The coming revolution in role-play games?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 14 май 2017
- Free trial with Audible: www.audible.com/lindybeige
Role play games have to grow up. This may be the way to go.
Support me on Patreon: / lindybeige
More role-play gaming videos here: • RPGs
The traditional 'dungeon crawl' with a maze filled with monsters and a party with the shared purpose of killing things and getting gold, is all very well, but it is a bit limited in terms of story-telling. Perhaps the game should concentrate on the relationships between the characters rather than the group's success at slaughter and theft.
My Hillfolk game aid pictured in the video:
www.lloydianaspects.co.uk/role...
The Pelgrane Press (publisher) Hillfolk section:
site.pelgranepress.com/index.p...
That amazingly bad Dragonstrike(TM) video:
• Dragonstrike Board Gam...
Lindybeige: a channel of archaeology, ancient and medieval warfare, rants, swing dance, travelogues, evolution, and whatever else occurs to me to make.
▼ Follow me...
Twitter: / lindybeige I may have some drivel to contribute to the Twittersphere, plus you get notice of uploads.
Buy the music - the music played at the end of my videos is now available here: lindybeige.bandcamp.com/track...
Facebook: / lindybeige (it's a 'page' and now seems to be working).
Google+: "google.com/+lindybeige"
website: www.LloydianAspects.co.uk
Subscribe to my channel: ruclips.net/user/lindybei...
/ user "Lindybeige"
Some people have mistaken what I am saying in this video. I'll try to clarify.
I started by saying that I had bought DragonStrike(TM). It wasn't cheap, by the way. Nostalgia costs. I spent money on it because I wanted it, and I wanted it because I can enjoy that sort of game. At no point in this video do I say that traditional RPGs games are rubbish or to be scorned. By telling you up-front that I have just bought DragonStrike(TM) I thought (wrongly, it seems) that I was making this very clear.
Nor do I say that DramaSystem is the only way for RPGs to get more dramatic in terms of character relations. I just thought that people who are already into RPGs might find the system involving a web of relationships between the characters before the game starts interesting. Yes, plenty of other RPG rulebooks have pages of suggestions for how to encourage good role-playing in what might otherwise become a mission-focussed game. The suggestions in 4th Ed. D&D were particularly good, but unfortunately, they appeared alongside a rule system that made good role-playing very difficult. Not impossible, of course, just very difficult.
At no point do I say that the players of other RPGs are bad role-players. I do not talk about the quality of players at all. It is so obvious that the quality of role-playing in a game can never be better than the quality of the players, that I thought it unnecessary to mention. Any game, even chess, can have role-playing added to it, but some games like chess do not encourage, reward, or facilitate it, while others, like DramaSystem, make it the core activity of the game. Some days, you feel like playing chess.
Also, at no point do I say that the settings of DramaSystem are all realistic, nor that unrealistic settings are bad in RPGs. Instead, I tell you about settings in DramaSystem where the PCs are time-travellers, rabbits, in a space-ship guided by dreams, orcs, and sentient robots. I don't see how anyone who has seen this whole video could have possibly made that mistake.
I would like to apologise to the three editing errors (a flash frame, a caption in the wrong place, and a missing fade-out) that I have spotted today in this video. The longer the video, the harder it is to spot all these things.
On the topic of the Judge Dredd movies, I see no one in the comments rushing to the defence of the Stallone effort, but a fair few have said that they liked the Karl Urban one. It was a lot better, but it wasn't based closely enough on the comic; was gratuitously violent; The Raid told the same story better; it had a storyline that didn't really tell the viewer much about Megacity One or the way it is run; and it didn't do much with the character of Dredd and what he stands for - he was just a tough guy with a gun. It lost 462 points from me when Dredd passed Anderson at the end, when the true Dredd would certainly have failed her.
Thanks for clarifying.
I do think that Hillfolk seems like an interesting game and I could see myself playing it with my group. I still disagree somewhat that D&D is a game that makes role-playing difficult because of it's ruleset, but I won't get into it because I think D&D is one of those things that has had so many different editions, playstyles, philosophies and derivations that everyone will have a different idea about what it actually is. I do get that it doesn't appeal to everyone and that that isn't necessarily the fault of the players.
Also, I just realized that you put the elusive d24 in your thumbnail, rather than something more iconic like the overused d20. An inspired choice, to be sure.
Couldn't disagree more that the true Dredd would've failed Judge Anderson. A true Dredd nerd would remember how he passed the first Judge Giant despite his many mistakes, and failed Judge Kraken despite his flawless performance, just because he had a bad feeling about him. Contrary to what most people think, Dredd is not a robot, and does bend the rules sometimes when he deems it necessary.
How sad that you even have to issue a message like this. Its clear that did not say or imply all the things that you mentioned in the follow up message for, but hey that's the internet for you.
I liked the Stalone Dredd. It wasn't as good as the Karl Urban one, but for a first stab at a move based on a well loved comic it wasn't terrible. In fact it had some very cool bits. It's a shame he played it as Stalone not Dredd though.
"At no point in this video do I say that traditional RPGs games are rubbish or to be scorned. "
Seriously, that's where you're going to go with this. After titling your bit "The Coming Revolution" and then clearly drawing the contrasts not between styles of play but in game mechanics (even in this very comment: i.e. "a rule system that made good role-playing very difficult."). In the video check what you say at the 4 minute mark.
Yes, Lindy- you did very much imply traditional RPGs games are inferior and even (a few seconds earlier than the 4 minute mark) childish. You also implied that they aren't really role playing games.
That's all fine really. It's opinion and I don't object that. There much I disagree with you about, but I still view your videos because you're very entertaining and most of the time informative.
But on RPGs... well Lindy I'm afraid you don't know much about them. This is a subject that you seem to think is new, the revolution is coming and all.
But really it dates back to the 90s where it was debated endlessly in rec.games.frp.adovacy newsgroup. Later it moved throughout every rpg website that existed (well any worth nothing anyway) such as RPGNet and the like. Countless drama focused games were created from as early as 1993. The makers and backers of such things went on crusade about their 'Revolution' and how it was so much better than traditional designs. The flamewars were epic, and you seem complete unaware of this history.
You walked straight into it, and thus have picked up all its baggage, which you're seeing in these comments.
You like history, so here's some links that may be of use to you:
General overview (don't bypass the criticism entries in both articles):
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threefold_Model
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNS_theory
Your own 'Revolution' seems to be here (2003 was the year) with this overly... worded description of Narrative/Drama games:
www.indie-rpgs.com/_articles/narr_essay.html
The idea of a robot surgeon becoming sentient during a surgery and realising the implications of what he is doing and what would happen if they fail is absolute genius.
Lloyd has an RPG with a brown cover. Imagine that...
Brown is just dark beige, after all!
Hey Lindybeige, sir would you be so kind as to perhaps post a video of one of these hillfolk sessions being played perhaps to enlighten your viewers as to the amount of depth drama and good fun that can come out of this system?
Well some people might not think the lending of your hammer to another person could be full of drama and intense emotion, but those people would be wrong. The bond a man forms with his tools can be very strong indeed.
Picture a man in his late sixties, a carpenter. A man who was burned by society one time to many. He has become a recluse, quick to anger and slow to friendship. He lives alone tortured by his volume of regrets.The only outlet for his agony is the creation of reasonably priced, hand crafted furniture. His most prized possession is a hammer. One that was used by his father before the war, from which he never returned. One day a younger man comes to his home claiming to be his long lost brother born of a different mother. They exchange photographs of the father and they are both convinced that they are indeed brothers. One day the brother asks if he can borrow his hammer... The older man looks up, after a short pause he responds "yeah sure I'm not using it."
masterful.
Reasonably priced!
For a given value of "reasonably"
I would watch the hell out of a playthrough of Hillfolk by Lindybeige
Yes
"I'm not a thief. I'm multi-talented." From a D&D campaign, I played in.
"Starring Peter Jones as- The Book". Oh man the memories from that radio play.
BRONZE AGE ISRAEL? ARE YOU KIDDING ME? WHY HAVE PARENTS NEVER TOLD ME OF THIS GLORIOUS GAME?
PLEASE do a stream of you playing Hillfolk.
Please.
in the original setting! haha!
This sounds like it ends up being more interactive storytelling or even acting than an RPG.
That's what RPGs ultimately should be.
@@alexloomis2398After watching this video years ago, I described DnD as interactive storytelling to a new player, and several more seasoned players thought that it was a good way of describing it.
Roleplaying is interactive storytelling
"Remember TSR?"
We're watching your channel, thus that is a rhetorical question.
Definitely seems the way to go for more character driven games although definitely still charm in more classic D&D scenarios. The best thing about old school D&D is the sorta feel to it- very similar to those fighting fantasy adventure books. A dangerous world with peril at every turn. The thrill isn't in the dramatic outcome in terms of character relationships but just the inherent intrigue of a fantasy scenario. Another world who's variables aren't determined by a computer but by the judgement of a human and in which infinitely more situations are possible. As the DM it's very engaging to know the layout of a scenario, where all the different monsters and how they would react to things and then throw players into that scenario and see how they sorta problem solve it. There is always the threat that random chance could make something unexpected to happen which is part of the fun.
what you are describing is the way my Group have been making characters for a few years. it totally Works
Rouge Trader generates a backstory on a tree based on your class and stats. So you can min max and have an interesting story generated as you go, or make a cool story, and get the stats out of that. Anywhere character trees cross is how they met.
I don't even play tabletop rpgs but this is brilliant. Using breaking bad to explain the system was a stroke of genius. Lindy is an artist for making "dull" subjects captivating.
Sounds like really elaborate fanfiction to be honest. Or drama class.
Don't say that you make it sound like cancer.
It's funny that you call this a revolution and RPG's finally growing up, seeing as these kinds of games have existed since the 80s at least. This stuff will most likely always be a niche. Also, the quality of these kinds of games is almost completely based on the players. A bad group could easily make Breaking Bad into a story about a diabetic man opening up a toy store together with a talking dog. Even D&D can be "grown up" with the right players.
I agree that character/drama driven games are more easily derailed by problem players than games with firmer rails. I almost exclusively run this type of game and haven't really found a way around it other than uninviting the players in question. I do think that the niche is growing. Indie rpg publishing has become a real, significant, thing as compared to 10 or 15 years ago when Dogs in the Vineyard came out (and I started paying attention). To be fair not all indie games are character focused, but just about all character focused games are indie so... something? I guess.
This sounds like an excellent method for collaborative storytelling.
Dragon Strike. That VHS kills me every time, from the Santa Clause dwarf to the glamrock American Gladiator warrior
I appreciate the idea of trying to gameify drama in RP games but honestly if you have a good group with a head for stories DnD can be plenty dramatic without the need for a system.
It doesn't seem to gamify drama, as turn character creation into a petri dish, to grow and bake in the drama from session 1. It seems to be trying to give new groups the same kind of game that you have after a year with a regular group.
Yeah I can see that. Probably a good idea to get people interested in the drama side of RP. In my group we usually create our characters together anyway but it seems that's not commonplace for most.
MODNAR22 yeh. But that doesnt happen that frequently, does it?
Depends. I try to stick with the same people and run pretty long campaigns.
It's all very dramatic until someone randomly falls off a bridge on a 1 and is never heard of again.
I always thought the drama came from the alignment system. The DM provides a scenario and the drama comes from differing views and morals on how to resolve it.
realistic drama comes from context. it's a fantasy that drama comes from internal character dynamics.
I really enjoy my Audible account, glad they're supporting channels I enjoy.
this feels like a much deeper version of the roleplaying game Fiasco. Though that is setup for tragic oneshots were everyone is dead or destitute by the end.
This game sounds similar to Fiasco.
Fiasco is more like Skulduggery in that it is supposed to be farcical (hence the name). DramaSystem games are supposed to be dramatic (hence the name) and there are actual systems for working out who wins challenges etc. instead of it being *purely* narrative.
It's all dependent on the playset you use. Some are plain drama, some support more comedic tones.
I've ran Fiasco numerous times at rpg cons and usually the most everyday playsets work the best. I've run the office themed playset over half a dozen times, and it has been different every single time. Sometimes humorous, sometimes really dark.
Fiaso is not intended to be farcical, it's based on the Coen Brothers. Why a few of their movies are funny, I wouldn't say any as farcical. (Except maybe Big Labowski) people play it over the top expecially when they're just staring out, but it easily becomes much more somber and dark if you let it.
Last time I played Fiasco, it ended up like a Quentin Tarantino Movie. It was fun, and the twist was amazing.
The Traveler system have a random generated background ... where you could die .. and had to start over
Foul Rabbit
TRAVELLER !!!
what ever.. i think people can find it even when missing a L ... :P grammar -Gestapo without a L
I didn't care much for Traveler but character creation was hella fun. It was interesting to be a scientist and then cause an accident and never be able to work science again and be forced to be a space scavenger.
stole the idea of the character creation and made a simpler version for the other games i played. Some people liked it other Hated it so much . :) it made the characters deeper and more fun as game-master
Daleo Eaton
I only enjoyed it when I ran it. Still would.
I'm a rampant Technologist, and kept it Hard Science Fiction as possible.
We had one member run his own campaign, and it was so bad (, Elves In Space!) , by the end of the 1st day, the entire party held hands and 'Suicided' around a TacNuc to end it.
Dungeon Worlds character creation system has "bonds" that tie player characters together.
It's also got a totally cooperative story telling mechanic, in that the PCs can add aspects to the story - the GM gets final edit on what is cannon or not - but is encouraged to include the interjections from the PCs.
Then there's End of the World, Zombie Apocalypse.
The setting is your town. The characters are You. The items you start with are what's in your pocket, or what's in the room or house you're in. Sure, it's not exactly fantastical - but everyone has imagined how they would try and survive a zombie apocalypse and gets a chance to role play it out.
Just started a Dramasytem game. The first episode was 2 days ago and I'm still thinking about it. It is one of the most fun, dramatic, and intense roleplay sessions I've ever had, and we'll be playing it for a good bit now! Thanks for the video :)
Ok,now you really have to make a standalone video about Breaking Bad
Armandomattia Imperatore Or a role playing series as a mild mannered youtuber who loses his audible sponsorship and is forced to make crystal meth to pay the bills.
Borat Sagdiyev Do not only talk about Heisenberg, be Heisenberg
Armandomattia Imperatore Or one on lovecraft.
Breaking Bad is schlock. Do The Wire instead.
What's there to say that hasnt already been said
I've heard of these types of games, but to me, they all just seem like a group exercise in a writer's workshop. I'm DMing a game of DnD, and I don't think all of the other people really want a highly dramatic, complex storyline with player relations being the highlight. They just want a system that lets them have fun, feel powerful and has NPCs behave in somewhat believable ways.
I don't think some of the players would even be active if the main thing they needed to participate were creativity. That doesn't mean the whole story is just a mission-driven grind.
i mean, i had fun watching breaking bad, so drama can be fun, especially if it is only within a fictional enivornment, also making sure everyone desires the same thing( a good story in this case) is important, if your group doesn't want a good story but a good fight, then sure, that's not your thing,, but that's your personal problem, not the game's.
different strokes for different folks, the drama system fits better forum rpgs than classic rpgs, and even less so when the players are experienced and not even remotely tired of the old systems.
It depends on person. I play and like both but specially enjoy dramasystem. I do like theatre and acting in general though.
It's important to point out that a lot of these ideas can be implemented into commonly played role playing games like dungeons and dragons. Whilst the generic "adventurers meet in a tavern" is a common way to play a campaign when you get more experienced and you are with a group of people cooperating with eachother you can do things like creating characters together. One thing my DND group does in particular is we have what we'd refer to as our session 0 or 0.5 where we essentially roleplay a period of our characters life on fast forward to help establish a better backstory and motivations. It helps because we start session one feeling like our characters have a pre-existing relationship with eachother and our backstories are actually something we've played to a certain extent rather than a collection of random thoughts scribbled to a piece of paper.
This is fantastic way to get characters to interact!! I'm absolutely going to use this for our next campaign, I play with actors already... they're gonna love it.
I've played a great game like this called Fiasco.
It sounds like he described almost exactly fiasco
What he is describing is more complex than fiasco.
The problem with this is your character is not your character. You are given a character. This works for some games but not all.
There is always drama in D&D, the damn chaotic neutral rogue makes sure of it.
The endgame when it comes to video game RPGs and fantasy worlds is indisputably Dwarf Fortress. Adventure mode is like DnD where your computer takes on the roll of the sadistic, cruel, and merciless DM who will stop at nothing to see your campaign ends in a gruesome death.
Board James did a review for this, looks awesome.
Yes! New Lindybeige video!!!
Lindybeige, what you are talking about is the three paradigms of tabletop games. The first is gameism, where the goal is to create the best team using the game's rules and then face challenges set forth by the gm. The second is simulationism, where your goal is to create characters that are consistent with the universe and have them act accordingly in an internally consistent rule set. The last paradigm is narrativism, where the point of the game is to create a story and the rules reflect this by giving the gm a lot of discretion. d&d is gameist, dark heresy is mostly simulationist, and world of darkness is generally narrativist.
The best thing about Dragonstrike is ...
Dropping in 5 years later to check in the Role Playing revolution.
I notice that most of the RUclips traffic is about (checks notes) D&D.
THIS shall be the beginning of your TV/Film review videos.
Let's do this!
"I want to borrow your hammer" - "Nooo, not the hammer!" or "Oh, the man behind the hammer doesn't matter to you, I see how it is, you just want the hammer well NO"
That dream-ship thing sounds a whole lot like ships in the Warhammer 40,000 setting. Psychic Navigators steer the ship through the Warp, a chaotic space comprised of demonic energy and manifestations of raw emotion.
Damnit, Lindy, we need more vids from you already!
Last time I was this early Britain had the biggest empire
D&D is quite good.... silly at times but also fairly dramatic. (Critical Role is a good example) The game master does quite a good job at story telling and the players are all dedicated to playing their characters' personalities. They have been playing for a number of years and it is quite entertaining to listen to. I try to run my campaigns in the same way... as long running and dramatic as possible while taking as much as I can from the players' input as we play, and making it as open world as possible. D&D just makes a nice framework of "recommended" rules to follow so that you can make some quick decisions without getting bogged down and ruining the flow of the game and the story.
i remember I played dungeons and dragons a few times, most quests were a disaster, ending with people trying to eat gelatinous cubes and exploding coffins
Its different though. I play both and love both =D
30second stick picassos sounds like a problem with your group
Critical role is not dramatic. Sure Matt is an awesome storyteller, but it besides the dice rolls it is quite straight forward and predictable. I enjoy it too, it is entertaining. but mostly for the comical moments and exaggeration of dramatic moments.
This is crazy how many subscribers you have. The last time I remember looking at that for you it was at like 150k and now you're at almost 500k. You deserve it!
I am reading Hillfolk now because you recommended it and I am a big fan of Robin Laws'" Hamlet's Hit Points. Question: did you play the game first then read it? Or did you read it, then play it? I ask because I'm reading it and can't seem to wrap my head around it. Also, how many of the players in your group have training in drama/acting? Great video, as always!
I always find it funny how the general idea of the video flew over so many people and perhaps even "offended" them.
The whole point is not that Lindy is saying "all other RPG's suck and you should only play this". Lindy is showing us a system that is based ENTIRELY around the idea of team story telling. It's telling stories around a campfire turned into a game.
Classic RPG's like D&D, Shadowrun and the like have players interact with the world "realistically" through actions their characters can make, but in here all people are creating the world around them together for the sake of purely the story.
Both games have their benefits and their faults and I personally think I might look up that hillfolk book Lindy recommends and run through it with my players to do some fun stuff with it.
On a side note @Lindybeige I wholeheartedly recommend that you have a look into two interesting RPG books by Ben Robbins. One is called Microscope and the other is called Kingdom. The interesting idea with it is that you and the "players" are creating a story together at a whole new level. You are actually working together to create A SETTING for the game, so be it a kingdom, a city, star empire or a colony ship. You work together to come up with characters, events stories that you can then perhaps use in a more "classic" game where actual players interact with the world you've all created together. It's really interesting stuff.
Some people are veeery resistant to the idea that that the roleplaying games would be more fun if you made them 100% roleplaying and 0% game, and not without reason. You have to broach any subject similar to that with a lot of tact.
@@awkwardcultism I'm personally not resistant to doing something that is 100% roleplaying, but it's not the same as playing an RPG. For me half of the fun of playing an RPG is in the game mechanics themselves.
I think you would like the Burning Wheel roleplaying game :)
I'm just going to leave this post here so that the odds of his noticing it are higher on account of the game just being that cool and relevant to what he's talking about.
I was also going to suggest the Burning Wheel games to him. Figured I'd check the comments first.
The really nice thing about The Burning Wheel, and it's derivitives, is you can lift some of the concepts out and slot them neatly into whichever system you are interested in - I love The Great Pendragon Campaign, for example, and you can run the entire campaign in Mouse Guard so easily. Nearly every RPG can benefit from the Beliefs/Instincts/Traits rules - and combine this with the Stars Without Numbers GM turn rules, to make the world have it's own complicated relationships and there is no need to give up your favourite systems to get these - in lindy's words - "drama systems"
bertmaan Urealms
Even just character creation in bw is so much fun. Though that's all I've been able to play because my friends are mostly the sorts here who don't understand "what's wrong with d&d". Nothing, what's wrong with not d&d?
You might like the Fate system published by Evil Hat; it sounds like it has a lot of things in common with the drama system and has lots of different tweaks, settings, scenarios, and so on out there.
You'd very likely enjoy Fiasco. It's also a cooperative story telling game. It's designed for single session play.
We need Armour updates Lloyd.
Still waiting (2021)
The character creation you're referring to (with linking and joint creation and character faults) is generally called a 'Session 0' for most other systems if you're going to play a campaign. The entire game group meets up, the DM sets the scene then negotiates the situation so theres linked backstory behind all the new characters and is usually done to avoid 5 murderhobos being bought together by the mysterious stranger in the corner of the inn.
Also if you like dramatic group collaboration or worldbuilding, check out a game called Microscope. Its essentially a round robin of people adding to the world and people can add certain rules such as 'no ftl travel' or 'everyone is part of a newly formed colony'. Then you fill in the history of the world by creating vague scenes 'you spot something on the radar' and roleplaying them out so that just through roleplaying that thing on the radar becomes a derelict spaceship or a fleet of incoming pirates.
Great vid though man, glad you're back :)
Been watching a lot of your videos, love them, and this is some fascinating insight into character/drama development
I love videos about this subject, especially when you talk about Runequest.
Should we tell him about World of Darkness?
Or all the stuff that happened in the Forge?
i was skimming through the comments hoping that someone would. I never played myself (i only read the novels buying the source books to explain things) but got the impression that the 'personal horror' of some of the systems would set things up the way he seems to want them.
Exalted would probably work just fine too.
I told him 3 Yrs ago.......
Yes. Glad I wasn't the only one to mention it.
While I do agree that most games focus to heavily on mechanics and not enough on narration I think the problems you are describing have more to do with your group then the systems yourself. One of the most compelling games I have ever played was a D&D 4e game. The Game Master used the mechanics provided to heighten the drama in a system that is see as mostly hack and slash.
oh my god. that transiton to the ad was perfect.
That ad placement was smooth af
The new Arthur movie. RIP logic and realism
*HEYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYA!
WHAT'S GOING ON!
HEYAYAYAYAYAAYAYAYAYYAYA!
Just a guess but does everyone.in medieval england know kung fu ?
I can see how this is more enjoyable for extroverted people with some acting skills and creativity, but it would be a nightmare for introverted RPG players who prefer the 'classic' find-kill-loot experience. It's kinda' like comparing cooperative escape rooms to paintball.
why ar eyou playing a group game if you're so much introverted you care only about mechanics? i think that's the real question, for introverts videogames fit better that idea...
@@iota-09 even introverts enjoy the clattering of dice and the tension that builds up when a fight doesn't go as planned, plus some may just find it fun to watch their friends roleplay while not being into it too much themselves. For me just hanging out with my close friends whether its D&D, MTG, or just some boardgames is better than sitting alone and playing skyrim for the millionth time
"A coming revolution," he says, before talking about systems that have been widespread and well-known in the storygaming sphere for years now.
People say it's the RPG groups, but I think that anyone in an RPG group would intentionally dislike another character because, really, it's their friend. This forces character dynamics to exist. An experiment I that would be interesting is a completely anonymous RPG where roles are assigned. Or, even among friends, a decoupling of player from character to encourage actual character relationships. Technology would obviously be required, but nothing beyond a text chat client.
Question. Any news on your armor?
Apparently Loyd's never heard of the Apocalypse World family of games? White Wolf? Anything other than D&D and its clones?
I don't disagree with his main points, I just think it's funny to see him overlooking other major pillars in gaming history that aren't D&D, etc.
As someone who has listened to Hitchhiker's Guide more times than I can remember, thank you for recognising it's excellence in its original form!
Bronze-age Israel sounds pretty cool, actually.
Lindy rants and rolls 20-> the DnD people get triggered
On the contrary I'm a huge DnD fan and I love hearing Lindy tear it apart, because he always has ideas that I can incorporate into my DnD games to make them better, especially on the roleplaying side of things.
Wouldn't triggering people you didn't mean too be more of a nat 1?
Not if your race is Troll. BA-DUM-CRASH
Hey!!! I liked the more recent Dredd movie :(
mrsqueakyvoice97 I'm starting to get annoyed with Lindy's opinion vids, he should stick to history
I liked the vid breh
Yeah I thought the movie was great!
"opinion vids" never knew his fans were so wet.
Damn right. Dredd (w/ Karl Urban) was immense and the Stallone effort was an abomination to be sure
The best version of the the hitchhikers guide to the galaxy is when Douglas Adams reads it himself.
All the jokes are delivered perfectly and all the weird made up words are pronunced correctly.
You make me laugh every time you suddenly introduce an advertisement. I always forget about you doing those until it's already there in front of me.
Nobody likes ads, but your method is succinct, pleasant and topical. I like it.
Afraid you're about 35 years late to the party.
Twilight: 2000 had a character generation system that lent itself to this sort of play back in the early 80's.
Capthowitzer: And I'm still playing Version 2.2 as a Merc campaign set in Africa (modern day). The D20 based roll under Skill Level + Characteristic (each based on a 1 to 10 scale for those readers who are curious) is the MOST FLEXIBLE system I have ever used.
If you just read this and are interested in Twilight2000, check out Far Future Enterprises for PDFs of all of the Twilight2000 material ever printed.
I've been looking into Hillfolk - and the Drama System is definitely great for soap operas - but I want to see players primarily involved in external conflicts, but with added character development.
Lol, great name
Not exactly my type of game but I can definitely use some of those ideas. I like the idea of the a system to circumvent the "everyone meets in a tavern" cliche. The group being connected from the beginning could really help role playing.
I'm a very simulationy sandboxy type gm.
29:26 well good ideas do get around
I personally think this system works exceedingly well for new players. People who are new to RPGs aren't going to make very good or interesting characters right off the bat, they have enough trouble figuring out the rules. Having these motivators set up ahead of time certainly makes getting games going much quicker and easier it also helps anyone new who might have joined your group have a much easier time
I somewhat disagree with your statement on d&d and other table top rpg's if only because the DM or GM ultimately determines how the game plays out, and how the world is experienced. Even player creation is largely group and setting driven in many scenarios. That being said it's a bit of a nitpick and perhaps I am misunderstanding your point. Anyway love your content.
p.s. I've seen another system use a similar character creation methods and I must say I love them and have been trying to add them into my other games.
I don't think it is nitpicky i think it is actually the opposite and a core problem with the game.
I like the token aspect he talks about, but the whole group making and deciding on what characters do thing doesn't sit well with me. I think the games need randomness to be enjoyable. What he is talking about it like writing a movie or tv show. I prefer games with randomness, things you have no control over happening, chaos at points. I mean yes I like telling the story, but having everything planned out isn't for me.
Michael Muise Especially since it's way more realistic that things might not go as planned. Characters have to make a decision not knowing what the outcome will be. It's much easier trying to imagine how a character would behave in a certain situation if you can't affect the outcome. You are in the same position as your character at that moment. Only a very skilled writer can do that without the random aspects.
Other players add more randomness that dice aver could. But dice are quite useful to quickly reach a decision on how something turns out.
So, he should stop playing DnD. Traveller and WFRP 2e are the firs things that jump to mind when it comes to random character creation. Hell, many of the players I play with use tables to generate completely random characters, determining sex, race, physical structure, and even personality traits as a unique character. These things are available, and aren't all that hard to find, either.
It's more of a drama system than a game
Dice create real world randomness. People don't know the outcomes 100% of the time. The rules help re-enforce that.
It's worth mentioning that "the Expanse" book and television series began as a role playing game with a remarkable rich world that the author built.
These relationship diagrams are something I've been doing for my campaigns for over 20 years. Nice to see someone else finding out just how useful they are. :)
You might want to look at Fate, as well.
When he started talking about the group creating everything together, I was instantly reminded of the Fate system. Hasn't it been around for quite a long time, too?
The first edition of Fate came out in 2003.
U.G. Wilson Fate Core was, IIRC, powered by the 3rd edition of the Fate (not going to bother with F.A.T.E every time here), and Fate is based on F.U.D.G.E (I think. They do use the same dice). Fate is like the Linux to Fudge's Unix.
But one thing is absolutely true: Fate supports proper role playing. D&D, with all its versions and editions and clones, doesn't support proper roleplaying. At most, it tolerates it, paying lip service with a few token rules. You can practically hear the game tell you "Here, roll your dice and check this table if your roleplaying works out. Now stop bothering, I'm this close to optimising my paladin. It took me 7 hours and 3 new rulebooks, but I squeezed another .5 DPS out of it!"
Fate, on the other hand, really embraces the idea of drama and collaborative storytelling. It's "combat" is usable for far more than murdering everything to loot it, it can turn all sorts of conflict into dramatic scenes, it doesn't need a billion special rules and tables and modifiers, and sports a "damage" system that makes so much more sense than the video gamey HP. And it manages to do stuff like advantages/disadvantages and "fate/action/willpower" points right.
Sure it requires you to be on friendly terms with the other players (which means lots of D&D groups are right out) and can't work if someone is out to "win" (disqualifying a lot more D&D rollplayers), but if the players realise they're all working towards the same goal - tell a great story and have fun doing so - it is just amazing.
Did I mention that world building is a team effort? Not only does it spread around the GM's work, it also means each player can make the world his own AND put in the hooks he needs for his character concept. In D&D, playing a vampire hunter requires the DM putting in vampires and telling you about it - or gambling that vampires will show up, good luck if the DM has bought a module. In Fate, you just put in the vampires as an active part of the world.
And that's just scratching the surface of a game so full of awesome ideas. Really easy on-the-fly NPC generation, unnecessary rolls being discouraged, characters being generated as part of a group of people with more in common than "you meet in a tavern", character motivation being relevant (I'd bet with 90% or more of DnD characters, the motivation is "cos we're playing DnD and The module involves going there"), optimising a character meaning making a more interesting and fleshed-out character with flaws and virtues, flaws especially being stuff you want to come up in the game rather than min-maxing obscure crap that gives a lot of points.
The Fate Worlds book 1 has a setting/hack called "White Picket Witches". It's Dawson's Creek meets Charmed, and it's all about the drama. One of the example scenes is that of two brothers (PCs) fighting over a girl (also a PC).
Excuse you sir, but Hillfolk sounds like a wonderful name and Bronze Age Israel sounds about as interesting a setting as I've ever come across. I think it's rather refreshing after all the dungeons and dragons bland fantasy tropes and over fanciful names. Blood on the snow sounds cool, which is a good indicator that it's just another fantasy game. Hillfolk on the other hand sounds interesting without trying to sound interesting.
Exactly what I thought too!
I'm sure a lot of us here on his channel would agree, but you have to admit trying to pitch it to your friends might not be so easy!
Philistines! Cool
That's true, pitching it to others would be problematic.
"Hillfolk" sounds like it's either about halflings or nuclear test site mutants, both of which would be more interesting than a bronze age desert in the middle east.
I once read a great tip for drama in RPGs: play a game of twenty questions about the player characters before starting the campaign. Encourage them to actually have reasons for adventuring (or what ever the game might be about). Also it encourages the building of backstory.
My gaming group - for which im often but not always the storyteller has been doing some of these things for character creation. Im a big fan of the 20 questions character generation system where the player answers 20 'simple' questions about their chartacter. These questions are 'simple' in real life but difficult for typical roleplay games. eg 'how is your relationship with your parents', 'were you ever in trouble with the law'. These questions often go to a second round where players discuss their relations with other players.
Anyways nice video chap, interesting stuff.
This whole episode seems to be based on a very specific (and imo awful) way of playing D&D and suggestions on how to do it better that have already been in common practise for almost as long as D&D has existed.
Also, having your players actively dick eachother over in the character creation phase is never going to end well outside of groups that have been playing together for years.
He should try Paranoia with an "evil GM"(TM) before these risky newfangled systems.
Well, you can't really throw Dungeons and Dragons in with that whole bunch, since all groups play it very differently, since what matters is how the Dungeon Master runs it. My D&D sessions aren't focused on combat, dice rolls and 'missions', as you put it. It's based on character development and raw roleplay.
This is a great video and a great idea, I'll definitely be adding some version of this system for the character creation process in my RPG.
Plenty enough drama coming from gameworld events and not-fully-compatible characters (and players), I don't need my own character to be adjusted by others in ways I do not find appealing. If I'm playing a role-playing game, I'm playing it because I want to play a character I like.
@Lindybeige I feel really sad for you as it sounds like you've only played RPGs with assholes, both GM and other players.
I've never played a role-playing game and therefore have absolutely nothing to add to this discussion.
So... uh.... How's the armor coming along? :D
I think I'll stick to Musketeering, and Club
Just wanted to thank you so very much for this video!
Ad with the hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy from BBS is so evil. Dropped a video just to listen this perfect intro. Thank you for reminding about such a masterpiece.
Why my dear chap, splendid though the narrative game structure of "Dramasystem" may be, one can hardly call it a "coming revolution". There have been strongly narrative, story driven roleplaying games kicking around for donkeys years, with things like relationship webs, interconnecting character generation and collaborative setting design and story control. Primetime Adventures, Fiasco and various earlier versions of FATE (I'm thinking Diaspora and Starblazer Adventures specifically, to name but two) all incorporate varying levels of these features, and there are plenty of games that take this sort of thing even further.. The indy gaming scene has been paddling in these "story games" waters for ages
I'd definitely agree that you can take these techniques and apply them in more traditional RPGs in order to spice things up, which is what I personally do.
But I'd also dispute the assertion that dungeon crawler games like Dragonstrike or more recent iterations like Descent are in some way inferior or less mature because of their lack of dramatic narrative roleplaying aspects. They are a different animal in themselves, focusing on some of the elements of the archetypal D&D "dungeon bash" while neglecting others in order to give a balanced, challenging game. It's in the same way that the origins of D&D grew out of tabletop miniature wargaming, enhancing some elements, neglecting others, to produce a related, but different, game experience.
Ever heard of Dungeon World?
Interestingly we play pathfinder (the offshoot of DnD3.5), when we create a new party, we do the relationship process. We don't just pick stuff at random and all meet in tavern. We may still pick various classes to balance the party but we always create a backstory to the party.
I've owned the book since the Kickstarter, but never did much with it. You have made me want to take a second look. Thanks!
sounds like the early days of the internet with forum RPGs. one person dictates what happens in relation to another character. any time two characters are at odds one character (to one degree or another) simply says that he gets what he wants, then the other guy says that the other guy is dead. the RPG then ends for those two and the whole situation unravels as such. this is why you have rules, the system you are describing is essentially the same thing, but with mob rule.
the whole thing leads to drama in real life, and success hinges on real life social skills. in other words it is a geek game that caters to non-geeks, bit niche of a product.
He didn't say DiD isn't fun, he said it can be lacking in character development and drama between player characters, since they are part of a group.
This guy gets it.
And no PC dying unless EVERYONE agrees to the PC dying adds SOOOOO much drama *insert sarcasm*
The problem is, that he strongly suggests, that DnD makes drama nearly impossible, which seems very untrue. He probably projects some of the attributes of Dragon Strike onto DnD. It's kind of a weird mess. I think a better way of putting the video (well maybe he just wanted drama in the commentsection who knows) would have been:
DnD has not a lot of rules to create drama between the players and a lot is left to the GM, Hillfolk however has created a specific approach to charakter creation and gameplay to solely focus on the Drama aspect of Roleplaying. And then he could proceed to elaborate on what the game does and what doesn't.
His way was simply pointing the middlefinger to a system and expecting what?
To be honest: the usual rulebooks on their own (not the adventures you can buy to spare yourself work) doesn't have too much in say of worldbuilding either.
One could argue, that a lot of the established Systems are created to facilitate the actions that are hard to balance without having rules govern them. Building a world to explore is somewhat easy. As long as you have imagination.
It get's harder to blance what who can do and what not. maybe if memory gets sloppy you end up having people perform and fail at similar tasks making everything inconsistent.
Of course the other way would be thinking that most room reserved by combat makes a game combat oriented.
Although combat is it's on kind of drama in itself, but I see I have digressed by quite a bit.
Oh, that's a complete valid point. It takes the stakes out of some situations, because if people woudn't agree you can not die. That's a major plot armour right there
I personally don't see the need for a ruleset to govern how your characters are supposed to think in relation to other things. Me and my group did that quite fine with 5e on our own. Our bard absoloutely hates my wizzard because she feels he lied to her about now being a necromancer. My necromancer keeps getting annoyed at our palladin because he strikes first and asks questions later. And so forth.
I also can't say I've ever encountered a 'PC can only die if everyone agrees' 3 of us died all ready once. I've almost gotten killed a bunch because Wizzards have like 0 HP. Dramatic, that. Unfortunate to see a cyclops exit a cave, pick up a rock, crit and almost instantly wipe me from the world. Or a beholder zombie almost disintegrating me into fine dust, missing by a few HP because of a bad roll on his part. Bellow average. An actual rule system to govern drama seems a bit off putting to me. It's just something people should be able to handle themselves so easily. I've never had that issue in any tabletop game I've played.
Just because you're a team with a common goal doesn't mean you like them all equally. Or have I missed the point completely?
Edit: I was reading through comments before I was done watching. So disregard the part about plot armour.
I kind of get it though, for that kind of system. It's a drama thing. Not my kind of deal, kind of feel like you all should just write a play at that point, eh? Without the danger of death proper, lest it's dramatic enough.
This should happen organically in a D&D game with the key I think being to use organizations heavily. After all, rarely are people just operating completely on their own no matter what they are trying to do. I was in a D&D group once where these kinds of dramatic relationships were built simply by the players representing different political interests. The main villain was defeated in the first "season" as it were (after a few adventures, but not at the end of the campaign). This wasn't totally intentional on the part of the DM (one of the players was a bit of a power-gamer, so the group progressed more quickly than she'd thought), but it turned out to be a very good thing. The next part of the game was spent with different characters wrangling over different parcels of land and setting up their own rebuilding operations. Eventually of course the party fell apart, but that was kind of meant to happen since we were also graduating from school soon. Maybe some DMs need to lose their fear of letting the party drift apart. I dunno. But I think what you're talking about is achievable without any kind of system in traditional rpgs. Though perhaps using a system like this would achieve a more polished effect since all the players would be aware that they were supposed to be doing it. But honestly I view this as more of an addon for something like D&D rather than it's own thing. And sorry, but 4 pages of setting is never good enough. It's almost never good enough for an historical setting which people can look up and whatnot. It is certainly never good enough for a fantasy setting where even the laws of physics or the motions of the celestial bodies might be in doubt. Somebody has to come up with those things, otherwise nobody knows what is possible and what is not in the setting. If you don't like worldbuilding then use a published setting, but don't advocate bad worldbuilding.
Amazing video! I gotta get into one of these games!!!