Jediphile

Thanks for the link. Interesting. Although the site doesn't seem to have been updated for a year (which is rarely a good sign...), it still has some good information on it. Don't like the d6 so much, since it also has the D&D to make building stats far more attractive than skills, but even then it might be a good basis for some ideas.

The problem with that is that we all have different ideas for storylines that we would like to see. I do try to make a point of commenting when I see one, since nobody could be bothered to comment on mine, and I didn't much like that. But Vagrant and I are scarcely the only ones to suggest plots for KotOR3. Trouble is that if people here aren't interested in reading story proposals, how can we expect Obsidian or whomever to read them? So after you've tried a couple of times, you just stop, and then it's all down to people suggesting hooded robes and black-colored lightsabers or whatever...

All those systems are better than GURPS.. Lemme add one more.. Savage Worlds looks pretty nifty too. EDIT: I am not too sure that d20 is better than GURPS though :darque: <{POST_SNAPBACK}> And I'm pretty sure they're all worse than GURPS... I certainly think that both d20 and d6 are.

I have both editions of GURPS, and though I haven't studied the whole thing down to the letter, they look very much the same, so I think you sourcebooks are just as relevant in GURPS 4rd Ed. as in 3rd Ed. It's nowhere near like the D&D 2e to 3e switch, which was a totally different game.

Sure, but I tend to see something like that as a tool in case the GM and players are not going to be bothered to role-play a situation - role-playing the party's visits to 10 shops in a town can drain your incentive to play like crazy. Besides, any good GM will take PC behavior into consideration - of course they're not going to get a favorable response if they persist in telling everybody they meet just how stupid and ugly they are

Already?!? Isn't GURPS 3rd edition almost 15 years old or so? Besides, 4th edition looks a lot like 3rd edtion as far as I can tell... I guess they didn't want to alienate any of the fanbase...

Well, I'd recommend Call of Cthulhu, especially 5th edition (pre d20) if you can get it. I've played some of World of Darkness, a bit of Exalted (which is not horror) and a good deal of Vampire, but Vampire never seemed much like a horror game to me - it's much more about keeping the truce between the vampires and humans and other beings than it is about being scared or scaring others. Cthulhu, however, is definitely horror. It's the only game I know of to have extensive rules for sanity that are used constantly, because facing the unspeakable monsters from beyond can clearly leave quite insane if you're not careful (and frequently even if you are...). Be warned, though, that characters die by the dozen in Cthulhu, so it's not for the faint of heart. And death is often violent and nasty in Cthulhu.

It will be restored-it has yet to be assigned to anyone however since we're all working on other stuff at the moment. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Thanks for the answer. It had been a while and since it is not mentioned in the progress report, I thought it might have been dropped. Glad to hear I was wrong.

Funny thing about that. Take a look at Smith in the first movie, and you'll notice that he is already pretty far gone. The way he removes his earpiece when torturing Morpheus and so being unaware of the attack by Neo and Trinity says a lot. The other programs looked shocked at what he is doing (and even ask him about it). And just how can he not know about the attack? Removing the ear-piece is not a clue in itself, since he is really a program and should be able to disconnect from the system. No, there is something wrong with him even in the first movie...

The problem with that is that Smith *IS* Neo. When he supposedly destroyed him at the end of the first movie, he accidentally gave him powers instead of deleting him. Or as Smith puts it, "something imprinted or copied". In any event, he made Smith aware and severed his connection to the system, thinking that would delete him. It did not have that effect, however.

A while ago I mentioned some soundfiles where the Handmaiden talks about how to combat people unarmed so that you don't kill them, and somebody from the team looked at it and said that it was to be used for the showdown with the Handmaiden sisters and that it might be restorable. Has any decision been reached on this?

I'd rather do my own plot

I played many sessions of Shadowrun and yet I never got around to feeling that way...

Bounty Hunter: "Finally we have found you - surrender or die, Jedi!" Evil Exile: "The next one who calls me a jedi is going to feel my lightsaber where the sun never shines!!"

Actually, a warrior has a d10 for each level, always the maximum 10 at level 1, and gets to add his con bonus every time. That's 10+bonus + d10+bonus/level. The wizard's fireball does only d6/level, so chances are he will never reach the warrior's hit points, even if the warrior missed his save. And since fireballs cap at 10d6 while characters never stop accumulating hp, the chances of dying are even smaller beyond level 10.

Or how about an armor... " Hehe - don't give me any ideas. I am a GM, after all, and I might let it slip to my players where I got my ideas

We are <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The problem lies in the multi/dual class systems, which are completely different in 2e and 3e, and in the way monster-races are fit into the rules in each incarnation. In 2e, a 1st level warrior is a 1st level character, no matter which race he belongs to, while in 3e, the race, if powerful, is considered to be worth a number of experience levels. I checked this, and IIRC a minotaur is considered to be an 8th-level character as a base, so a 3rd-level minotaur fighter would be considered 11th-level (8+3) and have to earn xp according to that. This means that I cannot fairly convert a 16th-level 2e minotaur fighter (who would drop eight levels to be a mere 8th level fighter) or a 12/12-level 2e dwarven fighter/cleric, since his classes would add up to 24 levels, which is far too much in 3e. The Karameikan school of magecraft did not exist in the original OD&D system, and even after it was invented, it has had next to no effect on the campaign world. Even the last pusblished PWAs give it next to no significance, and what magic is taught there was never touched upon in OD&D - it wasn't until the 2e box you got those hated kits to sort out the karameikan mages. The Atruaghin Clans don't depend on magic at all. They have shamans, but they their effect on their society is built entirely on their social functions and not on power levels or D&D class structures. The shaman class is described, but it's not essential to the setting and can easily be replaced by something similar in another game. Only Glantri and Alphatia can be said to be based heavily on D&D-specific magic, but then even the Radiance falls outside standard D&D rules and is described only in Gaz3 for OD&D and G:KoM for 2e. Otherwise both Glantri and Alphatia is founded heavily on magic, and so this is the one area where you would have to present a good substitute if you switch to another system. Taking those over to, for instance, GURPS rules will need some conversion, since the nations are tied closely to some specific D&D spells in certain cases. Well, Glantri is a problem for my campaign, since one PC is a dwarven fighter/cleric... and you know how much they just love clerics and dwarves there, and vice versa As for magical component, I don't agree. Yes, they have magic in most of those nations, but just how much does it matter in those societies, and how much is it tied to D&D magic that you cannot alter? We know there are guilds for wizards in both Minrothad and Darokin, but they have next to no detectable influence on society beyond being accepted as beneficial in some circumstances. The same is true in Thyatis, which has some truly powerful wizards, but who just don't matter much to the general life in their society.

GURPS? Dumbed down? It is quite the contrary! It ain't dumbed down enough! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I agree.. that it's not dumbed down. Not that it isn't dumbed down enough, though If a simple car chase scene takes over an hour to run and you need to consult the rulebook over and over again then the rules are too complicated. Netrunning and magic rules are also too complex. I have never been a big fan of rolling a whole bunch of die at once and counting successes..etc <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yeah, I feel the same way, pretty much as I do with Vampire, Exalted and the other WoD games... But then I don't like the Shadowrun setting either, too much of a confusing mess of odd races thrown in with cyberpunk future stuff. Always seemed half-cooked to me...

Personal taste is always important, but if we're going argue our tastes, then the discussion becomes as pointless as a cleric's weapon (unless you use Player Option rules...), since it will just be descriptions of what each of us tend to like. I'd rather we argued from a more objective base, since that can serve to lead us to useful conclusions about what a good RPG is or not. So far I've heard people argue that it depends on personal preference or GM inginuity. All good and true, but such comments don't add anything useful to the discussion, I think. I don't mind (as people probably know by now) writing pages of why I like this or that, but it's not helpful unless looked at as examples of why something is good or bad in a game. True enough. Canon Mystara is OD&D and doesn't have multi/dual classes at all. That means it's even more restrictive to play than later editions. However, you won't see that on the surface, since all of the NPCs fall into the categories set up for them, and because entirely new classes are invented as needed in the various gazetteers. Alphatia's council of 1000 archmages grew out of the rules, for example, as did the gladiators and other warriors of Thyatis. That doesn't make them impossible in a broader game structure, however, and they would instead serve to emphasize the value of focusing on a particular area of expertise (wizardry/magic in the first and combat/fighting skill in the second). Indeed, it would be harder to separate Mystara from D&D magic, since it is essential to some lands. Alphatia is founded on the exploitation of magic, for example, while Glantri is impossible without the Radiance. Actually, nostalgia is only secondary to me. It's much more significant that some of the characters in my campaign were made with 2e multi-class options or other rules that would make them impossible to convert fairly to another system. One character is a 16th-level ex-minotaur fighter, for example ("ex" because he lifted his minotaur curse and is now a really large human). In 3e a minotaur is actually counted as an 8th-level character (IIRC), which means he would only get 8 levels of warrior skill in the conversion, which is blantantly unfair on the player - he created the character on the basis that he would be able to take levels in the same manner as anyone else, so suddenly removing is to betray his character. I would do that if I switched to 3e. The same is true for the level 12/12 dwarven fighter/cleric - in 3e he would have about 15 levels to distribute among his fighter and cleric classes, and that is just unfair to the basis he created the character on. So I'm stuck in 2e until those characters leave the campaign whether I like it or not. But even if they were, I still wouldn't see much reason to switch to 3e - it's simply not enough of an improvement for that. As I see it, only the magic system ties Mystara closely to D&D. The campaign is tied directly to some of the spells of the game in some cases, and you have to come up with something similar if you change the system. But beyond that there is no reason why you couldn't switch the system. Mystara is certainly rich enough to allow for the diversity (unlike some D&D campaign worlds). Indeed, there are characters in Mystara, that fit so well into the D&D structure. Empress Eriadna or King Stefan both fit their archetypes well, but Chancellor Corwyn Mauntea of Darokin doesn't strike you much as a thief, when you read his description, and he seems rather to have been made into one simply because the other classes were even more improbable for him. This is an example of a character that was made to fit the setting, but which the fixed and rigid class structure of the game couldn't provide a fitting archetype for. I couldn't possibly disagree more - of all of the D&D campaign worlds, Mystara is the one that would best accept a broad system for customizable characters, since several of the nations are founded on a historic basis rather than a rules-heavy one. Alphatia and Glantri are clearly tied to D&D magic, yes, but nations like Ethengar, Darokin, Karameikos, Ylaruam, Sind, Atruaghin Clans, Ostland, Vestland, Soderfjord and even Thyatis are based far more historic reference than on D&D rules systems. It's quite the opposite in FR, where the nationalities are based first on alignment considerations and historic inspiration second or in DL, where everything is centered on the neverending war between good dragons and evil dragons. The inspiration for Mystara was not based on D&D classes but on history. Sure, it may seem so if you look at lands like Glantri, Alfheim, Rockhome, or the Five Shires, but that is more because those are based on magic, elves, dwarves, and halflings respectively, and as long as those are kept in focus for those nations, it really won't matter which rules you use - the dwarves of Rockhome will be just as effective and compelling under GURPS rules as their are in D&D, which underlines that Rockhome was written with the dwarven race as a focus and not the dwarven OD&D class. No, the problem is that I fairly convert the main PCs to another system. I could switch Mystara to GURPS rules tomorrow or even today without much trouble, if I were to begin a new campaign. In fact, only the heavy focus on magic in Glantri and Alphatia (and Thyatis to a lesser extent) would be problematic. But since we rarely adventure in any of those nations, it would not be a major obstacle.

Sorry, but to me that sounds like a contradiction. You say that you don't mind hit points in level-based systems, and then you cite their use in a game that is not level based as an example... FYI, GURPS too can be said to have hit points in the sense that there are points assigned to the various parts of the body, but the number of points they have is based on your stats and not accumulated automatically as you progress through the game. If a commoner has, say, about 8 hp on average, while a hard warrior can have up to 12 or 13, but also has tons of skill to avoid being hit at all, then that's fine by me - it's realistic since the PC doesn't automatically become a god next to the common man, he just knows how to defend himself. But if he's in a situation that doesn't involve combat, like drinking poison or caught in an avalance, then he's just as likely to die as anyone else because his combat skill is not going to be relevant. In 3e, however, your experience is a universal shield against any sort of threat, and that is completely silly. It's slightly better than 2e since poisons and such tend to cause ability loss, which can kill if reduced to zero, but then the PCs do tend to have higher stats anyway, and they even improve them automatically as the progress through the game, so it's still not very convincing. I don't mind that the heroes have a better chance of survival in these situations, that's okay, but they shouldn't be impervious to things that would be fatal to ordinary people. A fireball would be a terrible and horrible thing in a realistic setting, but in D&D it won't matter much to experienced characters - they just note down the damage and then continue as if nothing had happened, when they should have severe burns and be caught in the middle of a fire. A 10th level warrior surrounded by 15 orcs can easily let his wizard friend cast a fireball at him, because he will hardly take a scratch, while all the orcs are guaranteed to die even if they make their saves (which the warrior is all but certain to make). Again, silly.

While I think this works well on the level of options for the PC, it has the big problem of next to no plot. And what's more troubling is that if you're going to allow that much diversity for player choices so early in the game, then the overall plot of the game will inevitably suffer as a result. KotOR games tend to quite linear and give very little genuine choice to the player. Usually the light/dark choices are limited to very few and isolated quests and not the overall plot. The final LS/DS choice comes very late and usually has little influence on how things will play out - in KotOR2 it almost didn't matter at all. And when we consider that the game will have only a certain amount of man-hours devoted to it among programmers/writers/whomever, it becomes very clear that you can have either rich plot or many options, but not both, since doing a lot of one would reduce the amount of work that can be done on the other. KotOR games have so far prioritized plot over options, and personally I don't want that to change. If anything, I'd prefer richer and more interesting plot even over the loss of options. I play KotOR to see what happens in the story, not to have a gazillion options open to me. This is where they erred in the X-Wing vs. Tie Fighter game - they cut the missions, but you could play however you wanted. X-Wing Alliance had very linear plot in the next game because felt no progress or connection to a character in X-Wing vs. Tie Fighter. This might isn't the same, but the plot will still suffer as a result. This is also why I don't voice support of more color for lightsabers, robes with hood, or better graphics. I don't mind, but I don't want to see the devs sacrifice plot focus as a result.

Like Lancer I do play 2e, but unlike him I won't defend it as a good RPG system, since it's not - it's just what I've gotten used to, and if I stick with it, it'll be out of familiarity and nostalgia. Indeed, I would have dropped it already if 3e was that much better, but now I'm stuck with it for a while until my current campaign ends. But once that happens, chances are that I'll quit 2e too, for good. GURPS also has a simple mechanic - you roll 3d6 and try to roll below your skill. But if you don't like rolling below something, then there really is no reason why you couldn't add the skill value to the roll and try to get it as high as possible just as d20 does. Oh, and GURPS have all the rules you want in two books instead of three, and that is actually one book more than most RPGs. Combat might be more complicated, but it really didn't have to be - there is no reason why combat need more complex and slow in one game than in the other. In GURPS they just decided to have advanced and realistic representation of combat, and in d20 they focused on quick and simple even if that came at the expense of believability. But it's a choice, and there is no reason why GURPS couldn't have been much simpler in this regard. I would say d20 3e is more polished than previous editions, but saying it's an improvement might be going to far. For a game that is supposedly built on more than a decade of 2e experience, it certainly makes a lot of the same mistakes. The fact that players no longer stop rolling for hit points at high levels means that a 17th level warrior can certainly have in the vicinity of 200 hp, while a command still has one 5 or 6. That's just completely ridiculous when you consider that a thief could kill the common man with just about any sword, and yet the warrior would hardly notice it even if the thief hit him with a backstab (or sneak attack, if you prefer...). And I'm going to invoke the Boromir-argrument here again - the fact that four arrows fired by orcs cannot possibly kill a high level warrior in 3e is just plain dumb. You could argue the same for 2e, of course, but at least the accumulated hp had a cap somewhere around level 10 there, and they did introduce Critical Hits in Player Option: Combat & Tactics, yet those are strangely absent from 3e, even though they would make even more sense here what with the increased hp totals...