the literal army of skeletons and ghouls parked at the front gate and got into the fortress through the back way. In character I managed to convince him to drop it because it would have been a smarter idea to not alert the big boss who buffs undead for that fight, and that we could take down the army on the way out. The GM pulled me aside after the game and thanked me for managing to get the game moving.

 

[Judge Dredd]

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 tend to be pretty open with character race, but it's the concept that truly activates my suspicions,

Basically this.

I've mentioned before my criminal campaign were no one would do any crime and would always do the morally good thing.

If I run more campaigns in future, I'm going to be strict with character options. I like to leave it open, but there's always some awkward one.

Currently my campaign, though a plane hopping campaign, has a hub city they operate out of, so the ranger is a constant thorn in my side. The player is fine, but his character wants to be out and about hunting deer and communing with nature. He keeps wanting to use his tracking skills. His backstory he is was hunting a monster when he gated into the campaign by accident. So he wants to spend downtime tracking that monster. None of this is bad on it's own, but together I keep having to think of reasons why he hasn't fucked off between sessions. When he makes a tracking roll in a sewer or city streets, I have to try and explain how he follows them, or why he can't when the plot demands it. I struggle to think of some plane hoping wilderness creature that would also be related to the "collect the McGuffin" plot.

Likewise, why is the necromancer, the life cleric, the paladin, and the bard hanging around together. My usual excuse of having a faction with a shared goal is failing. I messed that up because instead of having it be a shared faction to start, I introduce the plot factions and have the party choose one to join after a few sessions meeting them and learning their goals and methods. Why would the thieves guild take a paladon and cleric? Why would the knightly order or knights allow a necromancer and a lute playing vagrant join?

Personally, I'm just racist against the dysgenic midget fucks. Same goes for halflings, and infinitely more so for kender.

Same. I'm pretty open as far as race goes, and there are some fun concepts, but in games that are grim dark or are advertised as having adult themes, short stacks immediately raise an eyebrow.

I also hold this suspicion in adventures too. Especially woke companies and authors. If there's an abundance of short race NPCs, or the art could be read as suggestive or fetishy in some way, I begin to think something weird is going on.

 

[AnOminous]

I'm kind of bummed by the responses of what GMs have banned, since many of them were ones that I did personally (and sometimes got banned for). It's like I'm a giant dick or something.

And on top of that, the reason other GMs (we had a community of about four or five) would recruit me to play a giant dick was because they knew I am one.

REEEEE.

 

[Corn Flakes]

I'm kind of bummed by the responses of what GMs have banned, since many of them were ones that I did personally (and sometimes got banned for). It's like I'm a giant dick or something.

And on top of that, the reason other GMs (we had a community of about four or five) would recruit me to play a giant dick was because they knew I am one.

REEEEE.

Sounds like the system working as intended, man. You are a vital, if highly dickish, part of your local RPG ecosystem. Be proud, your ability to piss people off is appreciated. Presumably.

 

[King Dead]

I'm kind of bummed by the responses of what GMs have banned, since many of them were ones that I did personally (and sometimes got banned for). It's like I'm a giant dick or something.

And on top of that, the reason other GMs (we had a community of about four or five) would recruit me to play a giant dick was because they knew I am one.

REEEEE.

I've only DM'd once, but personally I don't really care enough about stuff to ban it, at least preemptively. Sure, people have their horror stories about X race or Y class, but anyone can take a "good" character on paper and play it horribly. It's more about the player than what they're playing, and as long as I'm playing with people I trust, then I don't see an issue. About the only thing I'd consider banning outright is multiclassing, but only because I hate it for reasons mentioned before.

That said, I will still require players to run their character ideas by me first, both to help craft a shared party backstory to get the ball rolling and to suss out any potential shenanigans they might be planning. As ol' Ronnie Raygun put it, trust but verify.

 

[Loose Goose]

It's B/X with extra widgets and more classes. The core gameplay is mostly unchanged. Basically, imagine if somebody wrote a massive expansion for B/X encompassing trade economics and conquering kingdoms and stapled it to the back of the blue book. Or, as I put it before, imagine if AD&D had been written with the benefit of the hindsight the next 40 years of RPG gaming would have given.

This is accurate from my reading of it. You don't have to go into the empire building part if you don't want to. It can function as a slightly crunchier, slightly deeper B/X with a Roman flavor. All the rest is gravy. Although it looks a whole lot of fun and well designed, so the "it is there" makes it very tempting to use at least in some form.

 

[Sargon's wife's son]

I've never specifically had to be a paladin for this purpose, but I get having a leader character with one foot in reality. I remember when my flind gnoll rogue/ranger had to be that for a mid-high level group because I had the most initiative at the table and was the only one who bothered to strategize. He was a chaotic neutral braggart, but hated demons and undead enough that he was willing to focus and take the lead on a mission to siege down a necromancer's fortress. There was an IRL 90 minute argument at the table because the player of a cleric of St. Cuthbert was pissed that we snuck around the literal army of skeletons and ghouls parked at the front gate and got into the fortress through the back way. In character I managed to convince him to drop it because it would have been a smarter idea to not alert the big boss who buffs undead for that fight, and that we could take down the army on the way out. The GM pulled me aside after the game and thanked me for managing to get the game moving.

In a few games I'm currently playing I like to play the I'm really tired of listening to you guys argue about **** i'm just going to go kick the door down that character keeps getting grenades blown up in the face though it turns out for when you keep kicking doors down.
I generally hate getting to a session and then people arguing for 20 minutes it's really annoying

 

[Fuck Bankers]

How does everyone feel about GURPs? It's a game that I want to like but every time I run it the table and I hate it. I might solo it some time, but it takes so long to get all the material you want organized.

 

[Hikaru86]

How does everyone feel about GURPs? It's a game that I want to like but every time I run it the table and I hate it. I might solo it some time, but it takes so long to get all the material you want organized.

Dead, and I said that an ex-GURP player. Tried to play Martial Arts once and its a shit show.

 

[Loose Goose]

Nobody plays GURPS. Some people (perverts) buy GURPS and talk GURPS, but nobody plays GURPS.

 

[ZMOT]

but it takes so long to get all the material you want organized.

there should be a digest around of someone doing it before, depending what you're looking for. I do remember seeing the question occasionally with "what do I need for X" with recommendations what to grab and why.

 

[Sargon's wife's son]

How does everyone feel about GURPs? It's a game that I want to like but every time I run it the table and I hate it. I might solo it some time, but it takes so long to get all the material you want organized.

I ran the World War Two system and I got a bunch of people who kept trying to shoot Adolf Hitler they didn't even have good motivations they would just liberals in the German army which made no sense so I didn't let them do it so they Rage each quit.

Eventually I did find a bunch of actual on ironic Nazis they finished the campaign with and they wore way more fun they did kept asking if they could involve themselves in the Holocaust which I kind of allowed we had an entire two sessions of Jew hunting.

We hunted down an entire group of Jewish Communists Highting out in southern Russia.




It was still the most fun I ever had DMing

 

[Fuck Bankers]

I was running a game where the gimmick was we used Mythic as the GM and everyone would vote on what to ask it. I would determine the likelihood and if we rolled doubles on the d100 something from another setting would show up in the world. I would roll on a table of which setting thing, then I'd ask ChatGPT for a random thing from the setting. We started with the DnD 5e essentials kit. Over time adding cowboys or robots or Zenomorphs or anything else. the only system I could think of that could put all those things together would be GURPs. Combat was too much of a slog. The first encounter with 6 wolves took about 25 minutes. We added in a Terminator and it fought the manticore.

 

[AnOminous]

Sounds like the system working as intended, man. You are a vital, if highly dickish, part of your local RPG ecosystem. Be proud, your ability to piss people off is appreciated. Presumably.

As a GM I think I was incredibly benevolent. All my NPCs were helpful and kind and actually had personalities.

The moment I went into PC playing, though, I turned into a phenomenal dick.