# The Gaming Den

Welcome to the Gaming Den.

Skip to content

## Artorius - our take

The homebrew forum

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply

- Print view

39 posts

- Previous
- 1
- 2

Judging__Eagle
  Prince
  Posts: 4671
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
  Location: Lake Ontario is in my backyard; Canada

###

- Quote

Post by Judging__Eagle » Mon Feb 16, 2009 4:52 pm

> ckafrica wrote:The basic premise of this sounds like that fucking terrible Brukheimer King Arthur movie.
> No offence but I hope to see this fail; anything resembling that movie should not see the light of day. I'm glad that you guys boiled down what S/h/it really wants out of an RPG though; it explains a lot.
> So uhhh, Bad Luck ?

http://arthurrex.blogspot.com/
Interesting read. It pretty much tries to look for accuracy. We can easily use that site as a reference for what is accurate. Personally, I was thinking more along the lines of Arthur being Welsh, and driving out the invading Saxons and formerly invading Romans; or converting them to his side.
[[Note: I want conversion to be possible in this game. Merlin and his insane Pict/Irish/Scotsman army should be a wildcard that could be asked to join with Artur. Allowing for crazey berzerker k-nights with blue faces to join the crew.]]
Personally, I don't think that there's a reason to use a different setting. First, because no one has a claim to it.
I mean, there are already whole game systems set in this setting, like say, Pendragon. If anything, the onus should have been placed on Elennsar to come up with an original idea. As the inpsiration has been used and used over and over; and that was in the middle ages 1600 years ago.
Arthurian legend litereally soaks into our Euro-centric white, western view of what the "Heroic" portions of the dark ages was like. It's usually not Beowulf or the Volsung saga that gets us right at the bottom of our hearts and minds. It's mother-fucking Arthur, and his knights that gets people's attention. In light of that, using it as the jumping off point for a game where there is a fair amount of character attrition due to either small adventuring groups taking on giants or beasts, or full sized armies clashing seems fair.
Second, because the mechanics reflect the setting to a degree.
Ancient Egypt never had well documented and long-running situation where a leader/pharoh had to lead champions into battle in order to secure their position*. Armies perhaps, but never leading elite knights. The bulk of Egypt's armies were dudes with spears, axes, swords or slings, maybe bows. When they had more proffesional armies, they started using the fearsome war-chariot, but those tended to be used as mobile archer/javelin platforms for those elite people who had the time to spend practising with a bow.
*: Caveat, the succession of the Upper and Lower Kingdoms may have had something like this, but I'm not sure.
Last edited by Judging__Eagle on Mon Feb 16, 2009 4:59 pm, edited 2 times in total.
The Gaming Den; where Mathematics are rigorously applied to Mythology.
While everyone's Philosophy is not in accord, that doesn't mean we're not on board.
Top

koz
  Duke
  Posts: 1585
  Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 2:39 pm
  Location: Oz

###

- Quote

Post by koz » Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:02 am

> sigma999 wrote: All I ask is rename setting, figures, regions, and otherwise differentiate from Artorius. Please.

Sigma, if you have issues with Elennsar and his stuff, I understand. However, please don't drag this shit into this thread. If you have personal issues, keep them that way please, and don't rain on a perfectly good project because of bad associations which no-one but you and ckafrica seem to have.
Everything I learned about DnD, I learned from Frank Trollman.

> Kaelik wrote:You are so full of Strawmen that I can only assume you actually shit actual straw.

> souran wrote:...uber, nerd-rage-inducing, minutia-devoted, pointless blithering shit.

> Schwarzkopf wrote:The Den, your one-stop shop for in-depth analysis of Dungeons & Dragons and distressingly credible threats of oral rape.

> DSM wrote:Apparently, The GM's Going To Punch You in Your Goddamned Face edition of D&D is getting more traction than I expected. Well, it beats playing 4th. Probably 5th, too.

> Frank Trollman wrote:Giving someone a mouth full of cock is a standard action.

> PoliteNewb wrote:If size means anything, it's what position you have to get in to give a BJ.

Top

JonSetanta
  King
  Posts: 5512
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
  Location: interbutts

###

- Quote

Post by JonSetanta » Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:58 am

> the_taken wrote:Ancient Egypt?

That's a good start.
Top

violence in the media
  Duke
  Posts: 1723
  Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 7:18 pm

### Re: Artorius - our take

- Quote

Post by violence in the media » Tue Feb 17, 2009 1:58 pm

> Mister_Sinister wrote:As for the 'PC pool', giving everyone 3 PCs at the start, and giving them 1 more per completed quest might work.

I like this idea. Would you rather do it in the fashion of the Dark Sun character tree, or in a more X-com mission assignment style?
I'd lean towards the X-com style, I think. If you have these 40 or so guys following the Dux around, you'll have a good pool of characters for the players to pick from, depending on the mission. Everyone is a baseline competent fighter, but some of them have extra skills in different areas. Maybe you've picked up a Druid or Witch or something in your travels that would provide a unique skillset as well.
You would need to come up with reasons for why the players can only pick one character apiece for these missions, however.
Top

the_taken
  Knight-Baron
  Posts: 830
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
  Location: Lost in the Sea of Awesome

### Re: Artorius - our take

- Quote

Post by the_taken » Tue Feb 17, 2009 5:56 pm

> violence in the media wrote:You would need to come up with reasons for why the players can only pick one character apiece for these missions, however.

Conservation of Ninjutsu
I had a signature here once but I've since lost it.
My current project: http://tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=56456
Top

Avoraciopoctules
  Overlord
  Posts: 8624
  Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2008 5:48 pm
  Location: Oakland, CA

### Re: Artorius - our take

- Quote

Post by Avoraciopoctules » Tue Feb 17, 2009 6:31 pm

> violence in the media wrote:

> > Mister_Sinister wrote:As for the 'PC pool', giving everyone 3 PCs at the start, and giving them 1 more per completed quest might work.

> You would need to come up with reasons for why the players can only pick one character apiece for these missions, however.

Wait. Why do you need to keep players from controlling multiple characters?
Is it bad for the game if a given player simultaneously runs Lothar Freudianblade and his two equally important brothers?
What if Lothar's PC also controls Lothar's merry band of spear-chucking hooligans?
Top

IGTN
  Knight-Baron
  Posts: 729
  Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 4:13 am

### Re: Artorius - our take

- Quote

Post by IGTN » Tue Feb 17, 2009 6:44 pm

> Avoraciopoctules wrote:Is it bad for the game if a given player simultaneously runs Lothar Freudianblade and his two equally important brothers?
> What if Lothar's PC also controls Lothar's merry band of spear-chucking hooligans?

Fine for a wargame; bad for an RPG if you can't use the word "I" and have a clear meaning.
"No, you can't burn the inn down. It's made of solid fire."
Top

violence in the media
  Duke
  Posts: 1723
  Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 7:18 pm

### Re: Artorius - our take

- Quote

Post by violence in the media » Tue Feb 17, 2009 7:57 pm

> Avoraciopoctules wrote:

> > violence in the media wrote:Wait. Why do you need to keep players from controlling multiple characters?
> > Is it bad for the game if a given player simultaneously runs Lothar Freudianblade and his two equally important brothers?
> > What if Lothar's PC also controls Lothar's merry band of spear-chucking hooligans?

I can think of a couple reasons:
1. Controlling multiple characters does not promote teamwork on the part of the players. Each player will tend to spend their time finding combos and organizing their tactics around the characters under their direct control. That might be fine for battle-level events where they're each controlling a hero and a band of spear-chucking hooligans, but it's not really desirable on the level where they're operating as individuals.
2. Screen time. You don't want everyone to have to sit there and wait for 15 or 20 minutes while each player figures out and resolves what they're doing with Lothar, Lithar, Lathar, and their respective hooligans.
3. You're going to want the GM to get into the mindset of creating multiple events happening at once AND preventing those things from being tackled one at a time in turn. Even though the players will play each scenario one at a time, the events of each will happen silmultaneously. You're going to want individual-level situations to involve sending 5 Knights off to the North to battle the bandits plaguing a village so the people rally behind you. At the same time, you want to need to send 5 Knights South to ambush a Saxon caravan, and 5 more West to negotiate with a local chieftan to send troops in support of the Dux in the upcoming battle. Maybe throw in something about a princess and a dragon occassionally to round it out. During all this, you need to make sure that there are at least 40 Knights with the Dux, and you can probably assign them shit to do around camp.
edit: Fixed my tags. Thanks, IGTN.
Last edited by violence in the media on Tue Feb 17, 2009 9:19 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Top

IGTN
  Knight-Baron
  Posts: 729
  Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 4:13 am

###

- Quote

Post by IGTN » Tue Feb 17, 2009 9:12 pm

You might have left a tag open.
I think the five knights sent to the north, five to the south, and five to the east also works as a great way to keep the PCs controlling only one character; you might have a pool of knights, and everyone picks which knight they will play on each mission, and the missions happen simultaneously (but are resolved sequentially).
"No, you can't burn the inn down. It's made of solid fire."
Top

JonSetanta
  King
  Posts: 5512
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
  Location: interbutts

###

- Quote

Post by JonSetanta » Wed Feb 18, 2009 5:02 am

When the granularity of combat is 'backed up' and one sees entire squads or armies as individual units, one can have multiple players directing multiple characters.
The rules are the same but the scale is different.
I can't believe I'm making a WarHammer comparison but... it's like comparing the 'normal' figurines to the tiny, tiny, tiny Epic-scale ones with, what, 5 to a base? They're the same units but viewed from a different distance (granularity).
Gargantuan mecha become actual usable figures rather than artificial landscapes of metal.
Edit: That's "granularity" not "granality". Frank should take note as well since he's taken to using the term as well, lately.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Granularity
Last edited by JonSetanta on Wed Feb 18, 2009 6:19 am, edited 2 times in total.
Top

violence in the media
  Duke
  Posts: 1723
  Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 7:18 pm

###

- Quote

Post by violence in the media » Wed Feb 18, 2009 3:32 pm

> Mister_Sinister wrote:Equal damage friendly fire is a bit much, I agree. It would be better if friendly fire only occured on really crappy rolls - death by own side's arrows is stupid, unheroic and not particularly good for anyone.

You're tracking hits of 5+ on d6, right? What if, when a unit is engaged in melee with another unit, all 1's count as hits on your own guys? You're still more likely to hit the unit you're aiming for, but there's still the possibility of scoring hits on your own guys AND you've raised the probability that someone is hit with an arrow from 33 to 50% per die. Given that you're firing into a crowded melee, that sounds acceptible.
Top

koz
  Duke
  Posts: 1585
  Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 2:39 pm
  Location: Oz

###

- Quote

Post by koz » Wed Feb 18, 2009 6:59 pm

> violence in the media wrote: You're tracking hits of 5+ on d6, right? What if, when a unit is engaged in melee with another unit, all 1's count as hits on your own guys? You're still more likely to hit the unit you're aiming for, but there's still the possibility of scoring hits on your own guys AND you've raised the probability that someone is hit with an arrow from 33 to 50% per die. Given that you're firing into a crowded melee, that sounds acceptible.

Quite. I propose this be taken wholesale.
Everything I learned about DnD, I learned from Frank Trollman.

> Kaelik wrote:You are so full of Strawmen that I can only assume you actually shit actual straw.

> souran wrote:...uber, nerd-rage-inducing, minutia-devoted, pointless blithering shit.

> Schwarzkopf wrote:The Den, your one-stop shop for in-depth analysis of Dungeons & Dragons and distressingly credible threats of oral rape.

> DSM wrote:Apparently, The GM's Going To Punch You in Your Goddamned Face edition of D&D is getting more traction than I expected. Well, it beats playing 4th. Probably 5th, too.

> Frank Trollman wrote:Giving someone a mouth full of cock is a standard action.

> PoliteNewb wrote:If size means anything, it's what position you have to get in to give a BJ.

Top

Avoraciopoctules
  Overlord
  Posts: 8624
  Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2008 5:48 pm
  Location: Oakland, CA

###

- Quote

Post by Avoraciopoctules » Wed Feb 18, 2009 10:16 pm

> sigma999 wrote:All I ask is rename setting, figures, regions, and otherwise differentiate from Artorius. Please.

> sigma999 wrote:

> > the_taken wrote:Ancient Egypt?

> That's a good start.

Alternatively, I have another setting here: http://www.tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=49441
I'm planning on using a very similar system. The only change I'm planning so far is a separate soak pool to resist special effects and spells.
Top

Bill Bisco: Isometric Imp
  Knight
  Posts: 447
  Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 1:12 am

###

- Quote

Post by Bill Bisco: Isometric Imp » Sat Apr 11, 2009 2:40 am

Question about the game System.
1. Who goes first? Or do both sides go at the same time?
2. There is no "to hit" roll in this game? Both sides just roll attack and soak and the defender takes damage equal to the difference?
Black Marches
"Real Sharpness Comes Without Effort"
Top
Post Reply

- Print view

Display:
Sort by:
Direction:

39 posts

- Previous
- 1
- 2

Return to “It's My Own Invention...”

Jump to

- Main
- ↳ About the Gaming Den
- ↳ In My Humble Opinion...
- ↳ I Gave the Mouse a Cookie...
- ↳ In The Trenches
- ↳ It's My Own Invention...
- ↳ MPSIMS