Modern & "Realistic"

[RDU Neil]

Any of you folks out there watching "24" or "The Shield?"

How about movies like Gene Hackman's "The Package" or more recently "Narc" or slightly over the top "The Bourne Identity"

This style of adventure... realistic, violent, suspenseful... all about grit and guns and terrorism and espionage... does anyone play these kind of campaigns... or even mini-campaigns or one shots?

See... I love this kind of game. No superheroics, no "cinematic" action... real world laws and concerns... characaters who logically DON'T want to get shot at... weapons are deadly... etc. I think I'm alone in loving this level of game.

Everyone else I know, and all the posts on these boards, are all about larger than life Player Charcters, magic, super powers, etc. I like this stuff, too, but I miss the days of "Danger International" if you folks remember that old Hero System product from the '80s. Some of the greatest adventures I've ever run, or been involved in, were like a good cop drama or suspense film, and NOT a comic book or Action movie.

I guess I just wonder if anyone out there is playing this kind of game at all. I really miss it.

[Monolith]

I run an occasional game titled: Seal Team 1. The game is really only designed to be played for a specific mission (2-3 sessions) but it is always a lot of fun.

The problem with "real life" adventures is that characters can die fairly quickly. One lucky hit to the head and it's bye-bye Sgt Rock. Because you are making them the way you want them, HERO System characters can take a long time to make, so when the character gets killed by a lucky shot within the first hour the game the players can become discouraged.

Personally I think realistic styles of games are either better for convention games, where the player does not really care if the character gets killed, or better for systems like d20 where as much effort is not put into the character creation; and thus it is easier to build a new character as each is killed off.

I am not exactly looking forward to a new Danger International. Personally I do not think there is enough demand in the market for those styles of games any longer. I think it would be better for Hero Games to focus its efforts into a Super Agents game. I think the mixing of normal and superhuman has a greater uniqueness and a larger interest for most gamers.

[ZootSoot]

Originally posted by RDU Neil
Any of you folks out there watching "24" or "The Shield?"

How about movies like Gene Hackman's "The Package" or more recently "Narc" or slightly over the top "The Bourne Identity"

This style of adventure... realistic, violent, suspenseful... all about grit and guns and terrorism and espionage... does anyone play these kind of campaigns... or even mini-campaigns or one shots?

See... I love this kind of game. No superheroics, no "cinematic" action... real world laws and concerns... characaters who logically DON'T want to get shot at... weapons are deadly... etc. I think I'm alone in loving this level of game.

Everyone else I know, and all the posts on these boards, are all about larger than life Player Charcters, magic, super powers, etc. I like this stuff, too, but I miss the days of "Danger International" if you folks remember that old Hero System product from the '80s. Some of the greatest adventures I've ever run, or been involved in, were like a good cop drama or suspense film, and NOT a comic book or Action movie.

I guess I just wonder if anyone out there is playing this kind of game at all. I really miss it.

I don't think any of those movies could be considered realistic. Something like Far From Heaven might be realistic (except that the black lead looks like he is about to duck into a phone booth and come out in a cape . . .). Your choices are "dark and gritty" not "realistic" which can be fun as long as your players aren't sulky about death, disability and defeat.

[RDU Neil]

Originally posted by Monolith
I run an occasional game titled: Seal Team 1. The game is really only designed to be played for a specific mission (2-3 sessions) but it is always a lot of fun.

The problem with "real life" adventures is that characters can die fairly quickly. One lucky hit to the head and it's bye-bye Sgt Rock. Because you are making them the way you want them, HERO System characters can take a long time to make, so when the character gets killed by a lucky shot within the first hour the game the players can become discouraged.

Personally I think realistic styles of games are either better for convention games, where the player does not really care if the character gets killed, or better for systems like d20 where as much effort is not put into the character creation; and thus it is easier to build a new character as each is killed off.

I am not exactly looking forward to a new Danger International. Personally I do not think there is enough demand in the market for those styles of games any longer. I think it would be better for Hero Games to focus its efforts into a Super Agents game. I think the mixing of normal and superhuman has a greater uniqueness and a larger interest for most gamers.

I totally agree that a "campaign" of Danger International is very hard to maintain. Characters die or get badly hurt, paralyzed, or other retire... so one shot games, or mini-campaigns... two or three episodes... are best.

I think this reason... more than possible death of a character... keeps players away. So many players want to develop a character to the nth degree. They want to play a character forever... which I've never understood. I like to play a character, until they fulfill their mission/objective... or die trying... but after that, eh... what's next. The idea of playing a character every week, over and over... really gets boring to me. Probably why I GM most of the time... so I can enjoy world building, plots, and lots of other characters, rather than just one.

Superheroics and other "larger than life" character concepts, allow for players to justify their character living through weekly life or death battles. When you start leaning toward a more realistic level of game, verisimilitude is quickly lost, if players cheat death every week.

[RDU Neil]

Originally posted by ZootSoot
I don't think any of those movies could be considered realistic. Something like Far From Heaven might be realistic (except that the black lead looks like he is about to duck into a phone booth and come out in a cape . . .). Your choices are "dark and gritty" not "realistic" which can be fun as long as your players aren't sulky about death, disability and defeat.

I pute "realistic" in quotes for a reason. If you want realism, you don't game. Just live your boring, no guns and violence life.

As for "gritty" well, that is feel over content, ususally. A superhero campaign can be very "gritty" with lots of blood and death. I'm more talking about a more normal human level of game... whether or not death happens. Yes, "24" isn't realistic in that death defying events happen every hour, and Jack lives through them all... but individually, no one event is beyond probability. There's no hanging from chandeliers, or ice palaces, or laser death beams, or battles in gadget laden cars, like in the latest Bond film. I've had old Danger International adventures that were far from gritty, and were funny, goofy... and violence was running from a barfight in order to not get busted by the cops. I don't know how else to describe this 'closer to normal' level of game than "realistic"... even though I know it's not really realistic.

[archermoo]

One of the most enjoyable campaigns I've ever played in was a military campaign run in the same world as a superheroic campaign that all of the players were also involved in. The characters were low powered, and death was a real possibility. Every player had several characters, and every time we played one or more of each player's characters would get chosen for the current mission. We'd arm up and head out, and if one of your characters bought it, it sucked but you had others already made so you could keep playing. It was a great deal of fun, although it could also be very violent.

[RDU Neil]

Originally posted by archermoo
One of the most enjoyable campaigns I've ever played in was a military campaign run in the same world as a superheroic campaign that all of the players were also involved in. The characters were low powered, and death was a real possibility. Every player had several characters, and every time we played one or more of each player's characters would get chosen for the current mission. We'd arm up and head out, and if one of your characters bought it, it sucked but you had others already made so you could keep playing. It was a great deal of fun, although it could also be very violent.

This kind of campaign is actually my favorite style of superheroic campaign. Wild stuff exists... but the PCs have to be much more normal. This kind of campaign I can get people to play in, because it is more wild... less "realistic" because of the setting, and you can justify high "luck" powers and the like to keep your characters alive... though death does happen.

I guess it's just hard to find folks who want to play in the "real world." LIke I'd much rather watch Law & Order than go see the Daredevil movie (though I'll do both) I'd much rather play a normal private detective, ex-military type or new photographer... rather than a superhero.

Just a matter of taste, I guess. :cool:

[Herolover]

I like something in betwween. I want usually go with dark and gritty where the character realize that they are in great danger, but where actual death is seldom. Injury on the other hand can really put a character down for a while.

[allen]

Originally posted by RDU Neil
I totally agree that a "campaign" of Danger International is very hard to maintain. Characters die or get badly hurt, paralyzed, or other retire... so one shot games, or mini-campaigns... two or three episodes... are best.


I've always felt that they way around the problem is a shift in storytelling...

Most RPGs emphasize the PCs. The PCs are central to the campaign and individual sessions comprising the campaign. PCs develop, have goals, work to achieve those goals, etc.

If the focus were shifted to the organization, to which the PCs belonged, PC death or disability would not nearly be so damaging to the campaign. The organization develops, has goals, works to achieve those goals. The death of a PC would not end the organization, but could conceivable further its goals, and so (hopefully!) the player would be satisfied with that, rather than disappointed by the death of his character.

I mean you'd have to interest the players in the organization enough, that they were willing to perceive (and role-play accordingly) their characters as primarily a means of furthering the organization's story. In essence: that the campaign isn't about John Doe, international man of mystery, but about the organization John Doe belongs to.

Most important though, you'd have to intrigue the players with the story told about the organization in order to hold their attention.

And, of course, this is all hypothetical... I've never put it into practice, so take it for what it's worth. I think players, who could divorce themselves enough from a character to make it work, are in the minority.

[misterdeath]

I used to run Pacesetter Chill. Great game, but the main point that I'm going to make here is that allen's right.

Make the organization the focus. In Chill, that was SAVE. The organization gathered the PCs together, and sent them out on monster hunting missions. I was a kind GM, and only had 50% casualties. The GM that introduced the game to me had a 85%.

And, we loved it. My character may well have gotten put into a coma, but I gained the piece of information necessary for Dave's character to kill the beastie by burning the house down. Next time, Keith's character got his head turned around backwards, but I managed to stake the vampire while she was distracted. Teamwork and the overall mission were the focuses of the campaign. Not individual PCs.

However, it requires having Players that aren't Plumbers. Ones that can make throwaway characters, and not devote a 20 page background and 2 days of tweaking numbers to creating the Ultimate Monster Hunter.

Because one lucky shot, the GM picks up every dice he owns, drops them on the table and says, "you take some damage."

And it blows to have spend many days devoting yourself to crafting a piece of artwork and watching it get mangled like a Red Shirt on classic Trek.

D

[Agent Escafarc]

Originally posted by misterdeath
I used to run Pacesetter Chill. Great game, but the main point that I'm going to make here is that allen's right.


D

Man! Chill was a great game. Some of the best production values of any game company. Great writing, artwork, and layout! Too bad I could never get my group to play:(

[Tyrant]

Actually,
one game I ran using the 4th ed Champions was an adaptation of the Millenium's End game.

The Pc's are a operative cell for a private security and investigation firm. i.e: They took contracts from all sorts of clients and dealt with all kinds of situations.

Missing persons cases involving the underground LA porn industry, kidnap victims being rescued from rebel camps in the jungles of Colombia, exposing neo-nazi buisness men in league with war criminals from the Balkans war...

And when everyone wanted to dirty their hands some, I had the Pc's accept a contract to kill a Thai heroin baron on behalf of a rival.

It is still a commonly requested game from my players.

Tyrant.

[archermoo]

Originally posted by RDU Neil
This kind of campaign is actually my favorite style of superheroic campaign. Wild stuff exists... but the PCs have to be much more normal. This kind of campaign I can get people to play in, because it is more wild... less "realistic" because of the setting, and you can justify high "luck" powers and the like to keep your characters alive... though death does happen.

I guess it's just hard to find folks who want to play in the "real world." LIke I'd much rather watch Law & Order than go see the Daredevil movie (though I'll do both) I'd much rather play a normal private detective, ex-military type or new photographer... rather than a superhero.

Just a matter of taste, I guess. :cool:

The characters in the military campaign weren't super-powered at all. We were normals with stuff. Super powers existed, and a lot of the missions we went on were dealing with super-powered bad guys, but there weren't any supers on the teams.

Probably my favourite character could, if he pushed his strength, use what were effectivly 2 M-60s, one in each arm. He took STUN from doing it, but laid waste to the opposition while doing so. :) He very nearly died one mission, but was saved by one of his teammates rolling a 3 on their paramedics roll. Kept him from bleeding out before the evac chopper could show up.

[Just Joe]

As a player and as a GM, I prefer games which are both lower powered and more realistic than the vast majority out there. This includes my "fantasy hero" games, which take place in a fictional and somewhat fantastic world, but which sometimes have little or no magic. When something magical does come along, it really stands out.

A partial solution to the problem of PC's dying too easily is to deemphasize violence. I am not talking about Smurfworld here. There can be plenty of drama and conflict with the constant threat of violence but little actual violence.

I want to clarify that the games I like are RELATIVELY realistic, as compared to most RPG campaigns, not compared to our everyday lives. Furthermore, I am not arguing for the superiority of such games. I am just stating my personal preference and offering suggestions for others with similar preferences.

[Agent X]

I would love to play those plot intensive games again. I'm just too busy with my career and being a Family Man anymore. What I love about High Fantasy and Superheroes is that the plots are grand and simple and easy to concoct while still being entertaining.

[Toadmaster]

Originally posted by RDU Neil
Any of you folks out there watching "24" or "The Shield?"

How about movies like Gene Hackman's "The Package" or more recently "Narc" or slightly over the top "The Bourne Identity"

This style of adventure... realistic, violent, suspenseful... all about grit and guns and terrorism and espionage... does anyone play these kind of campaigns... or even mini-campaigns or one shots?

See... I love this kind of game. No superheroics, no "cinematic" action... real world laws and concerns... characaters who logically DON'T want to get shot at... weapons are deadly... etc. I think I'm alone in loving this level of game.

Everyone else I know, and all the posts on these boards, are all about larger than life Player Charcters, magic, super powers, etc. I like this stuff, too, but I miss the days of "Danger International" if you folks remember that old Hero System product from the '80s. Some of the greatest adventures I've ever run, or been involved in, were like a good cop drama or suspense film, and NOT a comic book or Action movie.

I guess I just wonder if anyone out there is playing this kind of game at all. I really miss it.

DI was my favorite, ok maybe a tie with Justice Inc but I count "modern realistic" games as my favorite, followed closely by fantasy. I've noticed the same thing "modern realistic" to many equals why play a game go to work theres your realistic game. I used DI, JI and 4th Ed. to play Morrow Project, Aftermath, twilight 2000 (I kinda like Post Apacalypse games), a short merc campaign, a counter terrorist campaign, a couple of espionage games, Call of Cthulhu, Stalking the night fantastic (horror) and a brief multi-dimensional game. I've been working on some WW2 material and was hoping to run a one shot Normandy game at the Dundracon (a starter for a campaign) but haven't progressed far enough yet to do it this year. HERO works quite well for "modern realistic", I also used the Armory which offered many extra nasty weapons, never had that much trouble with killing players, and I used most of the optional rules, HERO characters are pretty tough, sure one dies here and there but for the most part I didn't find HERO to deadly for modern games, GURPS was much worse for death tolls. Personnally I find HERO works very well for these games. Its not just these boards, i've found many gamers have a snobbery against these types of games as unworthy of being RPG's and many on these boards will argue that HERO is terrible for them, don't believe it.

[Mutant for Hire]

Two words: Combat Luck

I would say that James Bond has a huge amount of that, in order to survive all those explosions and gunfights. That can help keep the characters alive for a prolonged campaign without necessarily ruining the feel of the genre.

[RDU Neil]

... to see I'm not the only one who likes this "more realistic" style of game. :D

My players have no problem with gritty, but they do want to be "larger than life" and their characters are the prime focus, not the organization. That's fine, and I run a very complex superworld that is very satisfying.

I guess I just miss the private detectives and ex-Green Berets, trying to stop terrorists, or lying gut shot in a back alley when things go wrong. Players who play "normal people in extraordinary circumstances" rather than "extraordinary people."

Not something I want ALL the time, but would like to play some it some times. Do love the idea of focusing ont he "agency" and not the "agent" but I'm not sure if my players would like that.

Again, all a matter of personal preference... not saying one game is better than another.

[allen]

Originally posted by RDU Neil

Not something I want ALL the time, but would like to play some it some times. Do love the idea of focusing ont he "agency" and not the "agent" but I'm not sure if my players would like that.


Agency is a better word for it than organization...

And, yeah, I've known individual players that would enjoy such a game, but never a whole group of them... I have thought that if I allowed the players to develop the agency, decide its goals, put them in charge of divisions and departments, make up parts of its background, they would "displace" their attachment to the characters to the agency itself -- kind of throw a bone to the plumbers out there -- but eh...

Someday, when I'm in the retirement home, I'll have a captive audience (haha) and run this game, but until then I'm afraid it's not likely...

allen

[RDU Neil]

Originally posted by allen
I have thought that if I allowed the players to develop the agency, decide its goals, put them in charge of divisions and departments, make up parts of its background, they would "displace" their attachment to the characters to the agency itself -- kind of throw a bone to the plumbers out there -- but eh...

allen

I should give props to Storn Cook, who pulled off a similar concept, but in Fantasy Hero (and his own system) rather than modern day. He basically took our "ragtag adventurer" types, and, having built a fantasy world based on Forgotten Realms... gave us political/royal power. My character was made a Duke of a small town... based on my adventures and some precog powers that had conviced the queen the importance of this small area of her kingdom. The other players became my advisors and generals... often doing much more of the adventuring than I did. We all had multiple characters, as our main guys became stay at home and administer types, and others became the adventurers, soliders, explorers. This worked really well, as we could lose characters to battle, without the campaign itself ending.

Even though the campaign petered out after a few years, for a number of reasons, it still has to be one of the two strongest fantasy campaigns I've participated in.

[Nelijal]

I would add Ronin to the list of movies that reflect the Modern & Realistic idea. Unlike 007, who is always above local law enforcement (especially in the Deep South), the characters in Ronin actually have to run when the police show up. And, holy snikeys, the police actually do show up just a couple of minutes after a firefight starts. What a concept.

[RDU Neil]

Originally posted by Nelijal
I would add Ronin to the list of movies that reflect the Modern & Realistic idea. Unlike 007, who is always above local law enforcement (especially in the Deep South), the characters in Ronin actually have to run when the police show up. And, holy snikeys, the police actually do show up just a couple of minutes after a firefight starts. What a concept.

Thank you for reminding me. Heck... I own the movie.

LOVE the movie Ronin. :cool:

Other movies that make for good, "more realistic" style adventures.

China Town
Any of the Godfather movies.
The Bodyguard (yes, cheesy as it may sound, it's a solid DI adventure)
To Live & Die In LA (heck, the main PC bites it half way through the movie!)
Man On Fire
Platoon
Year of the Dragon
Heat and Manhunter from Michael Mann
Serpico
Taxi Driver

from TV, the old Edward Woodward show, "The Equalizer" (loved that show)
the new Michael Mann show, "Robbery Homicide"

ahhh... I really want to play DI again, darnit

[Storn]

Originally posted by RDU Neil
... to see I'm not the only one who likes this "more realistic" style of game. :D

My players have no problem with gritty, but they do want to be "larger than life" and their characters are the prime focus, not the organization. That's fine, and I run a very complex superworld that is very satisfying.

I guess I just miss the private detectives and ex-Green Berets, trying to stop terrorists, or lying gut shot in a back alley when things go wrong. Players who play "normal people in extraordinary circumstances" rather than "extraordinary people."

Not something I want ALL the time, but would like to play some it some times. Do love the idea of focusing ont he "agency" and not the "agent" but I'm not sure if my players would like that.

Again, all a matter of personal preference... not saying one game is better than another.

Neil, I think you are misinterperting at least one of your players. Me. I cut my teeth on the Hero system thru Danger International. It was the game of choice for several years. I LOVE D.I. style games (as I enjoyed your cyberpunk games too). I preferred Top Secret to D&D any day of the week before D.I. I love lethal combat systems, it plays to my strenght as a tactician.

My major problem with D.I., besides the high mortality rate issue( the cyberpunk game grounded to a halt after my ex-leionairre took a bullet thru the skull, but for the record, I don't mind high mortality if I know tha t is to be that kinda game.), it that it is set in the real world. Sounds contridictory doesn't it?

But what I mean is that the PCs by the very nature are going to be involved in some pretty amazing adventures, even if they are more "realistic" than Dark Champions or Fantasy games. Three deaths in a gunbattle in a city even like NYC is going to stir the waters... and I've seen D.I. games hand out casualties of much higher numbers. So it is hard to sustain the sense of disbelief... that these PCs are operating in a shadowy world.

Lastly, I simply prefers Spies and Internat'l Mercenaries to Private Eyes and Cops. I just like that canvas to tell stories better. But the problem with a Spy, is that one Spy at the right place can change the path of history. It might not be evident up close in the game, but can easily happen. So, again, the sense of disbelief, for me, gets challenged. If the solution calls for teh taking out of the French Prime Minister... and it happens...boom, we are no longer gaming in the real world. WE are gaming in an alternate history. which, for some reason, bothers me a bit. Yet being constrained to nothing to change the world bothers me as well.

And this can happen in a Chicago based P.I. game too. PCs mess up and the L gets bombed. Well, that has an enormous impact on the city of Chicago. Economic, folks trying to get to work... we address that in the game....boom... alternate history time.

Which is why I prefer something like cyberpunk. You can do all the tropes of D.I., but there is a bit more flexibility. We can whack the Prez of the US if the story takes us there. If Mexico needs to be the shining star of the future, with very little corruption and democratic society...boom... it can be so.

But to say that I'm not interested in a game like that... well...that just ain't so.

The real problem you have is that RDU is the 800 lb gorilla. The demand for playing that campaign is paramount. Not only fromt he players, but from yourself. You have stated on these boards that you are a continuity freak. Well. RDU is the haven of continuity. It has been going on for a long time. It is very seductuve with its width and breath and scope. It is the reason that I'm running a spy campaign. Yet it is set in RDU and it is superheroes.

I think for a D.I. game to succeed, it would have to be entirely removed from RDU, completely and utterly. It is not D.I. with supers or psionics or even low level Talents.

[AGLAR]

Originally posted by RDU Neil
I totally agree that a "campaign" of Danger International is very hard to maintain. Characters die or get badly hurt, paralyzed, or other retire... so one shot games, or mini-campaigns... two or three episodes... are best.

I think this reason... more than possible death of a character... keeps players away. So many players want to develop a character to the nth degree. They want to play a character forever... which I've never understood. I like to play a character, until they fulfill their mission/objective... or die trying... but after that, eh... what's next. The idea of playing a character every week, over and over... really gets boring to me. Probably why I GM most of the time... so I can enjoy world building, plots, and lots of other characters, rather than just one.

Superheroics and other "larger than life" character concepts, allow for players to justify their character living through weekly life or death battles. When you start leaning toward a more realistic level of game, verisimilitude is quickly lost, if players cheat death every week.

YES!!! I wholeheartedly agree!!!

[Bloodshot]

Originally posted by AGLAR
YES!!! I wholeheartedly agree!!!

I'm facing a similar problem in the new steampunk game that I'm running. For so long I've run Champions games, where one shot doesn't necessarily take a guy out. We had a fight with one PC and two NPC's against a dinosaur (don't ask), and the dino (a 8-foot tall velociraptor type) could kill a human with one chomp.

So, I pulled a few strings during the game to avoid the PC losing his left leg and right arm (using hit locations). It's made me realize that I need to pay closer attention to what the creatures they encounter can do. Not to mention that I need to re-read the 5E combat rules to see what I'm missing and what optional rules could be of use.

[Toadmaster]

Originally posted by Storn
Neil, I think you are misinterperting at least one of your players. Me. I cut my teeth on the Hero system thru Danger International. It was the game of choice for several years. I LOVE D.I. style games (as I enjoyed your cyberpunk games too). I preferred Top Secret to D&D any day of the week before D.I. I love lethal combat systems, it plays to my strenght as a tactician.

My major problem with D.I., besides the high mortality rate issue( the cyberpunk game grounded to a halt after my ex-leionairre took a bullet thru the skull, but for the record, I don't mind high mortality if I know tha t is to be that kinda game.), it that it is set in the real world. Sounds contridictory doesn't it?

But what I mean is that the PCs by the very nature are going to be involved in some pretty amazing adventures, even if they are more "realistic" than Dark Champions or Fantasy games. Three deaths in a gunbattle in a city even like NYC is going to stir the waters... and I've seen D.I. games hand out casualties of much higher numbers. So it is hard to sustain the sense of disbelief... that these PCs are operating in a shadowy world.

Lastly, I simply prefers Spies and Internat'l Mercenaries to Private Eyes and Cops. I just like that canvas to tell stories better. But the problem with a Spy, is that one Spy at the right place can change the path of history. It might not be evident up close in the game, but can easily happen. So, again, the sense of disbelief, for me, gets challenged. If the solution calls for teh taking out of the French Prime Minister... and it happens...boom, we are no longer gaming in the real world. WE are gaming in an alternate history. which, for some reason, bothers me a bit. Yet being constrained to nothing to change the world bothers me as well.

And this can happen in a Chicago based P.I. game too. PCs mess up and the L gets bombed. Well, that has an enormous impact on the city of Chicago. Economic, folks trying to get to work... we address that in the game....boom... alternate history time.

Which is why I prefer something like cyberpunk. You can do all the tropes of D.I., but there is a bit more flexibility. We can whack the Prez of the US if the story takes us there. If Mexico needs to be the shining star of the future, with very little corruption and democratic society...boom... it can be so.

But to say that I'm not interested in a game like that... well...that just ain't so.

The real problem you have is that RDU is the 800 lb gorilla. The demand for playing that campaign is paramount. Not only fromt he players, but from yourself. You have stated on these boards that you are a continuity freak. Well. RDU is the haven of continuity. It has been going on for a long time. It is very seductuve with its width and breath and scope. It is the reason that I'm running a spy campaign. Yet it is set in RDU and it is superheroes.

I think for a D.I. game to succeed, it would have to be entirely removed from RDU, completely and utterly. It is not D.I. with supers or psionics or even low level Talents.

I understand where you are coming from in the ability to disbelieve and I agree that this is a problem if you expect the game world to reflect tommorrows headlines, but assuming you start with the world as it is today and accept that from this point forward it is no longer identical to tommorrow I don't see the problem, on Sept 10th an airliner crashing into the world trade center was outlandish fantasy, now not so much. Assassination of a national leader? depending on the theorys this has happend many times, several Soviet leaders died mysteriously, there were attempts of DeGaul and our own JFK and Reagan. Sure these are wriiten off as kooks or in the Soviets case Colds, but if you allow the conspiracy theories a little more acceptance then a shadowy world protected from the outside by plants in the press and government make this far more acceptable. I don't see how you can enjoy any RPG's from the argument you give (suspension of disbelief) perhaps I am missing your point.

[Storn]

Originally posted by Toadmaster
I acceptable. I don't see how you can enjoy any RPG's from the argument you give (suspension of disbelief) perhaps I am missing your point.

It is a matter of degrees and balance to be sure.

Ok, if the PCs commit several killings over the course of 3 or 4 adventures...not out of bounds for such a campaign... "Realistically":"
1) hauled into court. 2) demoted, 3) Promoted. 4) In therapy and on "rest" 5) dead. and probably a bunch of other "likely" happenings to curtail or make difficult the ability of that PC to continue "adventuring"...or in modern terms, being nuts enough to put oneself in harms way.

So it is tough, like Neil said, to get a game past 3 evenings.

Yes, shadowy organizations can "cover" things up. Or the adventures and violence have to happen in such a way that is SO -below the radar.

I'm not saying I don't like these games or have no imagination... if you knew me you would know quite to the contrary. Its just that I see problems in running them. And I've had experience running them. They are very hard in some respects. Partly because of "realistic" tendencies of the players in those sitiuations. Neil knows this about me, I get into a DI situation, and it looks hoary... I call the cops. If its corruption and scandal.. I call the Washington Post. Those are realistic reactions. But they tend to rip the adventure away from the player characters.

So its very hard to build a situation w/o railroading the players that they are motivated to 1) not call the cops. 2) still put their lives on the line. 3) role play as realistically as possible (fear, not want to die, come to mind), (Jason Bourne is a kick-ass assassin...but the dude is scared a bit after those fights. He doesn't want to die and the crux of the character is he is scared by himself). 4) keep the body=count low enough to have adventures, but not cause massacres. 5) Do not use the media. 6) Avoid some obvious cliches; "you are stuck in a building with terrorists trying to get the hoozi-whatsits-macguffin". 7) the missions need to have emotional resonance. Playing Seal team 6 on varied missions becomes a wargame and not role-playing without personal involvement. I've done a lot of military campaigns... they all can really easily suffer from lack of personality. Who has time to talk about feelings when some mortar shells are landing all around you?

This is all a tightrope. Not that I dislike it.

Lastly, I would LOVE to play in a game like that. I just am not wild about running it. I think Neil has the same feelings. He wants to run in it, but not necessarily play in it.

[Law Dog]

Originally posted by misterdeath


Make the organization the focus. In Chill, that was SAVE. The organization gathered the PCs together, and sent them out on monster hunting missions. I was a kind GM, and only had 50% casualties. The GM that introduced the game to me had a 85%.

And, we loved it. My character may well have gotten put into a coma, but I gained the piece of information necessary for Dave's character to kill the beastie by burning the house down. Next time, Keith's character got his head turned around backwards, but I managed to stake the vampire while she was distracted. Teamwork and the overall mission were the focuses of the campaign. Not individual PCs.


D

Not a bad idea, Mister Death, but it is so contrary to why most people are playing RPG's. Most people what to do neat things and make witty quips and then get mad/disappointed/unenthused when something happens to their character. Even in most fiction we read and watch, we are usually more interested in the character than the organization/group.

Case in point - Sliders. When the original four were there, it was a wonderful show, but every time they lost somebody, the show became worse. That last season was a damned joke. I mean, I watched it because I still liked Remmie, but I wasn't real interest in the rest of the show anymore.

If you have too high of a turnover (character, not player) in any campaign, it starts changing everything.

[Toadmaster]

Ok, now I see where you are coming from, haven't had the problem you describe but I can understand where the problems could arise.

[AGLAR]

I have a big problem with the illusion of lethality. DnD is the most flagrant offender, IMO.

"Look at our cool game! Fireballs, lightning bolts, meteor swarms oh my! Tremendous power in the hands of characters!! Size 15EEEE 'wow' factor!!"

Only one little problem...

The game is built to prevent the death of mid to high level characters. There is an illusion that death awaits your character around every corner, but wishes, resurrection, raise dead, blah, blah, blah ad nauseum make this a sham.

There can be no real victory, if defeat was never really possible! My character is not truly in great danger if a party member can cast a spell negating death. It just rings hollow. :(

Now, in a Hero game without that new/improved regeneration or major transform, etc. DEATH is possible. Victories are pure, without that "rigged" feel.

Sure, a more realistic game means creating a new character far more often. A significant amount of work in Hero's case. The tradeoff is that you really FEAR combat. You don't hack/slash everything in sight because the cleric can bring you back from the dead. You pick fights carefully, knowing that the enemy could get a lucky hit every time he swings that sword or shoots that .357mag. I think that more pure roleplaying ensues when the object isn't to slaughter everything that moves.

Just my 2-cents, sorry for the sermon.

[Yamo]

I love low-powered and realistic HERO! It is virtually unheard of for anyone in one of my campaigns to be allowed to build a character on more than 25+25.

I also really wish that more published HERO products would take a step back from the "kewl powerz r00l, d00d!" philosophy and provide a decent treatment of gritty, realistic campaigning.

I feel that the system in general is being shortchanged somewhat by the 5th edition product line neglecting this aspect entirely thus far.

So Steve & company: More grit, less glitz, please!

[Storn]

Originally posted by AGLAR




There can be no real victory, if defeat was never really possible! My character is not truly in great danger if a party member can cast a spell negating death. It just rings hollow. :(

Now, in a Hero game without that new/improved regeneration or major transform, etc. DEATH is possible. Victories are pure, without that "rigged" feel.

Sure, a more realistic game means creating a new character far more often. A significant amount of work in Hero's case. The tradeoff is that you really FEAR combat. You don't hack/slash everything in sight because the cleric can bring you back from the dead. You pick fights carefully, knowing that the enemy could get a lucky hit every time he swings that sword or shoots that .357mag. I think that more pure roleplaying ensues when the object isn't to slaughter everything that moves.

Just my 2-cents, sorry for the sermon.

I wholeheartedly agree.

Even in Champions, I've been worried about my characters death...and the odds of that happening are pretty low. Yet, it has happened.

But at heroic level, with hit location? You better believe my character is going to be worried about death!!!!! One shot to the head and you are checking out of the combat, maybe the whole enchilada!

Or you can die from multiple wounds, which is damn easy to happen at heroic level.

But like Call of Cthulhu, death is at your shoulder, the intensity of the game experience and the actual role-playing seems to go up for me.

[Storn]

Originally posted by Yamo
I love low-powered and realistic HERO! It is virtually unheard of for anyone in one of my campaigns to be allowed to build a character on more than 25+25.

I also really wish that more published HERO products would take a step back from the "kewl powerz r00l, d00d!" philosophy and provide a decent treatment of gritty, realistic campaigning.

I feel that the system in general is being shortchanged somewhat by the 5th edition product line neglecting this aspect entirely thus far.

So Steve & company: More grit, less glitz, please!

Now this is only my opinion, but the realistic, gritty stuff is right there in FRED and is , game mechanically, easy to do.

Super-powers and various magic frameworks are much more complicated, game mechanics wise, and therefore get more attention.

And Champions, superheroes, is really the flagship genre for the system. It sells. Therefore, it gets more attention.

[misterdeath]

Originally posted by Law Dog
Not a bad idea, Mister Death, but it is so contrary to why most people are playing RPG's. Most people what to do neat things and make witty quips and then get mad/disappointed/unenthused when something happens to their character. Even in most fiction we read and watch, we are usually more interested in the character than the organization/group.

Case in point - Sliders. When the original four were there, it was a wonderful show, but every time they lost somebody, the show became worse. That last season was a damned joke. I mean, I watched it because I still liked Remmie, but I wasn't real interest in the rest of the show anymore.

If you have too high of a turnover (character, not player) in any campaign, it starts changing everything.

Well, yeah, that's why the focus has to be off the individuals, and on the agency.

You can't be James Bond, you have to be Agent of MI6. You can't be Elliot Ness, you have to be FBI Crimebuster #3.

There's a lot of role-playing freedom in knowing that your character won't survive, FWIW.

You can play the 80ish narcoleptic museum curator who mumbles a lot, knowing that next session, you'll be playing someone else.

Or, you can play that Jar Jar Binks clone, knowing that next session you won't have to.

But, yeah, most people don't like to not have the same characters over and over again.

It takes the right group of players, and the right GM. It's almost more work creating that kind of campaign rather than a more standard character.

D

[AGLAR]

Originally posted by misterdeath
Or, you can play that Jar Jar Binks clone, knowing that next session you won't have to.

D

Why would anyone want to do anything but jam a plasma rifle down Jar Jar's gullet and duct-tape the trigger down?!?! :eek:

Tell me you weren't serious!!! Reassure me that you haven't played a JAR JAR clone!!! :mad:

[misterdeath]

Originally posted by AGLAR
Why would anyone want to do anything but jam a plasma rifle down Jar Jar's gullet and duct-tape the trigger down?!?! :eek:

Tell me you weren't serious!!! Reassure me that you haven't played a JAR JAR clone!!! :mad:

Actually, I haven't. Haven't been playing much. Running some, but not playing.

But, imagine the intrepid heroes investigating suspicious deaths of local skiiers in Vale. Imagine toddling out, "Meesa Sorry, Meesa no gotsa passporta" at the airport gate. Sneaking around the Chalet, [BANG, CRASH] "Meesa Sorry, Meesa tripped."

Now picture the smiles and cheering when Meesa gets skewered by the Alpine Vampire.

You get to irritate the hell out of people, and they get vicarious thrills by imagining Jar Jar having both his arms pulled off by something trying to eat his head.

Bwahahahahahaha.

D

[misterdeath]

Originally posted by AGLAR
Sure, a more realistic game means creating a new character far more often. A significant amount of work in Hero's case. The tradeoff is that you really FEAR combat. You don't hack/slash everything in sight because the cleric can bring you back from the dead. You pick fights carefully, knowing that the enemy could get a lucky hit every time he swings that sword or shoots that .357mag. I think that more pure roleplaying ensues when the object isn't to slaughter everything that moves.

Just my 2-cents, sorry for the sermon.

Got yer back on this one. (not literally, it's the hair you know, I just can't compete.)

I'm running a 3E game. The party is all 8th level.

I toddle out a 12th level ranger riding a dire elk, with 3 4th level ranger cat people riding dire lions, and 3 4th level dog people riding dire wolves.

The stupid bastards wouldn't run. The druid and his bear charged. The Half dragon barbarian moved into combat, the rogue ran like hell, so he could sneak back, and the sorceress, well she kind of hid so she could lay down the artillery.

I did my level best to splatter each and every single one of them, because they had the D&D "there are no concequences" mindset. "I've got a 30 AC, let's go."

They found out that an 8th level party does not survive a CR 20 odd encounter. I killed the druid, and the barbarian, the rogue and the sorceress were out of spells and ammo, and down to the single digits on hit points.

Darn crappy Will saving throw and the big Ranger guy would have finished them off too. Now the two surviving characters have to figure out how to get everyone repaired, which de-rails the mission.

Sigh. Thanks for letting me rant.

D

[Yamo]

Hey! Not all Star Wars fans hate poor Jar Jar!

As a clumsy, unloved doofus, he's the only character I can relate to! :p

Hehe. Don't mind me. It's easy to develop a persecution complex in Star Wars fandom when Phantom Menace is your favorite of the films. At least I have my good buddy Don Trull's brilliant writings on the subject (http://www.lardbiscuit.com/lard/ilovetpm.html) to encourage me. :D

[Yamo]

Super-powers and various magic frameworks are much more complicated, game mechanics wise, and therefore get more attention.

Ah, yes, but mechanics don't tell the whole story!

As this thread illustrates, there are a lot of miscellaneous complex issues involved in running a gritty, low-powered campaign. You have to address everything from high character turnover rates to how to modify the traditional RPG campaign model (centered around highly-resiliant PCs) to something that works better for you.

So you might not need a boatload of stats and Power write-ups, but there is still a lot of valuable GMing, campaiging, and character creation advice specific to that type of game.

I would hate to think that HERO sourcebooks are only considered dumping grounds for various loose crunchy bits. Some genres depend a lot more on appropriate moods and storytelling strategies and are much less mechanically-dependent than that (horror, realistic espionage, NYPD Blue-style cops, modern military, etc).

And Champions, superheroes, is really the flagship genre for the system. It sells. Therefore, it gets more attention.

Yes, it does sell. This doesn't mean that HERO can't do more, do it well, and probably sell it like hotcakes, however. I would like to see some risks taken on new material.

"We don't do X because we haven't done X" doesn't cut it for me. It;s fallacious reasoning.

"We don't do X because the old HERO Games released a version of X with far inferior production values and writing than is standard today fifteen years ago to a completely different roleplaying market and it performed poorly" doesn't either. Irrelevent. That was then, this is now.

Neither does "We asked a bunch of our old die-hard Champions grodnards, and none of them were interested." Irrelevent when the idea is to bring new blood to the game.

As a universal system (and the best one going), there's a lot of new ground to break still and money to be made doing it.

But hey, what do I know? I don't even like superheroes. ;)

[Storn]

Originally posted by Yamo

Yes, it does sell. This doesn't mean that HERO can't do more, do it well, and probably sell it like hotcakes, however. I would like to see some risks taken on new material.

"We don't do X because we haven't done X" doesn't cut it for me. It;s fallacious reasoning.

"We don't do X because the old HERO Games released a version of X with far inferior production values and writing than is standard today fifteen years ago to a completely different roleplaying market and it performed poorly" doesn't either. Irrelevent. That was then, this is now.

Neither does "We asked a bunch of our old die-hard Champions grodnards, and none of them were interested." Irrelevent when the idea is to bring new blood to the game.

As a universal system (and the best one going), there's a lot of new ground to break still and money to be made doing it.

Well said. I think you are onto something there. I would certainly love to do artwork for a new D.I. I would certainly like to see some of the things you've mentioned explored.

[Yamo]

Well said. I think you are onto something there. I would certainly love to do artwork for a new D.I. I would certainly like to see some of the things you've mentioned explored.

And I'd love to see a full-color HERO book packed with Storn art one day. Hope is a glorious thing. ;)

[RDU Neil]

I thought this thread had died... take a couple days off, and BOOM lots of great comments.

So many things that folks have written here, I've said... verbatim... in gaming discussion before. The issues about "fearing combat" and "role playing improves when combat is scary" are arguments I've made in the past.

I also still state that for any ACTION based games, it is hard to justify the weekly shoot-em-ups in a "realistic" game... even though most of us enjoy combat in our games (assumption, yes, I know.)

Storn just helped make my point. Not that I don't want to play or run a D.I. level adventure... but the group needs to be in the mood for it... and not expect the storyline or their character to last forever.

I've not actually KILLED as many PCs in my "realistic" games, as the players have retired them. They played a news photographer caught up in a gang war... and went to the hospital with a bullet in their leg, and said, "Ok... I'm done!" The player made the character, enjoyed the character, and retired the character in one night.

I also realize Storn's issue of "you can't change the world TOO much, or it isn't the real world, anymore." I'd disagree that derailing a train changes the world so drastically as it becomes unrecognizable. Killing the president, well... yes. I also agree that in NO way would I link my D.I. world with my Champions world. Huh uh. Completely separate. I've always kept those worlds separate.

In the end, I enjoy the role playing inspired by low level "realistic" games. The tension in the air during combat is palpable. Palms sweat, every die roll is agonizing. Heroics become amazing, small actions are monumental, sacrifice is meaningful. I've seen players role play their characters into hiding in a corner, waiting for the shooting to stop... while others lost their heads and got themselves killed... and still others stepped up and made hard decisions and salvaged a small win in an otherwise horrific situation. Amazingly funny and even poignant dialogue can come out between two PCs pinned down behind a wall by a hail of bullets. They start to appreciate the life of their character even more... and if they survive... role playing out the denouments... the moments following the stark terror and exhiliration, are truly cathartic, in my experience. The moments are laughed and joked about... remembered with fondness... in a way other adventures are not.

It is intense... and not, IMO, applicable for a weekly, ever week weekly, game... but occassionally... it's brilliant.

Be careful what you ask for, Storn!:D

[AGLAR]

RDU,
Since your type of realistic game appeals to a smaller number of select gamers (spread all over the globe), as opposed to the teeming hordes of hack/slash junkies, might I make a suggestion?

Play "Realistic Hero" via online medium, i.e. PBeM or chat game. That way the one realistic gamer in Florida, the two in New York, the single person in Montana, etc. could game together. With PBeM there is an added bonus.
TIME.
You have time between phases to look up skills, check charts, ask for clarification, etc. In FTF combat heavy hero games, the pacing can be quite slow. Especially using all the optional rules. The pacing in PBeM is always slow, therefore not likely to annoy the impatient gamer.

It just occurred to me that you may already play online. Apologies if I am preaching to the choir. :)

[Nelijal]

Originally posted by Yamo
Hey! Not all Star Wars fans hate poor Jar Jar!No, just the vast majority of us. :)

Originally posted by Yamo
Hehe. Don't mind me. It's easy to develop a persecution complex in Star Wars fandom when Phantom Menace is your favorite of the films. At least I have my good buddy Don Trull's brilliant writings on the subject (http://www.lardbiscuit.com/lard/ilovetpm.html) to encourage me. :D Episodes I and II have very good stories, but it has become obvious that George Lucas just isn't that good of a director. He should perhaps stick to the creative side of the projects and get someone else to direct--too bad Stanley Kubrick is gone. :mad:

[Yamo]

too bad Stanley Kubrick is gone.

The only projects that Lucas has ever been involved in that I haven't liked have been the odd one or two he has a producing credit on. Howard the Duck, anyone? :) I'm generally of the opinion that his Star Wars films are all exactly what they should be: Good clean pulpish fun. No more, and no less.

Kubrick had moments of brilliance, but he was very hit-or-miss for me. Some of his stuff is genius (Strangelove, Clockwork Orange) and some is deeply-flawed (Eyes Wide Shut). One odd thing I've noticed about him was his tendency to do adaptations that were absolutely brilliant in some ways, but far short of the original in others. Shining, for example, had fantastic atmosphere but gutted the story and characters. 2001 botched the novel's ending horribly by turning it into a psychedelic lightshow that you pretty much had to read the novel to have any hope of really understanding. I suppose Kubrick didn't garner his reputation as an eccentric for no reason. Still, when he was at his best, watch out!

...

Stay on-topic, you say? What's that? ;)

[Storn]

Originally posted by RDU Neil
I

Be careful what you ask for, Storn!:D

heh.

Nope, this is a damn good thread. Don't have any add'l comments at the mo'.... but I'm sure someone will spark something up.

Aglar, neil and I have done some PBeM games. We both have a real hard time keeping them going for any length of time. But it has always been Champions and I did a really high level fantasy game once(which bombed quickly). Doing something gritty online might be a lot of fun.

[AGLAR]

Originally posted by Storn
Aglar, neil and I have done some PBeM games. We both have a real hard time keeping them going for any length of time. But it has always been Champions and I did a really high level fantasy game once(which bombed quickly). Doing something gritty online might be a lot of fun.

Yes, keeping a game going via PBeM can be difficult. The turnover rate is normally higher than in FTF games. Lose enough folks fast enough or the GM goes silent for too long POOF!
Dead campaign. :(

Hero Central seems to have a cadre of dedicated PBeMers that might stay the course.

[RDU Neil]

I actually ran a PBeM game for just Storn, that took place in my superhero world, but was very, very low level guns and crime and death. Storn had the ex-sniper type who'd gotten out of the life, retired in Baja California... until a local crime lord "pulled him back in!"

It worked really well, and aside from Storn's character being "best of the best" at a human level, there was only one paranormal factor in the game, and that was an opposing gunman, the telekinetik gun guy from one of the 4th Edtion supplements, also called the Mechanic. It was a fun adventure, with some John Woo moments and scary "run or die" moments as well. It actually had a complete story, beginning middle end, as well.

I would note that I've completed EVERY PBeM game I've ever started (as GM), except for the current one. They've all come to adventure/storyline conclusions, except for the latest, which fell apart over the past holiday season.

[Nelijal]

[off-topic]

Originally posted by Yamo
The only projects that Lucas has ever been involved in that I haven't liked have been the odd one or two he has a producing credit on. Howard the Duck, anyone? :) I'm generally of the opinion that his Star Wars films are all exactly what they should be: Good clean pulpish fun. No more, and no less.You didn't like Howard the Duck?

Yes, I do like George Lucas' stories. THX-1138 was an interesting debut, and American Grafitti is a classic. The Star Wars saga is also good story-telling, but actors such as Ewan McGregor and Natalie Portman are capable of much better performances than he got from them.

Originally posted by Yamo
Kubrick had moments of brilliance, but he was very hit-or-miss for me. Some of his stuff is genius (Strangelove, Clockwork Orange) and some is deeply-flawed (Eyes Wide Shut). One odd thing I've noticed about him was his tendency to do adaptations that were absolutely brilliant in some ways, but far short of the original in others. Shining, for example, had fantastic atmosphere but gutted the story and characters. 2001 botched the novel's ending horribly by turning it into a psychedelic lightshow that you pretty much had to read the novel to have any hope of really understanding. I suppose Kubrick didn't garner his reputation as an eccentric for no reason. Still, when he was at his best, watch out!Don't forget Full Metal Jacket. Eyes Wide Shut covers a wide misconception about relationships, but definitely took the long road to tell the story. You are correct about the very obtuse 2001. 2001 is interesting in that Kubrick was inspired to do a movie about an Arthur C. Clarke short story, and the two collaborated on an expanded version of that story. Kubrick did the movie, and Clarke put it in book form. That makes it even harder to understand how Kubrick managed to NOT get the point across to the audience. 2001 is a classic--if you've read the book.

[/off-topic]

Yes, me too, I do prefer campaigns in which the PCs have "realistic" flaws and vulnerabilities. ;)

[gewing]

"Man on Fire" was a very interesting read and a mediocre movie, but still better than many. "Manhunter" was good. Equalizer was Great, though I had problems with the main character deciding Guns limited options all the time. He had a point, but sometimes firepower is useful.

I guess most of our characters were on the high end for DI, almost superagents. Sometimes we played allowing 10 points in powers, etc.

I still like the DI rules for shotguns, bombs, and Artillery best!

HM, LaFeme Nikita anyone?






Originally posted by RDU Neil
Thank you for reminding me. Heck... I own the movie.

LOVE the movie Ronin. :cool:

Other movies that make for good, "more realistic" style adventures.

China Town
Any of the Godfather movies.
The Bodyguard (yes, cheesy as it may sound, it's a solid DI adventure)
To Live & Die In LA (heck, the main PC bites it half way through the movie!)
Man On Fire
Platoon
Year of the Dragon
Heat and Manhunter from Michael Mann
Serpico
Taxi Driver

from TV, the old Edward Woodward show, "The Equalizer" (loved that show)
the new Michael Mann show, "Robbery Homicide"

ahhh... I really want to play DI again, darnit

[AGLAR]

Storn said...
(snip)
Aglar, neil and I have done some PBeM games. We both have a real hard time keeping them going for any length of time. But it has always been Champions and I did a really high level fantasy game once(which bombed quickly).

followed by...

Originally posted by RDU Neil

(snip)
I would note that I've completed EVERY PBeM game I've ever started (as GM), except for the current one. They've all come to adventure/storyline conclusions, except for the latest, which fell apart over the past holiday season.

I realize that the two of you may have PBeM experience that doesn't involve the other, but not knowning if this is the case or not, I am a bit confused...

Or perhaps RDU is gently chiding Storn for bailing on a PBeM game or two? ;)

Off topic Alert - Storn, I love your art!

[AGLAR]

I killed another topic!

:(

Can we pretend I didn't send that last post?

[RDU Neil]

Originally posted by AGLAR
I killed another topic!

:(

Can we pretend I didn't send that last post?

I can see it now, Aglar... just like WWII pilots recording their kills, you have stickers on the side of your PC, indicating discussion threads you've sent crashing and burning to the earth. :D

Don't worry about it. Storn and I game FtF every week, and give each other all kinds of $#!t. We've even had to go our separate ways for weeks or even a year, because we argued so much... both being quite passionate about gaming. This is nuthin'! ;)

I think we'd just said our piece on the subject, that's all.

Though... in a slightly similar vein... are you, or is anyone, reading Gotham Central? This new Batman tie in book focus' very closely on the Gotham PD, and street level reactions to a dangerous superworld around them. Not as good as Bendis' POWERS, but a great read, nonetheless. It shows how low level "realism" (again with the quotes) can add a depth to the drama lost in most superheroics.

[Shadowpup]

Originally posted by misterdeath

And it blows to have spend many days devoting yourself to crafting a piece of artwork and watching it get mangled like a Red Shirt on classic Trek.

D

Now that might be a fun game to play in...
"Red Shirts"

[RDU Neil]

I love the idea of a game like "Redshirts."

Like a more serious/dramatic version of Paranoia. I think the idea of the game would be "survive long enough to get promoted from the security detail!"

Y'know... this would make an EXCELLENT game to run at a Con.:cool:

[Shadowpup]

Originally posted by RDU Neil


Other movies that make for good, "more realistic" style adventures.

China Town
Any of the Godfather movies.
The Bodyguard (yes, cheesy as it may sound, it's a solid DI adventure)
To Live & Die In LA (heck, the main PC bites it half way through the movie!)
Man On Fire
Platoon
Year of the Dragon
Heat and Manhunter from Michael Mann
Serpico
Taxi Driver


aww man, you forgot
HEAT

[misterdeath]

Originally posted by RDU Neil
I love the idea of a game like "Redshirts."

Like a more serious/dramatic version of Paranoia. I think the idea of the game would be "survive long enough to get promoted from the security detail!"

Y'know... this would make an EXCELLENT game to run at a Con.:cool:

Well, when Icon trek came out, they recommended that the PCs not be the upper brass (a wildly divergent view from FASA trek) but be the junior officers.

This is the first thing I ran. "You're all members of the security detail, you accompany the Captain on missions. Or stand on the bridge. Or something."

Great for a one shot.

D

[misterdeath]

Originally posted by AGLAR
I killed another topic!

:(

Can we pretend I didn't send that last post?

We can pretend anything you like.

How 'bout ...

You didn't kill the thread. um, um, let'see.

That much back hair is a good thing. hmmm. nah.

How bout ... The Democrats do to have a viable presidential cantidate. erm. well.

Morningstar ... nah, too easy.

:p

D

[AGLAR]

Originally posted by RDU Neil
I can see it now, Aglar... just like WWII pilots recording their kills, you have stickers on the side of your PC, indicating discussion threads you've sent crashing and burning to the earth. :D



This happens all the time! Great topic is just chugging along, I post, topic dies! Like I vented this huge electronic fart and ran everyone off! My pirogue would be covered completely if I applied a little decal for every topic I slaughtered! :D

Don't worry about it. Storn and I game FtF every week, and give each other all kinds of $#!t. We've even had to go our separate ways for weeks or even a year, because we argued so much... both being quite passionate about gaming. This is nuthin'! ;)

I think we'd just said our piece on the subject, that's all.

I have some RPG friends like that. :)

[AGLAR]

Originally posted by RDU Neil
Though... in a slightly similar vein... are you, or is anyone, reading Gotham Central? This new Batman tie in book focus' very closely on the Gotham PD, and street level reactions to a dangerous superworld around them. Not as good as Bendis' POWERS, but a great read, nonetheless. It shows how low level "realism" (again with the quotes) can add a depth to the drama lost in most superheroics.

Gotham PD? I will check that out. I like "Powers". Thanks for the suggestion.

[AGLAR]

My secret is simple....
add the following to a blender
1 oz Red Bull
1 dose Viagra
1 oz Rogaine
1/2 Hershey chocolate bar
Mix well, pour into a glass, fill to the top with Diet Pepsi!

UmmmmUmmm goooood!

[RDU Neil]

Originally posted by AGLAR
Gotham PD? I will check that out. I like "Powers". Thanks for the suggestion.

The Book should be called "Gotham PD Blues" It's a cop show, done in comic form, in the DC Universe Gotham City.

Very... VERY good book.:cool:

[AGLAR]

Originally posted by RDU Neil
The Book should be called "Gotham PD Blues" It's a cop show, done in comic form, in the DC Universe Gotham City.

Very... VERY good book.:cool:

I went in and asked for Gotham PD and they sold me three issues of Gotham Central. :mad:

Issues 2, 3, 4 no less! Must wait for number 1! Even if it is the wrong number 1!

[RDU Neil]

Gotham Central is the comic you want... don't be angry!

Hope you can find Issue #1... it's still on the shelf at my LCS. Where do you hail from?

[AGLAR]

Originally posted by RDU Neil
Gotham Central is the comic you want... don't be angry!

Hope you can find Issue #1... it's still on the shelf at my LCS. Where do you hail from?

Oh, good! I hail from Shreveport, Louisiana. EvilLuke and I took the pirogue into town Saturday and stopped by the FLGS. They had one of those "Everything on Sale!" things going on.

I asked the owner for "Gotham PD".
"Here you go." Hands me "Gotham Central".
I swirled the mullet of power. He has a really low DCV, so my called-shot hit pretty easily...
"INFIDEL, I said 'Gotham PD'! Not 'Gotham Central'! EvilLuke - ATTACK!"
Some 'Magic the Gathering' kids and some goth Werewolvers tried to help the FLGS owner, but we won in the end.
EvilLuke got an black eye from some Hackmaster weilding Heroclixer.
I bounced a brick of 6 sided purple dice off his noggin. No one with class were gonna buy that color anyway....
---------------------

Now for the truth. I looked right at Gotham Central and told EvilLuke, "They don't have Gotham PD. Just this Gotham Central." About 10 minutes later Luke waves the Gotham Central at me, "Are you sure this isn't it?" The FLGS owner confirmed Luke's suspicion and I bought 2-4 of Gotham Central.

[Tetsuyama]

Modern & "Realistic", eh? I've played in a couple of those using Hero, but it was at least an edition ago. It actually worked pretty well. We had to be careful, and no PCs died, but we didn't play the campaigns for that long. To assure our survival, we made sure that any time we were going to wind up in combat, it was a pitched battle that the other guys walked in to and had no chance of walking out of. It took a lot of sneaking and peeking, and making sure our contingency plans had contingency plans.

Something between modern day and cyberpunk really appeals to me. I've always like Masamune Shirow's work (the Appleseed/Ghost in the Shell world is so cool), but the amount of work that would go in to something quite that detailed is beyond me. It's got cyberpunk-like tech, but in some ways the world doesn't seem as dark. Maybe it's because the protagonists work for the government and don't have the same "us vs. the World" complex that frequently shows up in cyberpunk.

Anyways, one partial solution to the problem is what I'm thinking about running for some friends in a couple of months, an X-Files/Conspiracy X type game. If the PCs work for a government agency (or an outside agency with enough juice to fake it), then they can get away with a little more. They also probably have slightly better than standard tech, thus hopefully a better survival rate. Of course, you could ease things a little by having the characters be largely package deals with a bit of customization, and have each player run a character pool (this has been mentioned before, and seems like a *great* idea for this sort of game) that gets drawn from for each mission.

Was that mostly back on topic? ;)

Tetsuyama

[Shadowpup]

Originally posted by Tetsuyama


Something between modern day and cyberpunk really appeals to me. I've always like Masamune Shirow's work (the Appleseed/Ghost in the Shell world is so cool), but the amount of work that would go in to something quite that detailed is beyond me. It's got cyberpunk-like tech, but in some ways the world doesn't seem as dark. Maybe it's because the protagonists work for the government and don't have the same "us vs. the World" complex that frequently shows up in cyberpunk.
Tetsuyama

You have to go back to the first issue of Appleseed. The whole first chapter with Deunan ans Briarios living in urban ruins is preety much the majority of the world. The rest of the series revolves around their life in the "civilized areas" so you don't get to see much more of the junk heap the world is.

[RDU Neil]

Originally posted by AGLAR
Oh, good! I hail from Shreveport, Louisiana. EvilLuke and I took the pirogue into town Saturday and stopped by the FLGS. They had one of those "Everything on Sale!" things going on.

I asked the owner for "Gotham PD".
"Here you go." Hands me "Gotham Central".
I swirled the mullet of power. He has a really low DCV, so my called-shot hit pretty easily...
"INFIDEL, I said 'Gotham PD'! Not 'Gotham Central'! EvilLuke - ATTACK!"
Some 'Magic the Gathering' kids and some goth Werewolvers tried to help the FLGS owner, but we won in the end.
EvilLuke got an black eye from some Hackmaster weilding Heroclixer.
I bounced a brick of 6 sided purple dice off his noggin. No one with class were gonna buy that color anyway....
---------------------

Now for the truth. I looked right at Gotham Central and told EvilLuke, "They don't have Gotham PD. Just this Gotham Central." About 10 minutes later Luke waves the Gotham Central at me, "Are you sure this isn't it?" The FLGS owner confirmed Luke's suspicion and I bought 2-4 of Gotham Central.


Ah... well, I'm in Ann Arbor, Michigan... so it would be a long drive for just one comic. Sorry.:(

[AGLAR]

Originally posted by RDU Neil
Ah... well, I'm in Ann Arbor, Michigan... so it would be a long drive for just one comic. Sorry.:(

The FLGS owner I didn't really mullet is going to try and find a number 1 for me. If he doesn't deliver, I will check the other stores around here. And there is always E-bay! But thanks for the thought. :)