CrosshairCollie

He'd need a brain installed first.

He'd need a brain installed first.

Champs Complete p.27 states you can use two levels for +1 DC.

I'll put the TL;DR first: Friend of mine is running a game he loves, but I don't like.  Torn between 'he's a friend, I'm obligated' and 'I'm not having fun, I should stay home'.
 
The long version: He's running a game called Monster of the Week.  It's designed to emulate things like Buffy, Grimm, urban fantasy shows with monster antagonists (and sometimes protagonists).  The genre/concept itself, I don't mind, but the system is ... is ... there's almost no system to speak of.  You have five stats, valued -1 to +3; Cool, Charm, Tough, Sharp, and Weird.  To perform a 'Move' (as the game calls actions), you roll 2d6, add modifier.  7 or higher, you succeed.
Here's the thing.  Each stat has one or two moves attached to it.  Tough is used for 'Kick some Ass' and 'Protect someone', for example.  Each character has an archetype that grants them 3 'class-specific' moves, for lack of a better term.  The Crook, for example, can get a move that lets him perform B&E.  It seems that only people with a particular move can perform it, as most classes have an advancement of 'Take a move from other class's move list'.
That's it.  There's something to be said for simplicity, but this is beyond that.  Unless you default to Cool's 'Act Under Pressure' move for EVERYTHING, there's no way to hide, sneak, drive, pick a lock, break down a door (unless you're kicking the door's ass?), search for things, play an instrument ... I have no idea what languages my character knows.  I have no idea how much he knows about vampires or ghosts or anything else.  The combat isn't even interesting because it's just 'Roll Kick Some Ass'; the GM doesn't even roll anything; if you win, you hurt it, if you lose, it hurts you.  Which oddly means a melee-only monster can hurt you if you're shooting it with a rifle from 500 feet away and roll poorly.  No tactics, no variety, no aim, no brain.
There's just nothing THERE.  No meat, no crunch, no substance.  All fluff.  It's the cotton candy of game systems.  I don't like it.  I would rather stay home and play Overwatch or Skyrim or Smash Bros or just chat online.  I spend most of the game frustrated and bored because my options are so limited.
Except for magic.  Literally anybody can use magic, though if you fail your check, something bad will happen.  This makes a high Weird essentially broken; I played a Monstrous (werewolf), and eventually in each game I've gotten so frustrated with the mystery we were on that I just used magic to Postcognition a crime scene ... but I shouldn't have, because that's not my concept, but there's no allowance for that other than voluntary nerfing.  Why didn't I just give myself a low  Weird, you may ask?  Not an option.  When you pick your class, you've given a handful of pre-determined stat outlays, and all of the Monstrous ones had +3 Weird, so I didn't have a choice.  If you thought DnD's class system was restrictive, you ain't seen nothin' until you've tried Monster of the Week.
BUT the guy running it is one of those that thinks mechanics and roleplay are an inverse ratio, so he loves it.  He ran it at Gen Con this year and he's thinking about sending stories to the publisher, or maybe designing adventures for them, I'm not quite sure, which means he'll want to run it fairly frequently.  I don't want to hurt his feelings, and I'm afraid if I say that I want to bow out, that he'll stop running it to appease me, but I don't want him to do that, either, but I don't want it to get to the point where I can't pretend to be interested.  I've mentioned that it isn't really my thing low-key, but haven't really made a fuss about it; I figure he thinks I'm neutral on it, rather than outright negative.  Essentially, at this point, I'm only along for the socialization aspect.
 
Not sure if I'm after advice, or just needed to get this off my chest.  Either way, if you've read all this, thank you.

Krypton is NOT in danger, and the council will not hear anyone raising such baseless concerns. Someone one kindly tell Citizen Jor-El to please sit down.
 
 

A flat income tax is a terrible idea.  It's just another break for the rich.  For a poor or middle class person, let's say 20%, 20% could be the difference between paying a bill or not, or getting your car fixed or not.  To a wealthy person, that's the difference between owning two or three Ferraris.  We need a properly gradiated tax system, like we had back in the 50s, where the uppermost tax bracket was taxed at 90%, and corporations didn't get so many tax breaks that some of them were paying 'negative taxes', aka getting money paid to them by the government.

A flat income tax is a terrible idea.  It's just another break for the rich.  For a poor or middle class person, let's say 20%, 20% could be the difference between paying a bill or not, or getting your car fixed or not.  To a wealthy person, that's the difference between owning two or three Ferraris.  We need a properly gradiated tax system, like we had back in the 50s, where the uppermost tax bracket was taxed at 90%, and corporations didn't get so many tax breaks that some of them were paying 'negative taxes', aka getting money paid to them by the government.

That pun's so bad, it qualifies as attempted murder.

That pun's so bad, it qualifies as attempted murder.

I was going to participate, then I remembered ... I've maybe seen five movies since 2000.

This isn't so much funny as interesting, I admit.  But I thought it was interesting enough to post.

On the other hand ... (the one in the back is like 'Dammit, Carl, we're supposed to be majestic and s**t, stop f***ing around.")

On the other hand ... (the one in the back is like 'Dammit, Carl, we're supposed to be majestic and s**t, stop f***ing around.")

On the other hand ... (the one in the back is like 'Dammit, Carl, we're supposed to be majestic and s**t, stop f***ing around.")

On the other hand ... (the one in the back is like 'Dammit, Carl, we're supposed to be majestic and s**t, stop f***ing around.")

I saw this on the Book of Face yesterday:

I agree on macho (that was Kirk's schtick), but I would personally say he was the most heroic of the 4 Trek captains I'm familiar with (Kirk, Picard, Sisko, Janeway) simply because he always wanted to settle things nonviolently if it was at all possible.   A good hero, IMHO, knows not just how to fight, but when.

I agree on macho (that was Kirk's schtick), but I would personally say he was the most heroic of the 4 Trek captains I'm familiar with (Kirk, Picard, Sisko, Janeway) simply because he always wanted to settle things nonviolently if it was at all possible.   A good hero, IMHO, knows not just how to fight, but when.

I agree on macho (that was Kirk's schtick), but I would personally say he was the most heroic of the 4 Trek captains I'm familiar with (Kirk, Picard, Sisko, Janeway) simply because he always wanted to settle things nonviolently if it was at all possible.   A good hero, IMHO, knows not just how to fight, but when.

I agree on macho (that was Kirk's schtick), but I would personally say he was the most heroic of the 4 Trek captains I'm familiar with (Kirk, Picard, Sisko, Janeway) simply because he always wanted to settle things nonviolently if it was at all possible.   A good hero, IMHO, knows not just how to fight, but when.

This isn't so much funny as interesting, I admit.  But I thought it was interesting enough to post.

They have public schools in Mexico now?

I don't know what Neil was talking about.  The only human being involved in that conversation did fine for herself.

I rather enjoy throwing this in people's faces ...