The Official OTC TBRPG Planning and Organization Topic

[Xomeron]

See, given the rules for magic presented in the Inheritance books, even a normal human can do so much more than Eragon is doing, because he wastes energy on being flashy. Throwing a fireball when he could just set the target on fire, that sort of thing. My basic idea is that my character will be adept at finding little ways to save power, and use that power for killings instead.

[Silvan Haven]

Necro was talking about a music based RPG on page 3, what happened to it?I thought it looked realy cool and had a unique twist.Only, I haven't seen any mention of it since then and I was wondering if it was because he wasn't doing anymore or what?

[Toast of Awesomeness]

Well, Riders don't slaughter hundreds of thousands either. And I think I remember hearing somewhere that the dragon riders were inspired in part by the Jedi, so that's why I used that haha. But still, it gets the point across. People want to play as more powerful chatacters(usually), so the playing field would be more or less equal either way.

[Archer Vonn]

eragon was still a lot more powerful then anakin or luke ever could be (and in the last battle, in eldest, iirc he went on a jolly ol' killing spree that probably killed hundreds, but your right, hundreds of thousands is a bit much) and the riders kinda were inspired by the jedi- but most of the inheritence plot was copy+paste from star wars anyway.

[Xomeron]

In a fight between Brom at the height of his power and Obi Wan at the height of his power, my money's on Obi-Wan. Riders have to cast from hit-points, where Jedi have an external power source. But let's not derail the thread. Necro's RPG is on hold for a while, because he's busy with lots of stuff.

[Archer Vonn]

i guess having a laser sword that can cut through anything also probably helps.

[Xomeron]

Just going to throw this idea out here; a play inspired by Shakespeare. Some Player Characters are theater in Shakesperian Times, either Actors, Stage Workers, Writers, or some combination thereof, and members of the Lord Chamberlain's Men. Other players are Faeries directly inspired by A Midsummer Night's Dream: The shadowy, mischievous if not malevolent deathly Fae that people in those times feared. The exact objectives of each side are to be determined. Encourage players to, say, write in Iambic Pentameter, or show their knowledge/experience with the time period. Title Ideas: Ill Met By Moonlight, This Rough Magic

[Rumpelstiltskin]

Just a note here, but I'm just hashing out some of the initial issues of this RPG now; I want to wait until after Inheritance has been out for a while (and possibly when I can get more internet time) before I actually craft the RPG itself. But it'd be good to have this all out of the way when I do sit down to do that. I think that I'm going to stick with the basic four races of Alagaesia for this RPG - Humans, Elves, Dwarves, and Urgals. I can't justify banning Elves, as they're technically the dominant race of Alagaesia at the time. If I grant everyone two characters, then they'll most likely pick a different race for their second, thus keeping everything (hopefully) balanced. I'm not too worried about a lack of human characters, as technically humans are the least noteworthy of the races of Alagaesia. They're there for the people who want them, and I think they'll appeal to anyone who doesn't want the extra baggage of the excessive cultures of Elves, Dwarves, and Urgals. Human characters are simple, normal, and easy to RP. For those who do want to be different, Dwarves and Urgals should make good counterpoints for the Elves. The diversity of the Dwarves and their crafts, as well as the Urgals' general bloodthirstyness, should appeal to players as much as the Elves superior magical prowess. Dragons are not going to be playable as characters, unless connected to a Dragon Rider as a special character. Spirits and the human art of Sorcery are completely banned, no ifs, ands, or buts. (Shades included.) At the moment Werecats are going to be off limits as well, but I may change my mind later on, I'm not sure. As for Ra'zac, I'm still on the fence. On the one hand, their physical prowess isn't much different from an Elf's. On the other, they still have a huge potential for godmodding, and would be able to completely (and legitimately, I might add) overpower human characters. If I did approve Ra'zac characters, they'd have to be without a Lethrblaka counterpart, as the Lethrblaka is the ultimate predator and is impossible to maim or kill without a Dragon to balance the fight. ~Lord Rahl~

[Archer Vonn]

dare i say it, i'd like to feature a non-combat RPG. one that focuses on development rather then superiority. telling a story of two warring factions is one thing, but i'd like to see the story of a lonely boy from queens every so often too.

[Xomeron]

My Shakespeare idea wouldn't necessarily be combative. Heck, make it about two rival theater companies, use it to tell a story rather than just fighting.

[Toast of Awesomeness]

You could do it where you get one magic character, and one 'normal' character? Or something like that, haha. :PHonestly though, Ra'zac are pretty much on par with elves, and if you allow elves you should allow Ra'zac too. Maybe take away the human paralyzing breath or otherwise limit them. Like I said, if you want to play a human, you have to know you'll be weaker than an elf or a Ra'zac.

Edited October 25, 2011 by Toast of Awesomeness

[Jean Valjean]

Plus, I got sick and tired of about half a dozen people having characters that were the manifestation of all evil, shadows, or death. There should really only be one. I'd imagine that the creator of an RPG that has the potential for these characters should clarify who the ultimate evil of the universe is before people begin jumping to claim the position. Your Honor,Emperor Kraggh

I have to disagree with you there, Kraggh, as I found that the various "manifestations of all evil, shadows, or death" were all vying to be the one and only, which made for not only battles between good and evil, but also battles between evil and evil, on top of the constantly shifting alliances. On all other points, however, I have to agree with you, Reality had far too much leeway in any and every aspect. For someone with a serious-approach to RPing, it was practically impossible to do anything. --- Now, I was conceptualizing what a good Alagaesia RPG would look like, and I came to the realization that the various cultures need a steady guideline. For example, humans' last names are either "Xsson" and "Xsdaughter" or otherwise note a specific aspect of the person or title they've earned (ie "Shadeslayer"); the elves have an entire (complex) system of formalities and manners; and the dwarves have their various clans and specialties. All of these are the things that create the overall vibe that is Alagaesia, but seem rather restrictive when it comes to RPing. Do you guys think that I should outline all of this in the first post? ~Lord Rahl~

I won't argue this, because you're right. Although I do think it's a good idea to clarify what all the pros and cons are before making a full judgment. What annoyed me in particular was the legalistic battles over "property rights" that took place, because sometimes it came to the point when players honestly thought that their character was not just a manifestation of evil, darkness, or death, but the manifestation of all evil, darkness, and/or death, and that this claim didn't need to be settled in a fight within the RPG. Therefore what resulted was a series of disputes and arguments similar to the problems that arise when there are too many god-mods. It also got confusing when I saw more than one character named Shadow or Darkness. Though at the same time, you're right, because if handled correctly it can make for a fun alternative type of conflict, although that operates underneath the assumption that all the manifestations of evil, darkness, and/or death are not already the ultimate such manifestations, if you know what I mean. Your Honor,Emperor Kraggh

[Silvan Haven]

Thank you for explaining about Necro.As for the Alagaesia RPG. When you say the human art of Sorcery, do you mean that humans cant use magic or just the kind that can turn them into shades?

[Rumpelstiltskin]

I realize that I'm doing this backwards, but anyway... By "Sorcery" I mean the summoning and controling of Spirits, the screwing up of which makes you into a Shade. (Regular magic for a human would be fine.) It basically falls into a lose/lose situation - if you can't have a Shade character, then all your character can do is sorcery; if your sorcerer can't become a Shade, then theoretically they could cast the most improbable spells (that, in any other instance, would probably turn them into a Shade) without any fear of it failing, as that's against the rules. It's all too tied together and dangerous to justify including it in the RPG, as you're messing with godmod forces. Agreed, Kraggh, if handled right it makes for a much more interesting (and realistic) setting. (And I do see what you mean, I vaguely recall some disputes over whose villain's power would trump the other's.) But, I think with Reality, the whole purpose of the RPG itself was what caused its failure - complete and utter lack of structure. In a setting were literally everything is possible, there's bound to be massive disputes, genre conflicts, you name it. Not that I wasn't a huge fan of it, but from a much more grounded perspective, Reality was a mess. Well, if there's one thing I've found in my time on BZP, RPers are nothing if not creative. I'm sure that there are a number of systems of checks and balances that can be put in play to keep Ra'zac characters from becoming too powerful (despite the fact that they feed exclusively on humans...). I guess I can allow them, with guidelines. ~Lord Rahl~

[Xomeron]

Would anyone like an entirely noncombat* RPG? *Aside from the occasional drunken barfight

Edited October 26, 2011 by Your Friend Doctor Robert

[Hanako Herupa]

Would anyone like an entirely noncombat* RPG? *Aside from the occasional drunken barfight

Seems like it would be the toughest thing to do.

[Archer Vonn]

Would anyone like an entirely noncombat* RPG? *Aside from the occasional drunken barfight

Seems like it would be the toughest thing to do.

it isnt. the forum im used to has entire sub-forums devoted to rpgs based in schools and neighbourhoods. granted, it's a much more mature site than this (not saying anything about myself) taking combat out of the picture only makes it harder to come up with an actual RPG. the rest is just writing skill at its finest.~if i may make a very biased opinion, i'd love to see an RPG set in modern day hollywood. i'm very heavily under the influence of entourage, however. but it has the scenario to be realistic, non combatative, yet very cutthroat. i'll admit it'd probably work out better as a novel then an RPG, however. Edited October 26, 2011 by ~JC~

[Rumpelstiltskin]

Another type of setting that is non-combat is a mystery setting. You could combine all kinds of classic detective stories (I know there are more, but Sherlock Holmes is the only one that comes to mind) into this overarching world of mystery and intrigue. Who stole X, or who murdered so-and-so? The PCs would be the sleuths out to catch the crooks of this Victorian-era world. I'm just adding my two cents in, though. ~Lord Rahl~

[Toast of Awesomeness]

When I play an RPG, I play it so I can do something I couldn't do in real life.Writing about another person's actual life doesn't sound very fun to me. :/

[Alex Humva]

Yeah, while I once believed a Second Life RPG would be epic, further experience has taught me otherwise. I play RPGs to mess with nature, throw enemies through walls, command starships; not go to a virtual job and work for minimum wage.

[Lara White]

I have wanted very badly to make a mystery RPG (especially with one or more of the players as the whodunnit), but it's failed to take off every time I've tried it.

[Archer Vonn]

When I play an RPG, I play it so I can do something I couldn't do in real life.Writing about another person's actual life doesn't sound very fun to me. :/

the point is to develop a character and prove you can write, not really to have fun.

[IamJackssplitpersonality]

When I play an RPG, I play it so I can do something I couldn't do in real life.Writing about another person's actual life doesn't sound very fun to me. :/

the point is to develop a character and prove you can write, not really to have fun.

This is patently untrue, especially here at BZP. The point IS to have fun. You should also develop a character that exists within the realm of the rpg you're playing in, but that is not why you roleplay, that's how. If you are role playing and not having fun, then don't role play. If you just want to develop a character and write, then you should write a story or a novel.

[Silvan Haven]

Scratch that. What he said.

Edited October 27, 2011 by Silvan Haven

[Archer Vonn]

When I play an RPG, I play it so I can do something I couldn't do in real life.Writing about another person's actual life doesn't sound very fun to me. :/

the point is to develop a character and prove you can write, not really to have fun.

This is patently untrue, especially here at BZP. The point IS to have fun. You should also develop a character that exists within the realm of the rpg you're playing in, but that is not why you roleplay, that's how. If you are role playing and not having fun, then don't role play. If you just want to develop a character and write, then you should write a story or a novel.

im talking about non-combat oriented rpgs. even if i wasnt, way to miss the point.

[IamJackssplitpersonality]

When I play an RPG, I play it so I can do something I couldn't do in real life.Writing about another person's actual life doesn't sound very fun to me. :/

the point is to develop a character and prove you can write, not really to have fun.

This is patently untrue, especially here at BZP. The point IS to have fun. You should also develop a character that exists within the realm of the rpg you're playing in, but that is not why you roleplay, that's how. If you are role playing and not having fun, then don't role play. If you just want to develop a character and write, then you should write a story or a novel.

im talking about non-combat oriented rpgs. even if i wasnt, way to miss the point.

I knew exactly what you were talking about, my point still stands. If you're participating in ANY rpg, non-combat or otherwise, you should be having fun. If not, don't participate.

[Archer Vonn]

then your just ignoring my point.

[IamJackssplitpersonality]

I suppose I'm missing it, which is odd, because it seems pretty explicitly stated, and I've addressed your points.

[Toast of Awesomeness]

What he said, really. It's a role-playing game. It's supposed to be fun. If it wasn't fun, I'd have quit a long time ago. It's a game, not some kind of writing competition.

[Archer Vonn]

i didn't say it was a competition. if developing a character and telling a good story isnt as fun as writing 'i shot the guy', by all means suit yourself dude.

Edited October 27, 2011 by ~JC~

[IamJackssplitpersonality]

Now, that's a much more valid point, though I'd like you to note that it is distinctly different than what you wrote earlier. Yes, an rpg is more fun when you have a well developed character and distinctive writing style. Anyway, getting this topic back on its intended course, How would a mystery rpg play? It sounds intriguing, but I feel the actual logistics would be difficult to hammer out.

[Vak Il Mio Amore]

I've lost track by now, but whoever was considering doing a Fallout RPG pages and pages ago: I'll gladly help out there, as I've been tossing some fun ideas around involving a Fallout character. Otherwise, if one doesn't pop up I suppose I'll write a short story or epic of sorts

[Archer Vonn]

thatd be me and im glad to hear it- i've been bouncing ideas off a few RPers here but none particularly familiar with fallout, but i think i'm onto something good anyways.

[IamJackssplitpersonality]

I remember a fallout RPG before that had a fair amount of buzz going for it. I can't remember what happened to it, though. I think it was fairly successful. I'd write something up and see how reactions go.

[Vak Il Mio Amore]

If you want any help collaborating then, just drop me a message! I'd love to help you brainstorm some ideas.

[Bloody Nine]

if you're talking about the one CJ made, I'm sure that died after 13 posts. Not a paragon of success, imo.

[Archer Vonn]

spinky poo told me about CJ's RPG which did thoroughly discourage me- i've been unable to contact this CJ, although i do think we'd be a good team. (ba dum bum chhk?)

[Bloody Nine]

Think the problem was info overload. Not to mention that Fallout as a whole doesn't really lend itself well to a sorta-regimented roleplay, out of ridiculously huge sandbox, sicne the main theme is how you, one man can make a huge difference - which doesn't work so well when you have multiple players. unless you're playing FO3 and it's brotherhood of steel jedi, but... well, who plays Fallout 3 for the story, really? On another note, necro'ing this...

See, given the rules for magic presented in the Inheritance books, even a normal human can do so much more than Eragon is doing, because he wastes energy on being flashy. Throwing a fireball when he could just set the target on fire, that sort of thing

Because automatically causing someone to spontaneously combust with no saving throw is fuuuuun, amirite? Edited October 28, 2011 by Undying Light of the Lake

[Archer Vonn]

fallout has a lot of themes. they simply needed to sell. otherwise, the 'one man can make a difference' wouldnt be in the picture. nobody is going to buy a video game to play as a farmer who sat by and watched the world unravel around him. one man makes a difference in call of duty, in battlefield, in halo (halo is explained, at least.) and even in pokemon. ultimately, its a good setting, one that makes statements (albeit none particularly controversial) about politics, patriotism, and religion. it's perfect for an RPG, but as mentioned, challenging. in every RPG a player needs to feel like he matters but placing one player above all is nothing but a good way to lose players. ~ on a side note, i think that fo3's story was the only thing it has over new vegas. that and the mostly patched bugs and having more then a handful of voice actors. but off topic.

Edited October 28, 2011 by ~JC~

[Bloody Nine]

on a side note, i think that fo3's story was the only thing it has over new vegas

... :x And that's not quite what I mean. FO3's storyline is so painfully linear and cookie-cutter it's not even funny. All that happens is you walk around through the set pieces that it gives you, and does what the narrative wants, whereas NV and FO2 let you shape the world according to what you want. Don't like NCR? Go join the Legion because you're an cool dude if you want to join the Legion. Or join Mr. House, or go Wild Card, etc. Halo, FO3, Call of Duty, etc, don't give you that choice. There's the difference between them and games like New Vegas. Edited October 29, 2011 by Undying Light of the Lake