Drowsy Emperor

Even EA Sports has better games than Gearbox.

Sounds like a mix of Nobilis and WoD

Homeworld 3 shouldn't be anyone's first RTS. That way failure will come quicker than you can say banana mothership.

I haven't. Give me your impression of it.

Jesus Christ, this is still discussed. If you want more realism just ask Obsidian to ship the game with a rock inside. Seriously, videogame writers suck at writing romances - you're asking them to do the impossible and its going to make the game even more hammy than fantasy videogames already are.

The point I was trying to make was that the area's always been a buffer zone between East and West, and thus subject to basically millennia of conflict. In that you're correct. WAAAAGH!

I'm a fan of rich settings and simple systems. Good luck getting a gaming group to learn a new system with a heavy rules set.

You mean Fading Suns? FS is the space opera. There isn't a story idea the setting can't justify and incorporate. A pity the system is horrible. My pet project is a total conversion of FS to Savage Worlds. Eclipse Phase is nice, its obvious the authors are very passionate about the subject, but I think the rules presentation could be better and I'm not sure if the system isn't a bit too clunky for its own good.

I might start something as well, so I'll keep that in mind. Currently I'm poring over: Fading Suns Mouse Guard Burning Wheel One Ring Savage Worlds

The Byzantine empire wasn't arguably any more violent than any other empire? I don't understand that comment. The 20th century is a poor guide for passing judgment over the Balkans. There's over a thousand years of additional history which hasn't been any more violent than any other part of the world. In fact, its mostly peaceful - like history in general when you take out the short spans of war and other disasters. Whenever world power shifts, as it did with the fall of the USSR the Balkans are affected because every world power has a stake in them and its own interests. Besides, one could easily argue that Europe is the one with a special relation to violence, given that some of the worst crimes and the two worst wars in history happened there - by nations that boasted of their own enlightenment and progressiveness. Almost everything that happened in the Balkans pales in comparison. And that was a mere sixty years ago - there are still living people who remember it. The current state of peace in Europe is an exception that has yet to prove its long term viability.

You Are A: Lawful Good Human Cleric (3rd Level) Ability Scores: Strength- 15 Dexterity- 14 Constitution- 14 Intelligence- 16 Wisdom- 12 Charisma- 11 LOL Worst cleric ever.

I like Delta Green but its hard for me to create games in that setting material when i don't live in any of those countries - and my players don't know enough of those details to really immerse themselves. Which edition of Warhammer are you playing?

The main points of contention (from a neutral) with the historical parts of Boo's version would be 1) A/H wanting to invade Serbia in WW1. It was by no means a done deal, and there is little doubt that their crown prince- a noted moderate- was murdered with the active collusion of some in the Serb government. A modern comparison would be Joe Biden being assassinated by an Iranian in Bahrain with Republican Guard involvement; it may be a pretext, but it was a justifiable pretext. 2) The Serb experience in WW1 is actually rather underplayed, they lost the highest proportion (probably around a fifth, as high as a quarter) of their population in the war of anyone, and by a fair margin. There were also persistent incidents of ethnic atrocities from both A/H and Bulgaria- though their severity is disputed. That is important background. 3) While the conduct of the Croatian 'state' in WW2 was utterly despicable (e.g.)- as was that of the Catholic church who actively encouraged forced conversions and the like and shielded war criminals post war- it was not universally supported by all Croats or all Catholics, much as not all Serbs were resistance heroes. Most prominently, Tito was a croat resister (and Hildegard's grandfather too, iirc). Again, that is important background. 4) The dropping in support for the royalist resistance had less to do with any deal with Stalin and more to do with their ineffectiveness and tendency to use resources to fight Tito rather than the nazis. Overall what you had when Yugo split was a recipe for disaster based on wounds that had never been healed, but only papered over by Tito's strong personality. When the split happened the Serbs simply didn't trust the Croats not to be oppressive (not helped by use of some nationalist imagery and support from Germany, given the experience in WW2) and the Croats understandably didn't want to give up majority Serb areas of their new country. In general you do not hear much of the background stuff because it takes some research, and because it interferes with the standard good guy/ bad guy narrative. As with most things there really aren't any good guys, and in the case of the Balkan Wars barely even any less worse guys. The Serb reaction- even if I'd still blame them most overall- is at least understandable (though not really justifiable) in historical context. I can certainly understand Serb annoyance at always being painted as the bad guys though, both given their history of being genuinely oppressed within living memory, people's general ignorance of that, and that both the Croats and Kosovans expelled large numbers of Serbs without much if any condemnation from the west. Ultimately though, asking a Croat and Serb to give reasoned explanations of the Balkan Wars is extremely unlikely to work productively. Too many recent wounds, too much refusal to admit bad stuff done by their side while listing bad stuff done by the other. Too many eminent truths that are only either eminent or truths to one side. Quite a lot of the Balkan stuff is quite similar to the Chechen and wider Caucasus' experiences- Chechens' experiences under Russian and especially Stalin's deportations provide historical context for their fight and attitude, and the 100ks of South Ossetian refugees- more than their current population by multiples- fleeing the Georgians gives context as to why they don't want to be reintegrated into Georgia. Regarding no 1: The archduke of AH came to Bosnia to oversee military maneuvers on the Bosnian/Serbian border. What is the point of these maneuvers if not to prepare the army for an attack? He was assassinated by a Bosnian serb nationalist who wanted an independent Bosnia. This was a conspiracy in which certain officers of the Serbian government were also a part of. However the highest levels of government did not support this course of action. What would the Serbian government gain by provoking a 10 times larger country into war with it? That notion is ridiculous, there was no way to win the war even with the decaying state of the AH empire. And there were ways to avoid all out war. AH chose to create an unacceptable ultimatum and even though Serbia accepted all points but one of said ultimatum, AH did not try to negotiate further and instead declared war immediately. Also, the Germans were in favor of war and had a part in egging AH into it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/July_Crisis#Austro-Hungarian_attitude_to_war 3. I never said all Croats and catholics fell in line with NDH ideology. But the majority did. Neither were all Serbs resistance heroes of course. The royalist movement was composed mostly of Serbs, while the communists were mixed, although mostly Croat and Serb. You're wrong about Tito. His nationality is an unknown as are many other details of his life. Of course, he wasn't a Serb, so you have a point there.

Hey you're welcome. We don't have to agree necessarily on an issue, but you have an admirably stoic and polite approach to discussion. PS: You obviously don't get around much on the internet

This doesn't really belong here but I thought it was cute: http://www.thediceshoponline.com/categories.asp They have anything and everything.

He's probably going to wish he activated his suicide vest by the time this thing is through.

Wasn't the younger brother shot? He probably has a personal stake in it. Its the short version and some generalizations had to be made, but much of that can be confirmed by simple fact checking. Everyone likes to claim the position of the victim in the Balkan wars, but an ethnicity map speaks for itself. Its the best guide to seeing what happened, even if you don't know the actual course of events. 1990 Nat Geo ethnic map 2000-2003 apparently World Bank map As is apparent, Croatia is ethnically clean in the new millenium and Bosnia is homogenized into 3 blocks.

I didn't finish it though. Got tired at some point close to the end and gave up.

The short version is this: Pagan Slavs came to the Balkans in the 7th century or so. They were basically one large tribe or a multitude, but not significantly different. The area came under the competing influences of Rome and Constantinopole, and was Christianized. When the churches split into the catholic west and orthodox east the first differences were created - although there was more antagonism between Rome and Constantinopole than between the Slavs themselves. Slavic kingdoms rose and grew in power, even as the Byzantine power diminished. The Serbian state and the Byzantine empire fell in the 15th century to Ottoman Turk invasion. The Turks managed ultimately to get to Vienna but their real limit was the Austro Hungarian border, meaning they held the Serb territories but the Croats were left in a the catholic Austro-Hungarian empire. The differences widened as Croats became partially assimilated in the west, while Serbia struggled to retain its identity during the muslim rule. A small number were assimilated and mixed with the Turks becoming the serbian speaking muslims that would later form today's "Bosniak" identity. In the 19th century the Turkish empire is in a decline. Serbia rebels several time against Turkish rule, gaining independence in 1878. The Turks are driven out. Croats are still under AH rule. Twentieth century. A climate of unity is fostered between the Southern slavs. Ideas of a common state for Croats, Serbs and others rise. Austro Hungarian empire dislikes this. It desires the former Turkish territories. Annexes Bosnia (formerly Turkish), and prepares to assault its neighboring Kingdom of Serbia. Assassination of Archduke Ferdinand is used as a pretext to start the long prepared war. First world war begins. The Vatican and the catholic clergy try to instill anti-Serbian propaganda and later Croatian nationalism in the Croats, to get them to fight for AH which is already bursting at the seams. The Vatican dislikes the idea of a Slavic state as it sees Croatian territory as its own dominion. World war 1 ends. As a reward for fighting with the allies, but mostly to keep a buffer zone next to much reduced Austria, France pushes for the creation of Yugoslavia to include former AH territories (Croatia, Bosnia) Serbia etc. Kingdom of Yugoslavia is formed. Vatican inspired Croatian nationalism poisons the newly created state and before WWII the king is assassinated by a croatian nationalist. Yugoslavia starts to burst at the seams. WWII. Yugoslavia is overrun by Axis. Croatia is given a quasi independence as a nazi puppet state "NDH". The muslims are also coopted by nazi forces into a SS division. Serbia and the rest is occupied. "NDH" forms concentration camps for Serbs, Jews and Romany, to ethnically cleanse Croatian territories. In occupied serbia two resistance movements form. Communists and Royalists. Royalists are supported but later abandoned by the west after a deal with Stalin. Communist forces eventually win and post WWII Yugoslavia begins, within its former borders, as a satellite of the USSR. Croatian and muslim crimes are downplayed for the sake of unity. This leads to even more bad blood in the long run. Yugoslavia breaks away from USSR. During its time it plays to both sides building a new, socialist, non-aligned image. Economic troubles and the downfall of the USSR intensify a growing crisis. Croatian nationalism is resurrected with support from Germany and the Vatican. It declares independence.from Yugoslavia. The independence isn't a problem, but the new croatian leadership, which adorns itself in NDH symbolism refuses to give the large Serb minority constitutional rights. The minority rebels. Serbia is obligated to assist but the process is haphazard. Croatian leadership draws up a plan to forcibly convert, expel and eradicate the minority. The plan is a success with German and US PMC support. Bosnian leadership sees their opportunity. Macedonia and Slovenia split from Yugoslavia without major conflict. Bosnian muslim leadership desires to take control of the entirety of the territory. They only cover about half however, the rest is mostly Serbian and a small Croatian part. Civil war ensues. It essentially ends in a stalemate leaving bosnia split three ways as a western protectorate but it antagonizes everyone to the point of mutual hatred. Yugoslavia is left with only Serbia and Montenegro. Conclusion. The differences arise from religion. However religion is not the reason for the war. It is an instrument of foreign powers (Vatican, Germany, Saudi Arabia and other muslim states) and domestic elites who worked on intensifying the situation and marrying religion to a nationalistic ideology. The problem in Bosnia and Croatia was the huge minority of Serbian and other population that was left within their borders upon achieving independence or during that process. They did not want to integrate this population in a democratic state likely fearing their numbers and voting power. This led to violence and in both cases the minorities fought back, with covert support from the yugoslav/serb government in Belgrade. In Croatia they were all but wiped out, in Bosnia they carved out an entity for themselves. Kosovo is a long story.

Well who do you trust more, the journalists or your eyes?

I treat it like a different genre altogether, not as a substitute. Like a flash game that can keep you entertained for a little while. Drawing the map was the fun part.

I know of one ex Spetsnaz. I don't know the details of his service in Afghanistan but I have seen him flick razor blades a few centimeters into a wooden block. And throw anything else with a sharp edge.

Yeah its the Bioware travelling circus all over again. have you been on the BSN? it is quite possibly one of the most disgusting places on the internet...I feel less bad about being a part of the human race watching holocaust slideshows than I do whenever i venture into that sh*t hole. Impressions in the following order:

Since we have a topic on old RPG's I thought we could do with one on newer trends in the industry. I've come across several systems and settings I like that I haven't seen mentioned on these boards. Savage Worlds Savage Worlds is a generic ruleset that is tailor made for pulpy adventures regardless of genre. Its pulpy because the heroes and villains are markedly stronger than regular enemies, which are designed to be be beaten in large numbers. The core of the system is in its combat called FFF, meaning Fast, Furious and Fun. And it truly is fast. It takes no more than an hour to get to grips with the rules which is a huge advantage when trying to draw in new players. The system in a nutshell: A character is formed by picking from a setting specified list of races and point buying traits, skills, edges (feats) and hindrances (flaws to be roleplayed) and calculating a few derived statistics. The 5 traits (Agility, Strength, Smarts, Spirit, Vigor) are represented in die types: d4, d6, d8, d10, d12. They all start off as d4 and can be improved up to d12, at the price of one point per die type. A beginning character gets 5 points to distribute. Skills follow the same system and can be improved up to the die type of the trait they're linked to, for one point, and more than that for two points. Example: Fighting is linked to Agility. A d8 in Agility means the player can buy up to d8 in Fighting for one point. A d10 in Fighting would cost that player two points.A new character gets 15 skill points to distribute. Edges and Hindrances are bought by balancing one with the other. Edges work like DnD feats in the sense that the provide some sort of specialized ability. Hindrances are negative modifiers or character flaws intended for roleplaying. Edges, not skills, are the crux of character customization and there are a lot of them. Derived statistics: Charisma starts at 0 and can be modified with Edges and Hindrances. Pace is a standard 6" of movement + 1d6 when running. Parry is 2+half of Fighting. It represents the target number to hit the hero in combat. Toughness is the damage threshold. Surpassing it inflicts a status effect or wounds. Its 2+half of Vigor+ armor. Tests and player advantages: A test in the game is made by rolling the appropriate die for a trait or skill. The default target number is 4. A four and anything over is a success. Dice are exploding, meaning that rolling the maximum number of a die allows a reroll. Everty 4 points over the number need for success is a Raise, which brings an additional, beneficial effect. A roll can be modified with Bennies which are points used for rerolling an unfavorable die. Player characters (and major enemies) are Wild Cards. They can suffer more wounds and they roll a 1d6 Wild Die with every die roll they make and pick the better score. A double 1 on both dice is a critical failure. Miniatures: All measurements in the game along with cut out templates, vehicle rules etc are intended for use with (any) miniatures. The use of figurines speeds up the system a lot, but it may be problematic for some. There are alternate rules offered - but in general it is best to go with figurines. Sub-Systems: There is a magic subsystem, and simple systems used to tackle allies, chases, dramatic tasks, fear, hazards, verbal debates, mass battles, vehicles etc. Congratulations. You know enough to play Savage Worlds now. There are more rules of course, but this is all you need to get started. The greatest merit of this system is that its adaptable to any genre and setting, its quick to play and easy to learn thus good for drawing in beginners. Its not very crunchy and for people who need deep mechanics to enjoy their roleplaying. It can be found as a PDF or a hardcover on Pinnacle Entertainment's site along with a number of settings created for it.

Heya Raithe, I totally hear how life can completely get in the way of old school RPG! You said you picked up new books. For AD&D 2nd Ed? Heh, no, I think I've nearly got practically complete set of Ad&D 2nd edition stuff all stacked up.. I tend to pick up new books on fresh rpg's and such. Of late it's been more Shadowrun, M&M, Eclipse Phase, Pathfinder. I did go through a lot of WoD before the new edition. (I think if I put all my Vampire/Mage/Demon books on end I'd get a pile about 5 foot high). Fresh new worlds and settings that can be interesting to see how they've handled different issues, and see how they've approached similar mechanics in different ways. Hey I got Eclipse Phase as well. Nice setting isn't it? The rules are a bit clunky though For the rest of you - you can find the rulebook on the official website, free for download under the creative commons license.