RDU Neil

2 minutes ago, Brian Stanfield said:

o if I get this correctly, there are team chits as a result, that can be used by the players, I'm assuming with the group's consent, so retroactively "plan" for "The Plan"?

Yes... team chits, a player can request to use one, group has to agree to what is suggested.  Usually, "oooh... ooh... I have an idea..." and people agree or make suggestions... go...

7 minutes ago, Brian Stanfield said:

Just for clarity's sake on my part (I may have read right past your explanation), are the luck chits gained for the whole team based on the single "Plan" roll, or individually for each of their pre-plan rolls? In other words, is the ninja using a chit that belongs to the whole team based on their "Plan" roll, or his own chit based on how well he succeeded at inserting himself into the infiltration site?

 

By the way, thanks for reaching out to me at Origins! I love finally putting faces to names!

Great to meet you too, albeit briefly. Hope you had a good Con!

So, the way we played it, "The Plan" chits were a group pool, not individual. The reason for this was a) PCs already have their own, b) it clearly separated "I planned for this" vs. spending for a free Dodge or whatever, and c) it felt right to reflect the overall effectiveness of "The Plan" not just one PCs contribution. The contributions of each affect "The Plan" roll (Tactics or Teamwork being the Skill used)... but the result of "The Plan" roll is for the whole team.

hope that makes sense.

19 hours ago, ghost-angel said:

Oh this whole thing is good, this is fantastic. Please let me know if you how this all works in play.

Just fyi, the examples I gave ARE from actual play, including the duffle bag of guns on the roof of the elevator. I think the biggest issue we had with it was players struggling with determining "What are prep/montage actions vs. what are actual play actions"  The ninja player's "prep" actions were "I get in there and find the hostage and get out"... which was like the whole adventure... heh. So we had to discuss what was appropriate as "setup actions" vs. "actual play, the plan contacts the enemy" because old school gamers can be very unused to have "director stance" actions... which in some ways these are... but you can't take it too far. 

9 minutes ago, ghost-angel said:

 

Oh this whole thing is good, this is fantastic. Please let me know if you how this all works in play.

 

Yeah - the one thing I really like about Blades is there are no Planning Sessions. There is only "what info do you want?" - "How do you want to start out?" - "Let's see where everyone is and how far into the plan we are..." - and then Game On.

FYI, I was at Origins the past week and played the new hack of Blades in the Dark, called "Hack the Planet" which is the cyber-punk in an eco-devastated future version of Blades.

IT WAS AWESOME! I liked it better than Blades itself, while the core mechanics are similar, the details create a very cool, atmospheric and fast to play gritty, future of hackers and gene-rangers... storm chasers and zeppelin gangs. Supposedly the hardcover book will be out around GenCon... supposedly the PDF is available now at Drivethrough. Check it out.

10 hours ago, Doc Democracy said:

Worse are systems like TORG, HeroQuest and DC Heroes where the points are also used for character development. It is invidious to ask a player to balance character success and character advancement. Almost like the better you do in a scenario, the less you will advance (spending more points than you gain).

This was my problem with Deadlands in the past. When I created my Luck Chits, I specifically made them "use 'em or lose 'em" for each adventure, because I wanted them played for dramatic story shifts, and not hoarded for EXP or whatever. 

And while I, the GM, do have access to some Luck Chits as well... one of the things my players like, is that they can see my pool. When I spend to give the villain a free recovery, or whatever, they see this as a victory... they are wearning down my resources as well. If I didn't save a big bennie for the villain at the end, then he doesn't have his "automatic getaway" or whatever. Yes, the GM can say anything they want, but a bennie system can help moderate (in the eyes of the players) when the GM clearly is swinging the narrative against them. In fact, it kind of frees up the GM to be open about "yep, I'm deciding this in favor of the bad guys... here I'm spending a chit to have things go their way" and the players seem much more ok with that.

19 hours ago, ghost-angel said:

I've grown  particularly fond of the Flashback system from Blades In The Dark; we're about to start a new campaign and the GM plans on using Equipment Resource Points as both a loadout and flashback system. As long as you have unallocated resource points you can say "I brought that with us.." or "I'll spend some point, we've prepared for this..." - it should work pretty well I think. We'll see how it goes.

I actually included something similar (after reading Blades in the Dark)... calling it "The Plan" in my game. I already have a bennie system with "Luck Chits" and I've been experimenting with a relatively simple process.

1. When a scenario calls for it, players come up with a general "plan of attack"... like "We want the infiltrate the club in disguise, after having hacked the security cameras, and gotten a decent floorplan. The goal is to narrow down where the hostage might be kept, and so our assault is fast and quick, with a planned getaway."

That's it... no long involved arguing about how many grenades you are packing, or what language your hacking program is written in, or whatever... quick, general, covers the basic idea.
 

2. Each player/PC gets to role a "Prep" roll based on their skill/expertise/contacts, to contribute to  "The Plan". (i.e. the hacker rolls to say "I'm gaining access to the security network through cables running through tunnels under the club." and the faceman says "I'm organizing our local support to have watchers on the street and around the building and a getaway driver." and the ninja says, "I'm going to infiltrate and get in position way ahead of time, before things go down."   whatever...)  Based on how well they roll, they get contribute plusses or minuses to "The Plan" roll. for example... hacker rolls well, that says he is in, with full view of all cameras, give a +2 to "The Plan" roll... but ninja rolled badly, he was able to get inside, but unable to get far due to unexpected employees showing up and can't break cover"... -1 to The Plan roll.   The rolls help narrate the "set up montage"

3. Then, based on the total plusses or minuses... a player with Tactics or Teamwork... rolls. Based on how well they roll... the players gain Luck Chits for the group as a whole, that can be utilzed when necessary to say "I planned for this!" when they run into some obstacle in the actual op. For example, the PCs could only infiltrate with light weapons... but once inside, realized they were likely heavily out gunned. The ninja spent a chit saying, "I planned for this, and on my way in, I left a duffle bag of guns on the roof of the elevator off the kitchen." The PCs are then able to pick up a couple assault rifles and a shotgun before heading for the penthouse.

A few more tweaks (like I set a number based on how difficult the target it... from Easy to Hyper Secure (infiltrating a night club owned by gangsters is easier than infiltrating an NSA black site)... but generally that's it.

Players/PCs contribute to "The Plan"... a single roll is then made to determine how effectively the plan was up to the point of "Go" when the actual, moment to moment play begins... and a good roll provides "I planned for that..." bennies... or not if the plan wasn't so good.

Have just recently begun trying it, but it works alright and I'm committed to using basic HERO skills and contacts, etc.... just using them in a different light.

DC streaming shutting down.

or

conflicting reports

The found the Watcher's home on the Blue Area!

 

1 hour ago, mattingly said:

 

Yes!

 

Felt vs Plastic -- Muppets vs Toy Story, on a Muppet stage set of Andy's room.

 

That was it! (Though I swear it was "Plush" but ok...). Good times... I was the Swedish Chef.

On 6/8/2019 at 7:19 PM, mattingly said:

Title: Meep on the Borderland 
Desc: What if all of your favorite fantasy movies were remade with Muppets? Arm your felt with broadswords, holy symbols, magic wands, and a ten-foot pole. One does not simply wokka wokka into Mordor. 
System: Champions 
Players: 15 
When: S 9-11a

Many years ago, played in a "Plush vs Plastic" game at Origins... run in Hero. Was that you, running the game? This seems similar in tone.

So, I tend to spend all my time in the IGoD room when at Origins, but it would be cool to stop by and say hello. Where are these Champs games being held? How do I find locations? Origins website is a sh!t-show. 

Especially the Revelations game... I'll just be kicking around at that point, so would be cool to stop by.

1 hour ago, Cancer said:

 

 

About midway down this page (hangs off the official Chandra site) is another image that puts the black hole shadow image in scale context with the two X-ray images from Chandra.

Thank you. That makes much more sense, now.

2 minutes ago, Toxxus said:

 

My view of it from the original Superman movie series was being confined to a pane of glass spinning end over end through the universe for all time.

 

Like some murderous spinning amusement ride that never ends and confines you to two-dimensional space and prevents you from aging - for eternity.

Ok... that does sound... bad.  I never took the presentation literally, but if you do... then yeah... that is a horror show. 

2 hours ago, Toxxus said:

This also brings into play the issue of the phantom zone, which in earlier incarnations, was a fate far worse than death.

 

 

uh... really? Phantom Zone was just schlocky "super jail where villains go until writer needs them for a story" stuff. The PZ was more of a sieve than Arkham. So many of the things taken as canon were basically "bad writing MacGuffins" and not something that should be considered intrinsic to the mythology, but people never seem to recognize that. So many tropes that need to be jettisoned around superheroes and certain characters in general were manifestations of the reality of the medium or the politics of the time, and not intrinsically part of the fiction. 

This is why I loved the MCU, because, for the most part, they kept the core aspects of the character and world, but dumped all the non-essential minutia that so many cling to, but are essentially unimportant. Cap was always Cap no matter how many costume changes, or whether his shield was vibranium or adamantium or indestructible or not, or whatever. I think why Endgame was ultimately so amazing, while DCEU falters, is that they've failed to find and portray the core aspects of the characters in a compelling way on screen. (Wonder Woman being the shining example of when they DID make it work. Gal Gadot's version is nothing like, say, George Perez's in the details and presentation... but at the heart, it absolutely is... thus it works.)

13 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

My take was that he was likely unworthy when he gave up, but became worthy again when he returned to the fight for others.  As I viewed the scene, my sense was that he was waiting for Mjolnir NOT to come so he could say "Now do you see - your son is not worthy".  When Mjolnir arrived, his sense of self-worth was bolstered - failing had not rendered him irredeemably unworthy.

This I totally agree with. It was something of a moment of cowardice and moment of courage... could he stand to ACTUALLY find out if he was worthy or not? Easy to wallow and "feel" unworthy... a whole 'nother level to find out you actually ARE! After talking to his mother, he had the psychological strength to find out. Very powerful scene, and again, probably my favorite bit (Thor and his mom) in the whole movie.

2 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

The same Thor who, in a fit of rage, chops the head off of an unarmed and helpless prisoner right after chopping off one of his hands?

It is not the act but the context... and you were supposed to be shocked by the act. It was not played for smirking good times. It was a moment of defeat for Thor, which played out in the rest of the movie, not a feel good "show the dude bro being KEWL!" moment.

Thematic context matters a lot.
 

deleted

Superhero property damage.

Seriously, this kind of thing is why I always played supers as dangerous just by existing. If this kind of thing was as common place in the real world as it is in the comics... our infrastructure would be medieval after a few years at best.

As the MCU continues on Disney+


https://deadline.com/2019/05/kari-skogland-to-direct-6-part-the-falcon-and-the-winter-soldier-miniseries-with-anthony-mackie-sebastian-stan-daniel-bruhl-emily-van-camp-1202619197/?fbclid=IwAR3w8nTyFRbkLjevQXCbFpuN7oyB2cdSVgHLUIzPKj7r59qGuZM1KSKRktQ

I like that they are trying to bring back Zemo and Sharon.

https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/science/universe-may-be-billion-years-younger-we-thought-scientists-are-ncna1005541 

On 4/5/2019 at 8:41 PM, zslane said:

But like I said, they discovered that even this "half step" towards a "real Batman show" was not enough to keep people tuning in,

Personally, I chalk it up to horrible writing and dismal acting... as most WB shows are. But you are right, there is clearly an audience for fan-service comic book stuff, no matter how badly it is done... see Arrow, Supergirl, Flash, etc.

13 hours ago, Brian Stanfield said:

 

I like your discussion. Hugh really pushes it, but I like what everyone came up with. 

 

I prefer heroic games, so I'll probably never be able to apply what you're doing with END, except perhaps for Fantasy HERO. I've been trying to come up with a way to balance spells, AP caps, and END for a long time, and haven't come up with anything yet that doesn't seem arbitrary. Your ideas on END usage gives me something to work with. I'd like to have AP caps and END usage that is integrated into the campaign rules in a way similar to what you do with the Pushing cap. This gives me a lot to think about.

Heroic level games where the use of special abilities and powers are difficult and rare but generate a dramatic effect while being very exhausting... I think that is a GREAT place for more traditional END rules... and in fact remove ways to make reduced END possible. I'd just figure out a formula that shows "X END per action = Y Actions before REC/vulnerability is necessary, and how many RECs before back to full" as a way of comparing playability. Can certain characters effectively "go forever" with their main action/attack... while others are effectively limited like they had charges? That kind of balance needs to be very clear, and are the players ok with how that will actually come about in the game?  "Hey... the warrior can only really swing a sword, but he can do it all day... the Wizard gets maybe three actions... but they will be whoppers!  Are we ok with that?" (e.g. only).

Again, I just feel there has to be a better way to get to the dramatic moment of, "We've driven back the first wave, but gods, I can barely lift my sword!" where usually it is all about tactical rule playing, "If we rotate front line fighters every three actions, then no one ever runs out of END and everyone is always at full STR."  I hate that stuff, though a lot of people think that kind of thing is what gaming is all about. 

23 minutes ago, zslane said:

 

I see a real preference for H-t-H melee specialists there. Would Wolverine go on that list if he was in the MCU? Or is he too exotic with his adamantium skeleton and regeneration?

 

I do like Cap a lot as a character; one of my favorites in the MCU actually. But as comic book superheroes go, I prefer those with flashier, top-tier superpowers. That is to say, either more than one stat in the FASERIP MN "Monstrous" (75) range and/or multiple powers that don't simply involve punching/kicking.

I liked Wolverine up until the post-Byrne/Austin X-Men era, when he became ubiquitous and all ragey adolescent aggression along with the Punisher. He was never a big fave.

And yeah... add in Black Panther (old school, before he got all armored up) and the blue-furred Beast (again, Byrne/Austin era) and they were definitely my favorites. 

I was never as big a DC fan, but in the old argument, I am Batman hands-down over Superman every time. 

13 hours ago, Lord Liaden said:

 

Marvel and Chris Hemsworth both wanted to take Thor in a more comedic direction, because the noble warrior persona wasn't connecting with the general audience. Classic Thor is my favorite superhero, but it seemed to me that Infinity War balanced those competing interpretations effectively. I haven't yet been able to ascertain how the majority of the audience responded to what was done with him in Endgame. Personally I loathe it, as I indicated earlier on the thread.

I don't have the personal "favorite" aspect when it comes to Thor. He was always just around, and certain runs of the comic were good, but the character never connected with me... not like Cap or Daredevil or Iron Fist... characters I really loved in my formative days. I say that because I did love Thor: Ragnarok and "The Dude" Thor... not because I became personally attached to him, but because it made for good cinema. I absolutely LOVED the scene with his mother. Probably my favorite scene in a movie full of them. 

And I feel that his breaking of the hot headed, somewhat egotistical Odinson persona lent real credence to the awesome "Cap with Mjolnir" moment and his excited, "I knew it!" line which did more for his character than anything.