The Gaming Den

You can also just fake it.

You don't really need stat blocks or skills, you just need some idea as to what capability they should have. You can't do this so much in super crunchy and totally variable systems like Champions, but you can grab another villain group and turn the fire guy into the ice guy. But you don't track damage on mooks, they are either fighting, running or down. They hit on a really good roll and don't on bad rolls, etc.

Atmo wrote:This is the best explanation i can give you about what i think about FATE (and even isn't mine XD): http://tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?p=369089#369089

So your opinion on the matter is informed by another guy opinion on the matter ? Have you actually read the book or a review ? Do you at least have a slight suspect about how the game actually works ?

And where is written that anyone can pick those rules and insert them on their system of preference?

But then its a factor of the players playing the game, not the game per se. Im interested in games here, not people.

silva wrote:Sure, sure. But then it would be a factor of the group, not the systems at hand. Im more interested in seeing what systems have made in respect to it.

Nowadays we can throw this logic out of the window, as dozens, if not hundreds, of systems exists.

Honestly dont know what youre trying to say here.

Yes, GURPS is a good system to some things, but it have flaws. No system is perfect, and if anyone says it you can have 100% sure he is a fanboy that doesn't like to hear the contrary.

Agreed.

silva wrote:So your opinion on the matter is informed by another guy opinion on the matter ? Have you actually read the book or a review ? Do you at least have a slight suspect about how the game actually works ?

Of course i have, let me read the book herZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

silva wrote:But then its a factor of the players playing the game, not the game per se. Im interested in games here, not people.

Then you get very disapointed. XD

silva wrote:Agreed.

But GURPS is boring, even being a good system.

http://www.dangerpatrol.com/

Danger Patrol Beta wrote:

Time to start the show!
To start the game, the GM will describe the opening sequence to this episode of Danger Patrol. then, the players will do their “previously, on Danger patrol...” narrations. then the first action scene will begin.
The opening teaser
Each episode of Danger Patrol begins with an opening teaser, which shows the patrol in some perilous, life-or-death situation that looks hopeless. a cliffhanger, if you will. the GM creates the opening teaser as part of game prep. They should be short and punchy, establishing what the opening action scene will be about. See sample teasers on pp. 9–10.

“PREVIOUSLY ON DANGER PATROL...”
After the teaser, the opening credits and theme song play. then the announcer says, “previously, on Danger patrol...” Now it’s the player’s turn to narrate! each player should describe a quick sequence from the previous episode, spotlighting their hero (plus another hero or invented NpC if they wish). What previous episode, you may ask? The one you’re about to make up. By narrating action from an earlier episode that you didn’t actually play, each player has the chance to introduce an element or two that they’re interested in seeing in the current episode.

Leslie is playing a Mystic hero and wants the Stygian Adepts to be involved in the Crimson Ape attack. She could include a “Previously on...” moment in which we see her hero exploring an old Martian ruin, with strange hieroglyphics on the walls depicting Stygians controlling animals with dark magic. “The Stygians,” she whispers. “I knew it!”

While the players are doing their “previously On” narrations, the GM will be furiously taking notes. GM, it’s your job to work these elements into the upcoming episode in some way. they don’t all have to be in the first scene, but you should start to introduce some of them, with clues and leads that point to the others. During the “Previously On,” sequence, the GM grabs an index card and writes STYGIAN ADEPTS on it and puts it off
to the side. The players see it and know that the evil Stygians are involved and waiting in the wings. Another player creates the Anti-Robot League during his “Previously On,” so the GM makes a card for them, too,
along with a location card (Ludd’s Bar) as a reminder to do something with the League and the bar later.

This may seem challenging, but think of it this way: the players are creating your threats and dangers for you! Just take a few notes and you’ll end up with all the prep materials you need for the session. Once all the players have done their “previously Ons,” it’s time to start the action scene....

DANGER CADET BILLY SAYS, "WHAT IF YOU CAN'T THINK OF ANYTHING COOL?"
Don’t worry! the other players are right there to help you! Just ask them for ideas and then pick something that sounds good. It’s better to go with something quickly and start playing than it is to worry about creating the perfect thing.

Awesome, Rad! This rule ("Previously, on Danger Patrol") is exactly what Im looking for here.

By the way, I already knew John Harper games (though never had the curiosity about Danger Patrol). His other games are also interesting and make use of anti-railroading rules too. I specially recommend Ghost Lines and Lady Blackbird.

kzt wrote:You can also just fake it.

You don't really need stat blocks or skills, you just need some idea as to what capability they should have. You can't do this so much in super crunchy and totally variable systems like Champions, but you can grab another villain group and turn the fire guy into the ice guy. But you don't track damage on mooks, they are either fighting, running or down. They hit on a really good roll and don't on bad rolls, etc.

Yeah that's what the majority of DMs tend to do. Ignore most of the rules and just roll some dice using arbitrary numbers that are close enough.

Of course, by the end of it you kind of wonder why you really need all those complex rules when you can run the game just fine ignoring most of them.

Cyberzombie wrote: Yeah that's what the majority of DMs tend to do. Ignore most of the rules and just roll some dice using arbitrary numbers that are close enough.

Of course, by the end of it you kind of wonder why you really need all those complex rules when you can run the game just fine ignoring most of them.

And then after that you can write down your ideas and re-use them later or share with your gaming community. They can then further develop the ideas, perhaps publishing it one day in a community magazine.

Cyberzombie wrote: Yeah that's what the majority of DMs tend to do. Ignore most of the rules and just roll some dice using arbitrary numbers that are close enough.

Of course, by the end of it you kind of wonder why you really need all those complex rules when you can run the game just fine ignoring most of them.

And then after that you can write down your ideas and re-use them later or share with your gaming community. They can then further develop the ideas, perhaps publishing it one day in a community magazine.

Cyberzombie wrote:

kzt wrote:You can also just fake it.

You don't really need stat blocks or skills, you just need some idea as to what capability they should have. You can't do this so much in super crunchy and totally variable systems like Champions, but you can grab another villain group and turn the fire guy into the ice guy. But you don't track damage on mooks, they are either fighting, running or down. They hit on a really good roll and don't on bad rolls, etc.

Yeah that's what the majority of DMs tend to do. Ignore most of the rules and just roll some dice using arbitrary numbers that are close enough.

Of course, by the end of it you kind of wonder why you really need all those complex rules when you can run the game just fine ignoring most of them.

Well obviously you only do that when things go off the rails, and a skilled DM can in their head begin to actually making stats for the opposition in their head especially at lower levels and games where char gen can be fairly simple and fast like M&M where mooks can literally just have average attack and defense for their level and a blast or strike power and nobody will notice.

And of course you can purpose the characters you made ahead of time for the new adventure path.

I like Danger Patrol. But it's mechanics are literally bullshitting for bonuses, then rolling dice. It has no consistent setting, and is more railroady than any other game I have played. It's well balanced and a lot of fun, but open it ain't.

Fectin, how can Danger Patrol mechanics be "more railroady than any other game" if the very adventures the GM must conduct is informed by the players input through the rule "previously on Danger Patrol" ?

Its the exact opposite of a railroad.

silva wrote:Fectin, how can Danger Patrol mechanics be "more railroady than any other game" if the very adventures the GM must conduct is informed by the players input through the rule "previously on Danger Patrol" ?

Its the exact opposite of a railroad.

You answered your own question.

Nope.

Railroading: GM pushing his premade adventure down the players throats no matter what, rendering players input/choices irrelevant.

Danger Patrol: forcing the GM to improvise an adventure and situations on the spot through players input/choices.

Notice the difference ? Unless there is something Im not seeing here, Danger Patrol intended play is the exact opposite of a railroad, because it forces the plot to be created collectively by the group.

Have you actually played Danger Patrol?

darkmaster wrote: Well obviously you only do that when things go off the rails, and a skilled DM can in their head begin to actually making stats for the opposition in their head especially at lower levels and games where char gen can be fairly simple and fast like M&M where mooks can literally just have average attack and defense for their level and a blast or strike power and nobody will notice.

And of course you can purpose the characters you made ahead of time for the new adventure path.

M&M works great for improvising, mainly because you can partially create statblocks. You can choose a PL, then throw together an NPCs relevant combat stats in a few seconds as you go and still get a decent NPC. Then if skills become relevant later, you can do those up. Though most of this comes from the fact that there's no hard limit on the number of points a given NPC can use, so you don't have to worry about doing accounting as the GM.

fectin wrote:Have you actually played Danger Patrol?

No, but Ive read it and didnt find anything railroad-promoting any more than the average game (D&D, Gurps, Vampire, etc). Care to explain why its railroady in yout opinion ?

Cyberzombie wrote:

kzt wrote:You can also just fake it.

You don't really need stat blocks or skills, you just need some idea as to what capability they should have. You can't do this so much in super crunchy and totally variable systems like Champions, but you can grab another villain group and turn the fire guy into the ice guy. But you don't track damage on mooks, they are either fighting, running or down. They hit on a really good roll and don't on bad rolls, etc.

Yeah that's what the majority of DMs tend to do. Ignore most of the rules and just roll some dice using arbitrary numbers that are close enough.

Of course, by the end of it you kind of wonder why you really need all those complex rules when you can run the game just fine ignoring most of them.

That's a fair question, so I'll give you the answer.

You CAN just hand your players a few dice and just describe things happening, make them roll against some completely arbitrary DC, and then narrate what you think should happen. Literally, the previous line should be in quotes because it's the quickplay version of games like FATE, AW, or Danger Patrol once you get past the complicated dice mechanics and resource pools.

The problem is that you aren't playing a game any more. This means that people tend to feel as if their actions are essentially meaningless because the MC has chosen them. This is a true belief, BTW.

Games offer a sense of narrative control for the players. The player casting flesh to stone knows that the monster's save can only go so high, knows his rough chance of success, and knows that the DM won't arbitrarily make his spell not work because the game rules are a contract between the players and person running the game. The players get a specified amount of control, the DM is forced to improvise around that control in very specific ways, and people are less likely to get mad when the DM makes choices because they know that monsters and threats are generally in a range of numbers that they were informed about.

Certainly, there are dick DMs. They suddenly decide that the minotaur that you tried to petrify is wearing an anti-petrify amulet or has some crazy high saving throw, but this will cause players to balk. The contract of players and DMs is broken when things from outside the rules happen that also are not cool.

This is the risk that players take so that the DM can improvise rules and content in response to player actions. The DM could decide that the minotar BBEG getting petrified is actually a prophetic sign for a group of bull worshipers and have them be the villains for the next part of the adventure that he set up, and hopefully that's cool for the PCs and doesn't feel like a railroad. The PCs feel empowered that the minotaur is now stone as a direct result of PC action and not "I rolled a 6 to beat the threat (minotaur) and the DM decided that my wizard had a flesh to stone spell prepared and turned the minotaur to stone."

The TL;DR version is basically that objective rules feel like a game and subjective guidelines like the various "games" pretending to be "freeform" feel like public masturbation when you sit around doing them.

silva wrote:

fectin wrote:Have you actually played Danger Patrol?

No, but Ive read it and didnt find anything railroad-promoting any more than the average game (D&D, Gurps, Vampire, etc). Care to explain why its railroady in yout opinion ?

The MC determines all the threat, and determines where you will go and what you will do there. Further, all of the effects of player actions are completely mediated by the MC. It's much more like a railshooter than any other RPG I have played, read, or even heard of, and the fact that it supports an MC making things up on the fly does not give the players any more narrative control, nor any ability to affect the setting.

I like it because it's consistently fun. That is largely true because it is impossible to take seriously, and because your inputs don't matter beyond optimizing the 'press your luck" core gameplay, so it ends up being superhero themed improv comedy.

fectin wrote:The MC determines all the threat

Nope, only the starting one. The MC is obligated to accomodate the players ideas (threats, NPCs, mcguffins, etc) through their "Previously on Danger Patrol".

..and determines where you will go and what you will do there

I didnt read this. The game structure determines there will be a cycle with distinct phases ( Action -> Interlude -> Suspense -> Action -> Loop. ) but dont specify where and how in the game world those will be played out. At least thats my reading from it.

Further, all of the effects of player actions are completely mediated by the MC

There is a resolution mechanic in place, which consists of rolling dice and beating a number (usually 4), based on a mix of characters abilities and threats. So how is the game "completely mediated by the GM" ?

and the fact that it supports an MC making things up on the fly does not give the players any more narrative control, nor any ability to affect the setting.

In fact it does:

1. the adventure threats and other elements must come from the players "Previously on Danger Patrol" input.

2. the players can define by themselves (or with the help of the GM) what the Threats on the Suspense! phase actualy are, besides helping to frame the scenes themselves.

See below (emphasis mine):

Danger Patrol wrote: The GM will frame each question with a location and brief description before the Suspense scene starts. Players should feel free to offer suggestions
and say how their heroes get involved in the investigation (probably
following on from what they did during the Interludes).

You “fight” a question by performing investigation actions. You do
hits to the question until it’s defeated, just like a threat during an
action scene. When a question is defeated, it’s answered definitively
by the GM, the player who defeated it, or some combination (with
input from the other players as needed).

The fact the game has a clear procedural play structure dont mean it promotes a railroad, because such structure only works on a meta-game level (while in-game the story could flow freely to varied places and situations).

silva wrote:

fectin wrote:The MC determines all the threat

Nope, only the starting one. The MC is obligated to accomodate the players ideas (threats, NPCs, mcguffins, etc) through their "Previously on Danger Patrol".

Err. no. Even if the thing you said were true (it isn't) that wouldn't cause or prevent anything.

silva wrote:

..and determines where you will go and what you will do there

I didnt read this. The game structure determines there will be a cycle with distinct phases ( Action -> Interlude -> Suspense -> Action -> Loop. ) but dont specify where and how in the game world those will be played out. At least thats my reading from it.

...
I have no words. You think this is an argument?

silva wrote:

Further, all of the effects of player actions are completely mediated by the MC

There is a resolution mechanic in place, which consists of rolling dice and beating a number (usually 4), based on a mix of characters abilities and threats. So how is the game "completely mediated by the GM" ?

And what, exactly, do you think happens after you roll and beat or fail to beat a threat?

silva wrote:

and the fact that it supports an MC making things up on the fly does not give the players any more narrative control, nor any ability to affect the setting.

In fact it does:

1. the adventure threats and other elements must come from the players "Previously on Danger Patrol" input.

False.

silva wrote: 2. the players can define by themselves (or with the help of the GM) what the Threats on the Suspense! phase actualy are, besides helping to frame the scenes themselves.

Also false.

silva wrote: See below (emphasis mine):

Danger Patrol wrote: The GM will frame each question with a location and brief description before the Suspense scene starts. Players should feel free to offer suggestions
and say how their heroes get involved in the investigation (probably
following on from what they did during the Interludes).

See, this is why I asked you to define railroading. Apparently, all it takes to be not railroady, per your explicit example, is for players to be able to make suggestions.

Well, at least I can answer your original post now. Wikipedia has a convenient list: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ro ... es_by_name

silva wrote:

fectin wrote:The MC determines all the threat

Nope, only the starting one. The MC is obligated to accomodate the players ideas (threats, NPCs, mcguffins, etc) through their "Previously on Danger Patrol".

Point of order - this doesn't mean the game can't be railroady, just that the players get to pick a bunch of the stops. It seems like it would be hard to jump the tracks in the middle of a game (go do a different investigation), but also like that would be less of a concern because you got to pick them at the start.

TarkisFlux wrote:

silva wrote:

fectin wrote:The MC determines all the threat

Nope, only the starting one. The MC is obligated to accomodate the players ideas (threats, NPCs, mcguffins, etc) through their "Previously on Danger Patrol".

Point of order - this doesn't mean the game can't be railroady, just that the players get to pick a bunch of the stops. It seems like it would be hard to jump the tracks in the middle of a game (go do a different investigation), but also like that would be less of a concern because you got to pick them at the start.

You don't actually get to pick the stops. There's a bit of structured improv at the beginning, so the MC has time to make up a plot. Danger Patrol suggests that you steal any good ideas (much like other games suggest that you tie plot points to characters' backgrounds). As a player though, your "control" is just that you get to tell a funny story, not that it will affect anything.

fectin wrote: False.

It seems you are not finding the text in the book. Here, lemme help you..

Danger Patrol wrote:While the players are doing their “Previously On” narrations, the GM will be furiously taking notes. GM, it’s your job to work these elements into the upcoming episode in some way. They don’t all have to be in the first scene, but you should start to introduce some of them, with clues and leads that point to the others.

During the “Previously On,” sequence, the GM grabs an
index card and writes STYGIAN ADEPTS on it and puts it off
to the side. The players see it and know that the evil Stygians
are involved and waiting in the wings.

Another player creates the Anti-Robot League during his
“Previously On,” so the GM makes a card for them, too,
along with a location card (Ludd’s Bar) as a reminder to do
something with the League and the bar later.

This may seem challenging, but think of it this way: The players are
creating your threats and dangers for you! Just take a few notes and
you’ll end up with all the prep materials you need for the session.
Once all the players have done their “Previously Ons,” it’s time to
start the action scene....

Also false

Lemme help you again..

Danger Patrol wrote: When a question is defeated, it’s answered definitively
by the GM, the player who defeated it, or some combination (with
input from the other players as needed).

K wrote: You CAN just hand your players a few dice and just describe things happening, make them roll against some completely arbitrary DC, and then narrate what you think should happen. Literally, the previous line should be in quotes because it's the quickplay version of games like FATE, AW, or Danger Patrol once you get past the complicated dice mechanics and resource pools.

The problem is that you aren't playing a game any more. This means that people tend to feel as if their actions are essentially meaningless because the MC has chosen them. This is a true belief, BTW.

So long as there's some roll you can make to succeed and some roll to fail, I'm not sure it really matters actively where the numbers come from. For instance, the minotaur you try to petrify may have a will save of +6 or he may have a will save of +12. People will generally be okay with either of those options, as there's a number of ways a minotaur's will save could be different. So whether you arbitrarily decided he had a +12 will instead of officially calculating his will save to be +12 (via class levels, cloaks of resistance and Iron will), the PCs probably will never know, and most probably won't even care even if they did find out.

Ultimately the end result is that the minotaur has some will save bonus and you're going to roll it as you would any will save and live with the results. So the combat plays out exactly to the players as though the minotaur was built using an official statblock, only the ass-pulled stats method is way faster.

@K - Well, not entirely. Danger Patrol has a real game behind it. You roll some dice at a difficulty set by your health track, and apply successes at a thing on the board. Failures either cause more attacks or add more things to the board. You can arbitrarily add up to five d6s to a roll, and have a finite number of tickboxes that also add dice in ways that you can optimize. So there's a real and concrete game there, it just has no direct relation to the narrative: all problems are mechanically the same, and you solve them the same way. There's improv on top of that, but no matter what you end up playing press your luck, with a few more choices.

@silva - You already made it clear that you define any game where players can offer suggestions as "anti-railroading". That's a pretty worthless definition, but sure: Danger Patrol is anti-railroading by that standard.

edit:typos