Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - fuseboy

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
The Regiment / Re: The Regiment: Colonial Marines
« on: February 11, 2013, 02:50:40 PM »
Couple of wound questions for 2.5.

1. Can you get hurt in an already critically-wounded location?  (e.g. You're critical in the head. Later, getting shot while peeking around cover, you take a W from incidental fire. The head is the obvious spot to take your wound. Ignore it, or perhaps move it to some nearby location, Battletech-style, signifying system shock or further blood loss?)

2. When you miss a Critical+Wounds roll and take further damage, can you choose wounds or stress, or is your further injury of the same type as the critical?

3. For single shot weapons that happen to do multiple wounds (e.g. the railgun, close-range shotgun, bolt-action sniper rifle), seems to me you'd default to both the same box, critting immediately.  (This isn't really a question I guess!)

4. Regarding VOF and force party, if you have a group of players attacking the same enemy squad, do you use both the "Soldier vs. Group" rule and the "PC Team vs. Enemy" rule?  That would seem to make sense.

The Regiment / Re: The Regiment: Colonial Marines
« on: February 11, 2013, 02:10:29 PM »
Also, I'm offering $50,000 to whoever can hack John's PVR to queue up some WWII movies. :-)

The Regiment / Re: The Regiment: Colonial Marines
« on: February 11, 2013, 09:58:52 AM »
The one thing I'm not super fond of is the interaction between arbitrary wound location and the way that wounds stack up to become critical.

It strikes me that one of the nice things about VOF (or random damage in general) is that the GM imposes a plausible level of threat, about which the players can reason (e.g. "Dare I risk that random, unaimed fire to move up a bit further?"), but then dice determine the outcome.  The GM isn't being vindictive if the enemy scores an unlikely hit.

With arbitrary hit location, it seems that the GM is in the position of choosing critical wounds.

Somewhat separately, if people are having to stick out their necks to do battlefield assesses, do you get a lot of early head criticals?

The Regiment / Re: Tank vs. Tank
« on: February 08, 2013, 08:59:38 AM »
Thanks, Paul.

The Regiment / Tank vs. Tank
« on: February 08, 2013, 12:13:14 AM »
Tonight we were playing WWII regiment (2.1).  Our infantry platoon was being supported by a Sherman tank, under the instructions of our Officer player.  At one point, we squared off against a Panzer IV, and the anti-vehicle weapons were duly consulted.

It seems that medium tanks can't hurt one another on the front armor.  7d AP against armor 8 seems destined to do no damage.  We struggled with this for a while until deciding that some tank fire might be concentrated.

I'm not sure how a single-shot weapon becomes concentrated, I think it may have to do with aiming time.  (e.g. if you're hull down and stationary and a guy comes through a narrow defile, you'd be shooting concentrated).

Curious how this is usually handled.  (Maybe it's not, being an NPC-on-NPC action?)

blood & guts / Re: Playing in a setting with just one playbook?
« on: February 01, 2013, 09:12:12 AM »
"The Regiment" is like this if you play with the special forces playbook, 'The Operator'.  Operators.  Our characters felt very unique, but it was a one-shot, so there wasn't much advancement.  As I recall, too, at least one character was allowed a move out of another playbook.

brainstorming & development / Reasons to include a move
« on: January 30, 2013, 05:02:29 PM »
So, World of Dungeons is interesting because it only has one move.  As I dance around the edges of a first version of my own AW hack, a question has come to mind:

Given that I have a generic move, why would I include a more specific one?

I've come up with a few reasons so far; I'm interested in comments, your own reasons, etc.

1. Interesting failure/success options - the designer has a wonderful idea for particular kind of success or failure, and including it helps the game 'be about that'.  These might be insights into human behavior, combat, etc. - or they might be genre-appropriate turns of events.  ("On a 7-9, you shoot his hat off.")

2. Suggesting courses of action to the participants.  You might have a general move, but if your players are starting at the option to a) do something b) betray a friend or c) seduce an authority figure, it's clear you're playing a particular kind of tale.

3. Walling off areas of gameplay with fast pacing.  In The Regiment, there are downtime moves.  These neatly communicate that the game includes some downtime, but it isn't really about that - the moves you have are very coarse-grained and so have the effect of helping the game getting lost, waist-deep in camp politics between missions.  Nope - you roll your legwork move and you're back into battle.  Imagine a 'when you go to town to spend your loot' sort of move for a dungeon crawly game.

Similarly, moves give players license to refer to a move when they want accelerated pacing.  For example, if you want to 'launch a startup' and there's a move for that, that gives the participants a nudge you can do this with a certain amount of screen time - the GM might take the hint that she doesn't need to squeeze the players for justification of where they get their starting capital from.  You don't need to know anything about starting a business, you can just describe it in a handwavey kind of way, and the move gives you license for it to work out (or not).

(I think of the sex moves in AW as a fascinating combination of 2 and 3 - they bring sex into the game, but with such an accelerated pace that it can be mechanically/fictionally meaningful without having to describe zippers and orifices.)

4. Conversely, moves can slow down pacing, and zoom in the game.  Playing World of Dungeons, you could theoretically tackle a whole dungeon with a single move.  This is clearly not possible in Dungeon World, since there are moves that trigger on specific portions of dungeon tackling.

5. Nudging the conversation back into a particular fictional concern.  The moves in the Regiment set up a conversation about battlefield position and tactical advantage, despite the fact that these things have no mechanical effect (well, beyond gun range).  There's no movement rate, shooting bonuses from being up high, etc. - but the multiple references to these ideas cause the moves to keep bouncing the participants' conversation back to these topics.

I'd love to hear other thoughts on this.  (And it's dawning on me that there may be nineteen threads on this very topic.)

Yes, I think you're right, though I'm finding making a hack harder than I expected!  One reason is that moves have a built-in sense of pacing that you don't get in physics-focused games.  You make a lot of editorial decisions as a designer, decisions that (in GURPS, say) would be made by the GM in play.

The Regiment / Re: Neat way of handling artillery
« on: January 21, 2013, 08:57:19 AM »
If you do this, I think it's wise to practice a little. :-)  Our GM at one point missed the map entirely, which was a little anti-climactic.

Also, he gave us a chance to dodge when there was a direct hit, which is pretty important.  My sense is that the constant incidental fire in The Regiment is about ratcheting up the pressure as the players' resources (e.g. boxes) dwindle. But being hit right off the bat with a 10" shell would just .. suck.

The Regiment / Re: The Regiment: Colonial Marines
« on: January 16, 2013, 11:43:32 AM »
GM: You jump out of the landing craft onto the beach.  You hear the rattle of machine gun fire, and wads of wet sand are tossed into the air all around you.

PC: I shout at my men, telling them to get up that bloody beach as fast as possible.

GM: Sounds like a rally, to me.

PC: I roll 10, a hit.  [The benefits are noted.]

GM: Okay, as you're shouting.  The machine gun fire rakes your platoon.  Everyone take [rolls 3D6] two stress.  You're all suppressed.

The Regiment / Re: The Regiment: Colonial Marines
« on: January 16, 2013, 10:10:01 AM »
My advice would be this:

- Imagine and describe what the PCs are seeing and sensing.  Avoid thinking of it like a gridless, top-down strategy game.

- In battle, you never have as clear a picture of the battlefield as you'd like.  Call for Assess a lot.  Even if there's no facehugger hiding in the light fixture, making players ask for information reinforces the idea that - in the heat of things - the time to absorb the environment is a precious commodity, and comes at a cost.

- Don't be afraid to hurt them.  Grit, tough, death moves, bond stress, and the medic's whole playbook only come into play when PCs are taking damage.  The game hits its stride when characters are being chewed up and spit out.

The Regiment / Re: The Regiment: Colonial Marines
« on: January 12, 2013, 01:18:26 PM »
A few questions/comments.

1. I take it you intend to publish a WWII themed 2.2 as well?  Even so, I'd love to see a change log of the base mechanical differences.  It looks like healing has changed a bit, and I think VOF text has been consolidated somewhat.  I'm intrigued by the 'second character' advancement option!

2. Will you still be able to publish Aliens-themed stuff once you start selling?  (Like, do the copyright gnolls start getting antsy?)

3. I would love love love a few nods in the direction of more setting-neutral sci-fi.  Colonial marines trying to hold off the surprisingly well armed martian settlers until they can repair their downed dropship would be a blast.  I think a couple more weapons and vehicles would be enough - perhaps something lasery just for lasers' sake.  (Man-portable recon drones, target designation lasers, a few goofy nonlethal options.)

4. Smartguns are awesome.  I love the IFF tag!  (Does the IFF work with xenos, give their thermal invisibility?)

5. As soon as I saw the Dropship, I thought of crash damage!  (Occurs to me a simple way of doing it would be for each vehicle to have a crash weapon that it inflicts on itself - obviously dropships are going to suffer horribly in a crash, while tanks that can barely hit 50 kph are going to fare a little differently.)

The Regiment / Re: The Regiment: Colonial Marines
« on: January 11, 2013, 09:02:29 PM »

The Regiment / Untrained Explosives
« on: January 11, 2013, 11:31:56 AM »
It's come up a few times now that we've wanted to use explosives to blow something up.

We have a Commando, but he doesn't have the 'Explosives Expert' move.

Satchel charges are listed as weapons, which makes it look like the untrained can use them (at least for the purposes of hurting people or vehicles with damage dice, since no other weapons seem to require special training).

a) Combat Action +lucky (this seems the obvious choice, but we didn't think of it during the session)

b) You cannot make explosives detonate without that move

c) You can detonate explosives just fine, but they won't take down structures, only hurt vehicles or people as per the weapon damage rules

d) Oh, that's an oversight

The Regiment / Re: XP for failing to help someone in trouble
« on: January 11, 2013, 11:24:01 AM »
That seems a good way of doing it.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4