Well that all depends on context doesn't it. A party of archaeologists would have to run for their lives from an angry Tiger unless one had a gun handy. Whereas if the party consists of five ultra powerful murderhobos its a lot more difficult.

Intelligent enemy=terrifying enemy.

Everything can fuck you up for 90% of the game. Basically make it Dark Souls.

>>35499222
Tucker's Kobolds.

Organised, disciplined, know when to retreat. Will never engage an enemy without outnumbering them at least 2 to 1. Never engage directly when they can encircle. And traps. Lots of traps. Make sure your troops capitalise on the havoc the traps wreak though.

>>35499222
Reveal that some of the party members have skeletons inside them.

>>35499222
My answer would be to treat animals like animals in that they hunt in packs.
Going off your picture I'd have the group enter some cave at night. As time passes they hear a large group of wolves approaching after coming back from a nights hunt.
Basically big numbers in small spaces makes for fun panic times.

>>35499297
Reminds me of the scene in Troll Hunter where basically that exact thing happens.

File: 1294453067468.jpg (75 KB, 640x420)

75 KB JPG

Depends on the level of magic and the relative power level of the characters.

In a fully mundane game it shouldn't be to hard to make gettign lost in the wilds and being hunted by a pack of wolves (watch "The Grey") fucking horrifying.

Now if we are talking something like D&D at high level you are going to be kinda fucked unless you are a great DM, i've used things like natural disasters, plagues, revolutions and other things you can't just punch or magic out of existence in that case, you have to be subtle and set it up tho, make the charaters interacts with the world and endear with it before having a volcano start throwing ash all over the country, even if the players magically stop the volcano from erupting the crops are fucked and half the population will die of poisoning before anything is resolved, it's a more subtle aproach to horror kinda existencial and depressing.

that or have them raped by a high level mundane character.

Change things up. Are your players used to getting rest and replenishing hitpoints after combat? No, this forest is pretty large. Keep walking. Fight in the middle of the night? Yeah, that's Fort saves for everyone because you missed sleep.

When they start running out of magical healing, when they have no way to fix that weapon that broke on a crit fail, when their rations run out and they are losing time to foraging. That's when those seemingly harmless wolfpacks start to look threatening.

It might be effective to keep the players guessing as to whether or not the horror they are facing is supernatural.

Trapped in Vlad the Impalers dungeon, is he really a vampire like everyone says?

>>35499326
I'm GMing a PTA campaign, so I've gotten good at making "animals" feel pretty fucking terrifying. (Although to be far, pokemons are hardly mundane creatures)

>>35499279
Tucker's Kobolds is a case of giving ANY ENEMY at all unlimited time to build defenses will result in a tougher job for the party. The surprise really is that almost all dungeon crawls aren't much, much tougher. Orcs could build defenses like that, or gnolls, or bandits, but for some reason they usually don't.

>>35499279
I love how many 20s these DMs who take level 1 monsters against high level PCs must roll

I mean, a creature with +3 to hit (like, you know, a kobold) actually can't hurt a PC with over 24AC without a crit and a character in light armour with a +4 Dex bonus can hit 21AC minimum

So how do you reliably roll all those 17+s before the PCs just get bored and wander off or use their absurd BAB vs those kobolds' 15AC and 1d10 hit dice?

Even a pretty shit fighter could, statistically, survive against a gang of kobolds for a very long time and endure their mighty d3-1 damage strikes.

This is /tg/ tech support, have you tried not playing D&D 3.PF?

>>35499414
I've always wondered about that. I can only assume that the party that was so terrified of the kobolds was 3rd level or lower.

>>35499414
Depends on what edition you're playing. Shit used to be WAY scarier.

>>35499439
Kobolds were not scary in 1st edition. Unless the DM broke out grappling rules those 1/4 hit die critters struggled to hit any player besides an unarmored mage.

>>35499439
So the problem is 3.5

Makes sense

>>35499453
I was talkin' B/X, yo.

>>35499464
This is always the case, actually.

>>35499464
>>35499495
amen

>>35499414
I'd wager numbers and synergy. When one PC blunders into a trap that lowers his AC, the Kobolds converge on him and he has to swallow ten attacks in a round.

That's also a good lesson, BTW. If you make your enemies converge on characters who aren't careful, you promote players to be cautious.

>>35499222
Maybe stat animals like lions and such that they are much more efficient vs lonely prey, and then make sure the PCs that they have to hurry and do certain things that might get them to split up.

>>35499495
>>35499464

No, everyone just asumed D&D and furthermore no one other than this guy>>35499343 even think of the posibility of non combat encounters

fuck you /tg/ FUCK YOU

>>35499222
Make water and food scarce, and have creepy humanoids steal your food in the night

>>35499464
>>35499495
>>35499508
>maximumautism.jpg

>>35499414
The point is that Tucker's kobolds avoid standard attacks to deal damage (because they're shitty at it) and instead employ environmental damage and traps. A pit of fire doesn't have to make attack rolls, yo.

>>35499534
That reminds me of the first encounter in the 4e module The Slaying Stone (the only good 4e module? maybe) with the starving wolves. Their entire goal was to drag off a single party member and eat them. Totally hunger motivated, totally horrifying.

>>35499576
You are no better than the people you disagree with. Lets keep this on subject.

>>35499551
Instead of bitching like a little cunt, how about you add to the discussion by throwing your noncombatant encounters for mundane threats.

And in all honesty, it doesn't help since OPs pic was of a wolf, which instantly but everyone's mind into fight mode.

>>35499671
I tend to view someone pointing out the retarded autism as somewhat productive, as it discourages people from making further posts on the subject.

Unless people like you then make more.

>>35499675
OP here. Sorry if my pic gave people tunnel vision. I am curious about non-combat horror as well, especially since it is way harder (at least for me) to pull off.

>>35499222
No matter what the idea is, the best way is to make the players feel threatened.

You could do it with anything, as long as they're attached to their characters and they are uncertain about whether they'll survive.

I had players terrified of every single shadow in a dungeon because they didn't want to die.

It was less fun than you think.

>>35499724
That is a good point. It is never good to have players so continually freaked out that they spend ten minutes checking each door before they walk through it. The GMs pacing, mainly in the sense of knowing when the calm bits should occur and when the terrifying bits should occur, is very important.

>>35499769
Not to mention that if too much spooky happens, the players won't ever send their characters anywhere spooky again. Where is the fun in that?

>>35499222
Don't tell them what they're facing.
They see a shape, maybe the number of legs, it's behaviour.
Don't just call it a Wolf though, or an Umberhulk, describe the parts they can make out.

>>35499794
This is another key factor, familiarity makes things less scary, it's part of why people are afraid of the dark.

>>35499222
Context and presentation.

A couple of wolves sleeping with their cubs isn't scary. Getting pursued by hungry predators throught the forest and the snow, in the middle of the night, with only the moonlight to see something, while you have nothing to defend yourself with, on the other hand, can be terrifying.

Against a group 5 level 5 PCs? Boom, shipwreck on an abandoned shore. Read Crossing the Zahara or a similar book - dehydration penalties everywhere, missing gear, and that's just the start of the hike. They may have 2k gp on board, but that's worth less than a single waterskin for the hike through the deserts and tribes ahead.

20th level is different. A 20th level fighter gets wreckex, swims ashore no prob, and punchs a dire bear to death so he can eat its heart as a refresher, before threatening the gods or casters who made the storm.

>>35499222
It's only possible for really great storytellers, but they can make rabid wolves just as scary as the Great Old Ones. It's just incredibly difficult to make ANYTHING really scary in a tabletop RPG context.

>>35499917
I wouldn't say it's that difficult, I have had quite a bit of success over the years.

The only advanced problem is that it takes the storyteller coordinating a lot of different things.

By not playing D&D or anything else where PCs become powerful enough to ignore mundane threats.

>>35499944
Yeah, horror is only possible in
>insert my personal favorite non fantasy, non-sci-fi, TTRPG
Pro advice, 10 stars out of 9.

>>35499936
Stories?

>>35500038
If you take hat away from the post, then you are really fucking retarded. Look at fucking Riddle of Steel, where a rusty nail can kill you dead. In some games mundane things are simply no threat. They are built to be hat way. If you want to make a wolf a threat, then play a game where a wolf is a fucking threat and not some miniscule xp on four legs.

>>35500113
You're sure correct, Mr. Anon.

All them superheroes in any RPG you don't like are completely immune to hunger, disease, exhaustion, and exposure.

>>35500134
>implying I don't play Mutants and Masterminds
And most of them are, or might as well be, with minimal effort.

File: 1382751229854.jpg (101 KB, 600x600)

101 KB JPG

>>35500336
>Look at this dumb off-topic faggot

>>35500062
I've got one that's mostly like OP wants.
>Running a self-ascribed meat-grinder campaign.
>Party is relatively low power, having only played for maybe 10 sessions.
>Only two PC's have died so far, one on the first session and another on the 6th.
>Both deaths were entirely their own fault.
>Party has started restoring a castle to keep as their own, and three of the members survived a vicious ordeal (The session went for about 10 hours late into the morning with the rest of the party going home while they clawed their way with no equipment out of an underground cave system) where they were captured and sacrificed.
>Player attachment was HIGH.
>Two of them had contracted the Hanta virus from opening a dusty old tomb and weren't feeling well. Starting to see this vast moneymaking scheme differently.
>Supplies were low, as the dungeon was far from their base of operations.

>Playing Ligeti, Apparations and Hans Zimmer's The Well as background music as they once again delve back in to see if they can recover some treasure they saw.
>Fairly dark atmosphere in the game room.
>They encounter a door with blood painted on it telling them to RUN!
>They quietly debate back and forth until one of them slowly creaks it open.
>Give description of the wet flesh rotting on the floor and an oily skinned, small shape with glinting teeth and eyes that reflect red in their torches snapping to look at them.
>Demand to know what they do NOW.
>One immediately steps in to attack it
>Two players go "I don't know!" and hold still.
>Three whole members see him step in and go "No, it's not worth it anymore!" before turning and fleeing down the corridors.

>It was just a harmless baby animal.
>mfw when I realized that I had broken my party's ability to play my game...

>>35499890

The party can handle a handful of wolves, they cannot handful hundreds of starving wolves pursuing them for days. No rest, constant movement, constant attacks of opportunity. Watch a nature doc about pack animals hunting, and think about how that moose feels... it's a mind fuck.

>>35500805
>hundreds of wolves

Which stops it being mundane. Unless Dracula is after them you are not going to get hundreds of them.

>>35500837
Nonsense, the players kill off all of the wolves natural predators (bandits and such) as well as their game.

Several dozen wolves now forced to starvation come peeling after them and the smell of their cooking meat.

Hardly supernatural!

>>35500906
Several dozen is a far cry from hundreds. And wolfpacks tend to have LARGE hunting areas. And unless there's something strange going on, the players are unlikely to kill all the game from area of several hundred square miles.

>>35499222
You'll need to define "terrifying."

Do you mean like, "This is scary, as though I'm playing an actually scary horror story."
Or like "I could actually lose this fight! Fuck!"

Because if every single enemy makes the party feel like they're one hit from dying no matter what level they are or what they do, I'd argue that's more annoying than terrifying.

>>35499222
Trips must be answered.

Alright, imagine the dead still of winter. Somewhere where there is no sound because of the snow muffles and silences all noise. Somewhere where the days are short and cold, while the nights are long and colder. In these places few animals survive and even fewer are active.

In these places even the most mundane of beings can become reapers and avatars of terror.

Your party huddles around a small campfire at night to prevent from freezing. Fingers and toes constantly numb from the cold. Then you hear it, a howl from just outside of the light from your fire. The howl is far quieter than it should be for how close it is. Echos barely reach your ears... No, not echos. The howl has been answered.

The wolves are literally at your door, hungry, ready, and worst of all adapted to the cold and snow. Here, they are the predators.

>>35500981
>Because if every single enemy makes the party feel like they're one hit from dying no matter what level they are or what they do, I'd argue that's more annoying than terrifying.
It's a good thing no one suggested doing this.

>>35500981
Do you mean like, "This is scary, as though I'm playing an actually scary horror story."
Or like "I could actually lose this fight! Fuck!"
These can be equivalent.

>>35499702
I find them stifling discussion by labeling any opinions or points they dislike as autistic.

If you have an issue with an argument, you argue, you don't label it autistic and suddenly think the argument loses all credence.

Ok... your characters are traversing swamplands for days, tracking down the BBEG. The insects constanly buzz around them, leeches stick to their legs. They can't sleep. They rapidly become exhausted, with all the penalties that go along with that. No rest. Never any rest until they get out of this goddamn swamp.

Add a bunch of hit-and-run attacks from creatures, maybe some simple traps that pick away at hp bit by bit, and you have a grueling campaign.

Think Vietnam.

>>35499577
It also deals incredibly neglible damage to a high leveled character and can be also solved without any expenditure of resources, because of nigh permanent buffs.

>>35500134

To be fair, hunger and exposure, and rarely exhaustion will effect the party, they make those needs trivial.

I'd love to run a travel session, where the main enemy is the very landscape. Missteps and poor decisions can result in losses of supplies which would be critical to survival. Natural hazards, like very strong winds, rock slides, quicksand, poisonous flora, droughts and desert heat. It's those moments of struggle that really humble you, and should you survive bring you and your compatriots closer together by survival such an ordeal together.

>>35501206
I don't get it.

What argument?

I mean, I can read the replies and understand what you're saying, but just making statements that are easily recognizable as completely unsupported bullshit can be dismissed just as easily.

When something is without credence, labeling it autistic is just pointing out the obvious.

File: Retard implies this would(...).gif (126 KB, 673x923)

126 KB GIF

>>35501308

>>35501310
Lewis and Clark expedition.

Find the Lolo hot springs in the middle of winter, think about how fortunate they are after the biting cold has been hounding them!

Dozens of men freeze to death that night.

>>35501345

In this case, the argument was that the fault of many of the complaints in the thread results from 3.5 edition of D&D.

You could argue against that, providing evidence these issues stem from another possible edition, or even just the mindset of the game, divided away from any game.
Or you could argue that these issues really aren't issues or are easily solvable using the very system/edition they decry.

Instead, one labels it autistic, and discussion is stifled.

This labeling of autism applies beyond this thread, there's a running meme on /tg/ that disliked or overtly critical opinions or arguments are labelled autistic in some way to discredit them. All it does it stifle discussion.

File: face.jpg (6 KB, 283x309)

6 KB JPG

>>35500906
>>35500805
>hundreds of wolves

Mundane threats would be easier to pull off if people had anything remotely approaching a basic understanding of how to implement them without sounding cheesy as fuck.

10 wolves, a forest, nighttime.

A school of barracuda in a coral reef.

A good old fashioned pandemic.

>>35501379
Why wouldn't it? If you are at level 10+, nothing is stopping you from doing exactly that. At that point your character possibly has braved eldritch blasts, the breath of a dragon and suffered more terrible wounds than any man should and still has lived to tell the tale.
This is like the "martials can't do cool things" argument all over again.

>>35499354
Or terrify the players with pat morals and prosocial messages
>Trapped in Elizabeth Bartory's dungeon
>Turns out all the scary stuff about her was just spread by lords jealous of her power
>"I guess the real monster was cyberbullying!"

>>35501426
Why would you waste time arguing when the person making the assertion has given no discernible reason or logic to support their claim?

I don't think calling something like that autistic is even close to a running meme.

Autistic is just for "thing I don't like" most of the time.

It's not stifling a discussion when there wasn't any to begin with.

>>35501477
Because non-magical fire is full of choking smoke, flashpoints over 1100 degrees, and melting flesh and lack of oxygen.

Even Hercules might die.

>>35499222

>Count everything

When on the road don't handwave food and water. Travel is rough, and horses and pack animals aren't cars.

>Put them on a clock

Events can be untimed and timed, but don't allow sleep or preparation save for in situations where the players need to determine what would be the best chance. And really you need to eliminate the auto-safe spells such as Rope Trick, but you already did that right anon?

>Harry players

Make them burn resources through attrition. Make every spell slot and expendable count.

That will make the players have to make decisions which will prompt anxiety.

Then, for true terror? Fuck with the players. I usually use tones just barely at the ears played on my sound system, slight changes in light, little recorded whispers and things. I've had a few players almost break down, but that's just bad fun leaving the body.

>>35501560

Discussion is a two way street, anon.

If they make such a claim, prove the claim wrong with an argument and evidence.

That brings to light knowledge that many may or may not know, and deconstructs or reinforces any prejudices or preconceptions of the subject in question.

>>35501577
No, because you are trucking around with a fort save of +something. At level 10 it's entirely possible that you have been magically choked quite a few times, which is even more dangerous than regular choking.
Fuck, if you don't like 3.PF and don't play it, just say so, but don't act like your made up "lol no save you die :DDDD"-shit is in any relation to the system.

>>35501657
>Anon begging GM: "Listen mang, I should be able to walk through the burning building!"
>GM:"You can't see fucking anything through the smoke, and you just got hit with a wave of 2000 degree air that destroyed your lungs so you can't breath anymore, as well as being knocked down by the flashover shockwave."
>Anon: "You fucking not using rules GM, fire only does 1d6 damage, CHEATER! CHEATER!"

Riveting.

>>35501849
Well, you could at least hit him with the actual damage, a save, and the resulting effect of your lungs disappearing (choking, chiefly). And if you want to roll realism, you make those high, and if you want to roll demigod, you make them low.

>>35501657
>>35501849
Hey look its board game vs physics again!

>>35501987
Oh look, it's one of the cancers who believes RPG's are the same thing as board games and that believability or consistency is unimportant!

>>35501965
Obviously a save is in order, and it's not like not being able to breath kills a super-athlete instantly.

But to say that mundane things like fire are a pointless challenge means you don't have a lot of scope of power.

>>35501655
You'd be right, except it's not a discussion at that point.

When someone makes a completely unsupported, ignorant claim, neither I nor you nor anyone else is obligated to provide evidence before pointing out how much stupid bullshit it is.

>The Illuminati are behind world war III!1!
Point out the autism, move on and ignore.

>>35501617
I wish Rope Trick was as safe as people said, if only it stopped time for all the people outside.

Atmosphere is definitely a big part, though.

>>35502021
>saying 3.PF is shit is like saying Illuminati were behind WW1

And you call others autistic...

>>35502082
Yup, saying "The reason games used to be scarier is 3.5" is autistic.

>>35502082
I think he means everybody knows both.

>>35499279

So, making the monsters as smart as the players?

>>35502125
>The reason games used to be scarier is 3.5
Actually that's not entirely flawed. Mundane animals DID use to be more dangerous is previous editions of D&D and the whole "lel fantasy characters are superpowered superheroes who can walk through fire and drink acid each morning" didn't *really* hit the roleplaying community until 3.0, and then suddenly it's everywhere.

>>35502176
So you're trying to say that 3.0 invented and pioneered the creation of heroic fantasy?

Where characters never die to mundane threats?

Well. Shit.

>>35502176
Every lie is all the more believable with half a teaspoon of truth.

>>35502220
No, D&D did that from the beginning, it just never took off as hard and as widely as it did with 3.0. Not until then was it thoroughly entrenched as the go-to roleplaying trope.

This is talking specifically about the roleplaying community, of course. Heroic fantasy existed beforehand, though never so prolifically in roleplaying circles.

>>35499675
>Instead of bitching like a little cunt
How about you not use such sexist language when you try to speak.

>>35502305
for example, see
>>35499453

File: positive-thinking-81577_2(...).jpg (10 KB, 200x200)

10 KB JPG

>>35502320
You. I like your style.

>>35502125
To be fair, games were fucking terrifying in 3.5.

You're fighting a dragon, you're fighting an incredibly paranoid creature hundreds of years older than you that is smarter than you are and more physically powerful, with enormous wealth and spellcasting capabilities.

It saw this fight coming long before you did, it's smarter than you and it's had layer upon layer of protections, contingencies and backup plans prepared since long before your grandfather was born, and on top of that it's far better at everything than you are at *anything*.

3.5 was a scary game, it's like playing rocket tag with the Imperium of Man.

>>35502329
Kobolds hitting people and dealing damage has never been why Kobolds were scary. Kobolds are scary because they create dangerous dungeons, situations, and especially traps.

Reminder that Tucker's Kobolds were a 2e thing, not a 3e thing. 2e is the game where a first-level dart trap is an instant kill that doesn't bother dealing damage.

>Interesting thread devolves into yet another fight about D&D

Stay awesome, /tg/.

>>35502433
Imagine the awesome threads we can have when no one plays D&D.

>>35502452
I'm not particularly looking forward to more Quest and CYOA threads, thanks.

>>35502452
I don't think that will ever come to pass in our lifetime.

It's been 40 years and it's still growing.

>>35502392
No! Did you not read the thread? 3.5 is where games stopped being scary, it's all the systems fault and not us as players.

>>35502480
>implying people wouldn't be playing other systems and be having more fun

>>35502529
>implying that all the third party RPG's would be more fun when playing with people like /tg/

>>35502536
What the fuck do you mean by third party?

>>35502495
Eh, I found the choice made things scarier. In 2e there were so many ways to get killed without a save, arbitrary deaths that you couldn't really do anything about.

3.5 was so much scarier because it was fair. You had power and you had choice, and then a mind flayer mind switched its brain into a tarrasque and burst its way straight through my fucking flying tower.

>>35502557
Fairly sure he meant any one of the generic brand "not-DnD's" like Fate or GURPS or etc.

>>35502629
And what's third party about those systems?

>>35502657
It's a term for any generic brand copy of something else.

It's a common English term.

>>35502557
I meant any game that wasn't DnD.
Sadly, as many an anon here would find out.
The problems were inside themselves all along.

>>35502683
And neither Fate nor GURPS are generic copies of anything.

To claim so is to showcase some staggering ignorance to the world.

>>35502738
Oh yeah, no, I get it.

You totally roll slightly different dice while doing the exact same thing.

Generic can have such negative connotations when it doesn't need too.

>>35499222
Description is good, but it only goes so far. It's hard to feel the threat of exposure/starvation/wild animals when you're sitting in a comfy chair in the living-room.

Try assigning mechanical penalties, so they get an understanding of how the situation is threatening their character. Possibly rolls (or saves) to resist the environment, fear, hopelessness etc.

>>35499403
Why build defenses if you don't expect to be attacked? It's a waste of time/resources.

It's the same reason that peaceful areas had cities without walls. (Unless they are trying to regulate trade.)

>>35502775
>You totally roll slightly different dice while doing the exact same thing.
This can explain all roleplaying systems. So are all systems generic? That's a very useful distinction, thank you.

>>35502797
No, because one is branded as the first.

Making all the copies the generic brand.

File: 1396660484819.gif (2.76 MB, 190x200)

2.76 MB GIF

>>35502832
>Every system that isn't D&D 1E is a generic copy.

>>35502615
>implying 3.5 was difficult at high levels when you could nuke continents on a whim

>>35502615
Look, I appreciate your badass campaigns you had with your friends while high, but it's very difficult to talk about the systems themselves when you bring in material that isn't in them.

Firstly, Tarrasques are immune to Mind-Affecting and Soul Jar effects RAW, so while I like the idea of the dangerous and intelligent Tarrasque, it's not a thing that happens. And your talk of flying towers makes me remember all the ways that 3.5 was not fair.

Say what you want, but all the shit people are piling up on 3.5 saying "This is why 3.5 is scary, because if you assume the NPC's do the same thing PC's can do then your mind-flayers and dragons have thousands of contingencies and magical bullshit" is nothing new. The only difference is that Fighters have worse saves against their attacks and that the enemies *have* to have the magical bullshit in order to be scary.

OP was asking about how to make the non-magical, non-supernatural scary. 3.5 is anathema to that because of a lot of mechanical reasons, reasons that are pretty much impossible to get around.

>>35502910
Don't go implying things that were obviously never said.

You have about 6 or 7 upgraded versions, and there are generic brands of each version.

No one ever said basic.

>>35502920
>3.5 is anathema to that because of a lot of mechanical reasons
>lists nothing
so basically
>All of your reasons don't count because I don't like 3.5

Ok.

>>35502931
Yeah, no. You're just flat out retarded.

>>35502931
You explicitly said that Fate and GURPS were generic copier of each other when in fact they have absolutely not a single thing in common that they don't also share with every other system out there. They are basically as different as systems can be. And you're fucking dumb for making confident assertions while not knowing this basic fact.

File: Marching Order.gif (2.7 MB, 380x136)

2.7 MB GIF

>>35502920
This.
3.5 doesn't have any rules for exhaustion, starvation, sleep deprivation, or disease.

Monsters can never hurt you, ever, either.

No rules, then they don't matter.
Anyone who does otherwise is cheating.

It's impossible to get around even if you tried.

>>35502992
>Explicitly said
>>35502683
>"like Fate or GURPS or etc"
Nope, looks like another way to be wrong, faggot.

>>35503027
see
>>35502738
and
>>35502775


I'l quote for you:
>You totally roll slightly different dice while doing the exact same thing.

Yeah he's saying they're the same thing. Which they're not. So he's 100% retarded.

>>35502920
Tarrasques are immune to neither of those things, they can be mind switched.

And yes, the scary people all had magic. It was a high magic setting, most scary things are smart and if you're smart the first thing you do is get some magic. Don't like it, go play a more down to earth rpg, there are hundreds.

>>35503121
Oh please you dumbfuck, get over generic cereal tasting slightly different.

>>35499222
attrition, circumstantial modifiers, not letting them rest ever.

Bet you 5 internets I could TPK your party with a pack of dire wolves. And I mean the extinct animal, not the ones on magic steroids.

>>35503121
>finalautismform.jpg
Yeah mang, you totally don't play either of those as PCs in a roleplaying game.

They're just so different, they uh.. and..

nope, got nothing, different dice?

>>35503146
In my homebrew they're definitely immune.

Also, I would rule that swapping the brain literally would be a mind-effecting ability.

>>35503191
Let me guess, you've never even so much as glanced at any system that isn't 3.x? Go kill yourself, retard.

>>35503191
So again we go back to that you're a fucking retard who thinks that saying that all roleplaying systems are generic because they're roleplaying systems like it's a meaningful distinction.

Come back when you have the intellectual capacity to understand half a shit.

>>35503183
>still thinking they're generic
So you're either dumb as fuck or just ignorant, which one is it?

>>35499222
Threatening to the players. If there are consequences for death, and death is likely, then the players will be intimidated, it's as simple as that.

>>35503229
They're not all generic, there's the first and most marketed one, DnD.

Just because all the others copy a version of DnD doesn't mean they aren't generic.

>>35503229
>>35503223
>only argument is insults
Amusing, good 2/10's guys

>>35499222
My advice is to play a system where every urchin or hobo with a rusty knife can be lethal to any character, no matter what.

>>35503210
Good for you, I found a mind flayer mind swapping the tarrasque to be an amazingly fun villain to fight.

>>35503274
>All systems that aren't D&D are generic copies of one or more editions of D&D

You... really? You actually think that? You're honestly this fucking delusional?

>>35502775
>You totally roll slightly different dice while doing the exact same thing.
There have been zero refutations for this statement, are we making a move to acknowledge that it's correct?

As far as anyone can tell, you do the EXACT same things, and in a different system you just roll slightly different dice and use a slightly different table for the outcome.

However the games are more indie, so you would have more fun playing them, of course.

>>35503274
>Just because all the others copy a version of DnD doesn't mean they aren't generic.

Except the vast majority of all other systems are completely different from D&D, except in that almost all of them involve rolling dice. That's like claiming that every existing computer game is a generic copy of Pong.

>>35503330
It's so retarded statement that there isn't any point in refuting it. Just go read a system - any system - that isn't D&D.

>>35503375
So no refutation, just "You must not have read these systems, they're exactly as you describe but if you read them then maybe you won't think that!"

Hipsters, mang.

>>35503335
More like claiming Path of Exile was Diablo 2, anon.

>>35503409
No, not really. Because that statement actually has some basis in reality.

File: obama_laughing_rectangle.jpg (275 KB, 660x440)

275 KB JPG

>>35503407
>Actually, honestly, being this fucking retarded
Keep on trucking hombre.

>>35503454
>Uncomfortable truth
>Only response is
>"lel, you retard, me not able to think on that hard"
This is good entertainment.

>>35503448
So it's a valid comparison while pong wasn't?

>>35503321
They kind of are, in a broad sense. Different mechanics, different genres, but the fundamental game concepts are the same.

>>35503497
Nope, the pong comparison is far more valid.

>>35503409
No, actually not, because Diablo 2 wasn't the first computer game out there.

The retarded anon is actually claiming that EVERY SINGLE OTHER roleplaying system is a generic copy of the first one, D&D.

So the pong comparison is a much better equivalent.

>>35499222
Something being terrifying has to do with it's presentation, not its metaphysics. Being attacked by a wolf pack described in terms of numbers, stats, hit points, etc. is not terrifying. Hearing a pack howling in the distance, seeing them tracking your party during the day, seeing their eyes reflect the light of your campfire as they close in after dark, hearing your pack horse whinny in fear and pain as it's torn apart, knowing they will come for the rest of the party inevitably...

That's terrifying.

If you want to scare your players you have to build suspense, make the existence of the threat undeniable, and make the scale of the threat hard to measure.

>>35503581
>>35503564
Except that would be baselessly saying that video games are equivalent to RPG's

Since that is a blatantly false premise, the comparison is very clearly complete shit.

>>35503543
Except the genre can be identical as well.

>>35503543
Yeah and every computer game is pong because they're all executed by a computer. In the broad sense.

The only problem is that, while that broad sense is technically, true, it's a completely useless and nonsensical statement. Yeah, (almost) every roleplaying system is a copy of the first one if your only point of comparison is that you use dice. The problem is, you're fucking retarded beyond being a human being if you actually think it's meaningful to make that kind of comparison.

>>35503581
TTRPG's are weird, so you're saying that while video games started simple and branched out, RPG's stayed that similar to eachother even over 40+ years?

>>35503636
Broadly: Every video game is executed by a computer.

Broadly: Every RPG consists of a DM, and players, all playing imaginary beings, all saying their actions then rolling dice for randomized probability at success doing the same actions across any different game, then comparing them to a table with chance of success.

Sure seems identical, amirite?

>>35503686
>Every RPG consists of a DM,

Nope.

>>35503686
Yes, you're right.

Both assertions are also equally fucking retarded and useless.

HEY GUYS ALL HUMANS ARE EXACTLY THE SAME BECAUSE WE ALL SHARE THE FACT THAT WE'RE HUMAN

Technically correct, still fucking stupid to anyone with half a brain.

>>35503543
By that logic all games, including D&D, are all variations of World of Darkness. Just swap out the mechanics and genre, the fundamental concepts of "Roleplaying a character doing things" is exactly the same.

D&D is an old game that is a good example that people tend to use as "What an RPG is" but it's not everyone's first RPG and it's certainly not definitive as to what RPG's are. A WoD game plays and is written completely different than D&D different than GURPS different than Rifts is different than Shadowrun. Even if all of these games have magic, dudes using magic, and plot that happens, that does not make a strong correlation like that.

>>35503721
>Every RPG is a boardgame.
Not this fucker again in the same thread.

>>35503725
Except it's more than that, from the ground up all of these games play almost exactly the same.

Humans don't all live such similar lives.

>>35503727
WoD didn't come first, anon.

And it doesn't really play very differently, either.

>>35499222
>Could some of you share your wisdom about how to make mundane (i.e. non-supernatural) threats truly terrifying in RPGs?

yes, with conspiracy
1- get new world order conspiracy things that sounds real, specially the ones that predicted stuff
2-use them in your setting
3-players will become scared

>>35503335
The vast majority of systems are based on a group of people playing together, each person taking on the role of a single character, controlling their actions through a framework of basic rules and a process of freeform adjudication to handle anything not covered by those rules, and a single person taking on the role of referee, describing the in-game world and dictating the actions of those characters not controlled by the players, with success or failure being moderated by rolling dice. That's D&D. That's what makes D&D what it is. It didn't exist before D&D, then D&D did it, and now it's a thing that exists and is copied by everyone.

>>35503789
Yes, but, DnD is less fun than the alternatives because it's more popular.

>>35503812
Eh, this I guess.

File: Dungeons and Dragons.gif (105 KB, 576x1183)

105 KB GIF

>>35503789

>>35503764
>Except it's more than that, from the ground up all of these games play almost exactly the same.
No, they don't. This much is self evident to anyone who've played more than two systems in their life. Come back when you have meaningful experience to back your claims.

>>35503868
Yes, they do. This much is self evident to anyone who've played more than two systems in their life. Come back when you have meaningful experience to back your claims.

>>35503727
They're not all variations of WoD, though. WoD is a variation of D&D. D&D originated the entire concept - not through being some divine inspiration, just by being first, by evolving naturally out of its predecessors - and that concept took off and got done in a lot of different genres and with a lot of different rules, but it's the same concept. Before they called them RPGs, they called them D&D type games. It's all the same damn game, call it whatever you like. This isn't a qualitative judgement, it's just how things happened.

>>35503868

Correct.

>>35503916

Full of shit.

>>35499222
Make your PCs play as peasants, suddenly the common wolf is a god damned dragon.

>>35503943
Pfft, great argument, lots of convincing all around.

>>35503916
Correct

>>35503868
Full of shit.

This is why no one takes your dumb opinions seriously.

>>35503812
I'm not saying D&D is better or worse. It just happens to be the fundamental concept on which all these other games are based. And I'm speaking of OD&D of course, there are games by entirely different names which are closer to the original than whatever WoTC is currently putting out.

>>35503789
The vast majority of games are based on a single agent traversing a game world, the player controlling the actions through a number of buttons and with the machine performing adjudication of anything not under the players control, as well as describing the in-game world for the player. That's a computer game. That's what makes a computer game what it is. It didn't exist before computer games, then computer games did it, and now it's a thing that exists and is copied by everyone.

The argument sticks both ways but is bullshit in either case.

>>35503943
Anon, how can you lose so hard against a retard on 4chan?

>>35503955
>This is why no one takes your dumb opinions seriously.

Everyone except you seems to, though.

File: 1378769728146.jpg (58 KB, 472x604)

58 KB JPG

>>35503992
>no, I'm right, everyone else is on my side, I'm finally popular!
>Right guys?!
>guys..?

>>35503764
D20 games maybe. But there are allot of differences between a point buy simulationist game and a free form, dice-less narrative game.

To clam that they're all copies of DnD, would be like claiming Dnd is just a generic copy of playing Cops and Robbers as a kid, since that was "the original role playing game."

>>35504019
Doesn't mean he's right, but it does mean your statement was completely wrong, retard.

>>35503961
Argument? That anon was stating pure facts.

There's not even an argument in the whole post you responded too.

Also, the majority of video games Don't involve a single agent traversing a game world, many of which are just shitty games like chess that don't describe the computer world at all.

>>35503961
I don't see how what you said equates to what he said, though I'm flattered that I inspired your posting style.

>>35504067
>Argument? I was stating pure bullshit.

FTFY

>>35504067
>the majority of video games Don't involve a single agent traversing a game world
Yes, they do. Even pong does. You're just being more picky for one side and less picky for the other.

>>35504054
No, anon, that's stupid. All human culture is just cheap copies of cave painting on the walls because that came first. Because coming first is IMPORTANT.

>>35503961
This completely downplays the huge difference in playing different video games compared to playing different TTRPG's.

Blah blah blah false equivalency.

>>35504054
Citation needed for Cops and Robbers being the original roleplaying game, or for "playing pretend" being 100% synonymous with the rules of a TTRPG.

>>35504096
>Anything I don't like is bullshit
What a good way to stay ignorant your whole life.

>>35504098
>pong is a single agent traversing through a game world

Bull fucking shit, you're being insanely vague and retarded to try and make your false equivalency make sense.

1/10 for making me reply.

>>35504140
>"playing pretend" being 100% synonymous with the rules of a TTRPG.
The point is it isn't, and neither are other roleplaying systems 100% synonymous with D&D. So yeah, that's a good argument.

>>35503764
>WoD didn't come first, anon.
>And it doesn't really play very differently, either.
Then you really don't know anything about WoD.

WoD is a game where you never want to get into a fight not because you'll lose, but because it will probably cause roleplaying complications that could mess up the entire scheme you're trying to complete. WoD is a game where the mechanics support trying not to snap and kill everyone you love, but if you spend your time away in order to "protect" them then you become the monster that you... well, you get the drift.

It's a different experience. Better? Worse? Depends on the player and the group. But it's certainly different.

>>35504137
Would make sense if all human culture was directly based and mimicking cave paintings.

>>35504166
You're right, they're not 100% synonymous, maybe 90% minimum, but not 100%.

>>35504161
So you're NOT okay with me being vague while talking about computer games but you ARE okay with retard-anon being extremely vague when comparing roleplaying systems? And you dare speak of false equivalencies?

File: Honk Honk.gif (982 KB, 500x243)

982 KB GIF

Instead of a bandit or orc camp use a camp of killerclowns or a company of assassin mimes. Slightly hint to supernatural or insane background and/or cannibalism.
>Cue carnie music, empty stalls, a rusty carousel and a circus tent
>Squeek squeek HONK! Stab!

>>35504167
All of the things you just said are story things.

You could easily play any version of DnD where you're trying to not get into fights because of "roleplaying complications"

Except 4e, but let's not go into that.

>>35504190
Explain how Amber diceless roleplaying system is 90% or more synonymous to D&D any edition.

Go on, I want to hear this.

>>35503961
OK, yes? I agree that's what most computer games are. What are you saying?

>>35504193
Know how to use logic and reason?
No?

Let me make an example for you.
You called a pixel on a screen moving between two wooden walls an "Agent traversing through a world"

He called player characters traversing through the world "player characters traversing through the world"

Still not getting it? Guess your retard-anon comment was not only wrong, but hypocritical.

>>35504137
>>35503959

>>35504170
It does make sense, because not every other system is directly based on, nor tried to copy D&D. Cave painting just came first.

Same thing with D&D. I just came first. It doesn't necessarily mean everything else after it is based on it. So thank you for clarifying my argument.

>>35504308
>It doesn't necesarrily mean everything else after it is based on it.
>Necesarrily
Correct, it's a shame that everything that came after DnD is based on it so heavily and completely.

>>35504308
I already pointed out where the comparison fell flat, anon.

>>35504308
They are based on it though. That's why these sorts of games didn't exist before D&D, and now they do: once the concept was developed, it was broadened into a range of different forms and genres.

I mean, jesus. If I went and told the chess fans that all chess variants are fundamentally just variants of chaturanga, do you think they'd get this pissy about it?

>>35504247
>You called a pixel on a screen moving between two wooden walls an "Agent traversing through a world"
And that's exactly what it is. Exactly and precisely. If you can't deal with that, that's your problem.

File: your just a big fatso mea(...).gif (32 KB, 250x250)

32 KB GIF

>>35504371

>>35504397
Don't acknowledge the retarded trolls existence you giant fucking cunt faggot.

>>35504333
>Correct, it's a shame that everything that came after DnD is based on it so heavily and completely.
Except it isn't.

>>35504350
Except that's not what we're talking about here. The original retard anon explicitly states that every single roleplaying system that isn't D&D is a generic copy of D&D. And that's patently false.

Never once did he acknowledge anything like "a range of different forms and genres".

>>35502021
Don't even pretend like D&D isn't a resource management board game at large. You minmaxers are delusional

The closest thing I had to mundane in my game was a perfectly normal whale that has been summoned multiple times via a magic sword as an attack on various large objects. Hypothetically though, there's plenty of scary stuff in reality (see: anything venomous, bears, gorillas, Russians etc.) just represent them realistically.

>>35504397
How is the environment of Pong not a game world? How is the board you're playing as not an agent? Do you not understand the definition of these words? What is wrong with you?

>>35504456
He's saying it's unreasonably vague, not that it's inaccurate.

>>35504427
>explicity states
>using the word explicity wrong again for untrue bullshit
original argument post
>while doing the exact same thing
>doing
>so far nothing but people talking about how you do the exact same things in RPG's no matter DnD or generic brand other RPG.

>>35504216
Show me in any D&D game where the basic mechanics supporting the system rely on a system of humanity and inhumanity on a sliding scale, mechanically enforced by having your actions judged according to the GM and by the guidelines of the book - Mostly that "Killing people and eating their livers is wrong, but you have to do so to survive," but baby steps. Acting according to your Humanity gives you penalties, but you don't go nuts and kill people.

Now you're going to say that Alignment is the same thing and that D&D invented arbitrary mechanical decisions on your character's actions.

>>35504486
see:
>>35502683
To clarify:
>It's a term for any generic brand copy of something else.

File: i like false equivalencies.jpg (94 KB, 603x573)

94 KB JPG

>>35504420
just to fuck with you
>>35504371
>>35504456
>pic related

What the fuck do I care if someone pretends to be retarded for his reddit lulz?
I'll feed all day.

>>35499222

Remember: if an animal attacks a human it'll aim to wound then run away.

In systems where healing takes a while and magic is sparse this can be devastating.

>>35504528
>starts to point out 5e and Inspiration with alignment
>see anon Answered own question with second line.
My work here is done.

>>35504539
Yeah, that phrase doesn't mean what you think it means, dude. Is that what this was all about? That'll teach me to jump in without reading quote trees.

>>35504539
That wasn't even me, and I've been posting for like an hour now.

You clearly don't understand English.

basically:
>>35504581

>>35504485
>He's saying it's unreasonably vague
So is calling all other roleplaying systems copies of D&D.

Again, the equivalency holds.

File: Ohgod.png (434 KB, 875x656)

434 KB PNG

>>35499295
That is just too much, Anon. TOO MUCH.

>>35504137
Human culture is all derivative. There's evidence that Proboscidea have been practicing ceremonial burial for millions of years.

>>35504601
Except it's not unreasonable, as several anon have pointed out it's quite accurate in most examples that anyone can think of.

>>35504581
So calling something a copy isn't actually saying that it's a copy.

News to me.

>>35504624
No, they have pointed out that there are similarities. Which is NOT the same thing as saying something is a copy.

>>35504629
Saying something is Generic Brand isn't the same thing as an "exact copy" you goddamn autists, holy jesus.

All the arguing just from people being retarded.

>>35504624
The closest anyone has come to providing an example in favor of all RPGs being D&D derivatives is claiming that the fact that they all use dice is incontrovertible proof of this.

>>35504651
You're just playing with words, saying something copies something else doesn't mean it's an "identical copy"

>>35504657

False

see:>>35503789

>>35504657
How come there haven't been any examples of it playing differently yet?

>>35504655
>conveniently leaving out "copy of something else"

>>35504683
>You're just playing with words, saying something copies something else doesn't mean it's an "identical copy"
No, I'm not the one playing with words. I asked this anon if he seriously meant it as identical copies and he all but explicitly said yes.

Seriously, go up and follow the exchange.

>>35504683
>Copies: a thing made to be similar or identical to another.
>similar

Copies: imitate the style or behaviour of.

Copies: make a similar or identical version of;
>similar again

Fuck.

>>35504707
see
>>35504224
or
>>35504528

>>35504683
>False

That's an absurdly generalized statement devoid of meaning, not an example.

>>35504761
see
>>35504569

Why link a post that goes through the trouble of providing it's own counter-example?

>>35504736
>Seriously, go up and follow the exchange.
Link pls, bullshit until link.

>>35504683
>>35504655
What about this post saying D&D and other systems are AT LEAST 90% similar at all times?
>>35504190

You might have been arguing whatever the fuck you want, but there was people in the argument honestly arguing that D&D and other systems are close to 100% similar. If that weren't you, you just didn't follow the argument.

>>35504788
>absurdly generalized
>describes at least a dozen different aspects of play, then ends with explaining how other games copied DnD.

>>35504791
>Why link a post that goes through the trouble of providing it's own counter-example?

It doesn't, it mocks an attempt at counter-example with a thinly veiled inb4.

Because alignment isn't at all the same thing as he describes.

>>35504813
I don't really care what all the concern trolls say.

It'd be hard to argue that other systems don't play 90% similar, even if more than that different in their resolution mechanics.

>>35504835
Thinly veiling inb4 for an obvious counter-example just inevitably makes it easier to show that even the poster knows he's full of shit and begs you to find other ways that also show it.

>>35504837
That's because it would be hard to even define in concrete terms what "90% similar" means, so any argument ends up in "yes they do" "no they don't" ad infinitum.

They don't, though. Don't Rest Your Head plays COMPLETELY differently from D&D 4e. Just about the only thing they have in common is that both are technically roleplaying games and both use dice.

>>35504350
Chess players tend to be more intelligent, we would not get as pissy after you point out the obvious as all of these anon.

>>35504901
No one here is arguing that 4e is a roleplaying game.

>>35504655
Going back to the Generic Brand Cereal thing. You could argue that Pathfinder or Swords and Sorcery are "generic brand" copies of Dnd.

But claiming that Gurps or Fate are generic versions of DnD would be like saying that Coco Puffs or Lucky Charms are a generic versions of Kellog's original Bran Flakes, because Bran Flakes came first and they're all classified as cereal.

Because something has similarities, and one came first doesn't mean it's a the later version is generic. It'd be like claiming that Metal is a generic version of Blues. Or that Vodun is a generic version of Catholicism.

>>35504922
Oh, okay. If 4e isn't a roleplaying game, then all tactical wargames must ALSO be D&D derivatives.

>>35504947
No? Tactic wargames came first.

For OP's pic, watch The Grey. A constant sense of being hunted by something that, while killable, almost definitely has the advantage on you and you won't be able to just rush in and beat them to death with beer bottle knuckles. Coupled with more mundane fears, such as being alone in the wilderness with the chance of an even worse threat out there, and my favorite/least favorite scene from the movie, very, very, very tall heights

>>35504938
I agree, obviously Generic Brand was some stupid bullshit.

Doesn't change the fact that all of those Coco Puffs and Lucky Charms are eaten the same, based on Bran Flakes, and even taste almost the same following this example.

>Players camping in wilderness
>Get attacked by pack of wolves
>Party win but get shit kicked out of them
>Finally make it to village they were travelling to
>Deserted, blood trails like something was dragged off
>Find a critically injured survivor who can only gasp 'wolves'
>Players promptly NOPE their way out of the plot, steal a boat and fuck off somewhere safer

I guess I won at horror GMing?

>>35504994
>Bits of marshmellow taste like bran
>Dnd plays like every other systems

uh wot?

>>35505094
Yup.

I had players NOPEing right and left in my zombie game. It was great.

>>35505146
Not in real life, but in the example bits of marshmallow taste uncomfortably like brand.

Shows not every analogy is perfect.

Also, "like" is a broad term, so.. yes.

DnD plays like every other system.

An outsider wouldn't even be able to tell the difference.

>>35505187
An outsider wouldn't be able to tell computer games apart from just watching the player, either.

>>35505276
Yeah, I know that I couldn't tell the difference between someone playing Wii Fit and Destiny.

>>35505187
>An outsider wouldn't even be able to tell the difference.

Is that the criteria by which we judge if something is Generic?

And to be fair, there are some systems you could definitely tell were different then DnD, just from the trappings. Although they might enquire if you were playing DnD in space, or similar.

>>35505276
Good thing I was talking about actually playing.

Man do you need validation bad

>>35505351
No, it's just one more helpful term, with the results correlating with all the others.

Nothing is even stopping you from running DnD in space.

>>35505355
So was I. If the hypothetical watcher was watching the screen, for the situation to be equivalent he would also need to be examining the character sheets and notes.

>>35505322
I'm sure you couldn't tell the difference between a vampire larp and a D&D game, either.

>>35505419
>So was I.
>>35505276
>from just watching the player

backpedal more, faggot.

>>35505382
Alright. Now that we're on the subject.

Could you define the criteria by which you determine that something is a "generic version" of something else?

With those criteria, we should be able to verify one way or the other if other RPGs fall into the category. We could also apply the same criteria to other situations to see if wee need to revise our criteria.

>>35505470
Ha! Good one anon!
I don't get it.

>>35505479
>completely ignoring the rest of the post

So you admit you don't have an actual counter argument, then?

>>35505481
How about for talking about a TTRPG, we define the "generic version" as being something marketed as a different game, but where you do the exact same things when playing.

Sort of like Path of Exile vs Diablo 2 like was said earlier.

>>35505520
You've got him on the ropes!
Keep mimicking while saying nothing.

>>35505520
>Ignoring the rest of the post.

Faggot, your post didn't even have an argument.

Your argument against "They play exactly the same to an outsider"
>play
was
>"Well, video games would look exactly the same to someone who wasn't playing"
>looking
>"Oh god, please validate the dumb things I say anon!

>>35505531
>How about for talking about a TTRPG, we define the "generic version" as being something marketed as a different game, but where you do the exact same things when playing.


We need something more general. For example "the exact same thing when playing" doesn't work for generic cereal or generic facial tissue.

>>35505649
Games aren't really the same as a normal consumable product, though.

Generic facial tissue is still made of approximately the same ply and is nearly as useful.

A generic game would only play like it was approximately the same ply.

>>35505578
The difference is that watching a videogame tells you pretty much everything about it, while watching a tabletop game doesn't tell you much anything, since visual cues don't play any part in it unless it's either LARP or you include reading things such as character sheets.

>>35505649
Maybe "Delivers the same experience"? or "Accomplishes a similar result in a similar fashion."

Along with "Is a newer, less well known, and less widely used."

>>35505682
That's why we were talking about playing.

Better luck next time, dumbshit.

>>35505680
>Games aren't really the same as a normal consumable product, though.

Then we'd have to either change our criteria for "generic version" or concede that other RPGs aren't generic versions of DnD.

>>35505689
Shit, but that makes them seem even more similar.

>>35505689
If you go by "Delivers the same experience" or "accomplishes a similar result in a similar fashion."
then all the TTRPG's start to blend together.

That's kind of uncomfortable.

>>35505726
So watching a visual game tells you more about it than watching a non-visual game. Congratulations on being a total failure at articulating your point.

File: w-w-w-watching.jpg (40 KB, 349x642)

40 KB JPG

>>35505816
Holy shit, this retard is still on about his lack of thinking or reading comprehension.

He's still so stuck on his video game thing that he's desperate for ANYONE to take his side.

I wish I knew you in real life so I could point and laugh.

Here's some posts for you when you rub your two brain cells together for the first time.
>>35505355
>actually playing

Since you can't read:
Here's a clarification post.
>>>35505578
>play
>play
>play

Then I'm not going to bother responding to your dozen posts trying to go how "if someone was only watching"
blah blah, stupid bullshit.

Jesus, when people want attention they want attention.

>>35505816
>still on about watching when literally no-one else said anything about watching.

You're special even by 4chan standards, aintcha ya little attention whore?

Polite sage for responding to shitpost

>>35499279
Doesn't work in 3.5 against sufficiently high-level optimized characters. At all.

>>35505770
>>35505737

I'm sure the discomfort will pass.

>>35505689
By those critea, allot of things are generic.

Like Death Metal, Electronica, Most Video Games, even Religions and Philosophies. Even humans are generic versions of other hominids.

Can we legitimately say that Ethical Egoism is a generic copy of Hedonism? Yes by the current criteria.

So, we either have to accept that quite allot of things are "generic versions", or that our Criteria are too broad.

I would vote for the latter and assert that the criteria are too broad. I'd also assert that there aren't any criteria that you can exclude things that we know not to be "generic versions" and be inclusive enough to included other rpgs as generic versions of Dnd.

Although, if someone can come up with revised criteria that do fit, I'd be more then willing to retract my assertion.

>>35506072
>Even humans are generic versions of other hominids.

I retract that, humans while newer are more well known then other hominids, at least currently.

Which means at some point we were generic, but now aren't.

>>35506072
But none of those things "deliver the same experience."

There are definitely some similarities, if you were to say that Baptists were Generic Protestants that might be valid.

But most of those things don't deliver the exact same experience. Death metal will produce more adrenaline than Electronica, which might cause more feelings of elation and dopamine.

Different TTRPG's can and often do meet that criteria and deliver indiscernibly "the same experience" if you hold other factors equal.

I honestly don't know what critera would be better, though.

>>35506165
cont.

They definitely all "accomplish the same result in a similar fashion" though.

Well, except the humans thing, but you retracted that one.

>>35499222
Lethality, if your players can handle it.

I played AdEva's v3 alpha, and holy shit. You fucking run from someone with a gun. If you can't run, you hide behind cover, and wait for a chance to run.

When a mundane pistol does d6 damage, and you have roughly 3-4 health points, you're going to be terrified of that mundane item.

>>35506165
Delivers the same experience is too vague, it's why I find it discomforting.

For example, if you were to take a group of players and a DM with exactly equal levels of experience in DnD and GURPS.

Then had them play representations of the same characters built in the different systems, in a world based on Lord of the Rings, with the same LOTR module.

You'd see the exact same result in nearly if not exactly the same way.

But clearly these systems are different, so how do you say they're different in a meaningful way?

>>35506165
I didn't mean to imply that Death metal and Elctronica are generic versions of the same thing. I apologize for not being more clear.

If we go by the dictionary definition
>noun .a consumer product having no brand name or registered trademark.

Then only those rpgs that don't have trademarks can be considered generic. I don't know that much about trademarks to make an assertion as to whether that applies to most rpgs or not.

So the

>>35506429
They aren't. Which means that they fit the criteria.

I'm arguing that too many things we wouldn't consider to be "generic versions" also fit the criteria. So we can either accept that they too are generic versions, or accept that our criteria are flawed.

>>35506508
The criteria is wrong, but that then wouldn't change that the two separate systems played so similarly.

>>35506508
Yeah, we should probably stop using generic that way IMO.

>>35506595
Is that a problem?

Soccer and Rugby are played similarly, but they are different games.

>>35506712
They play VASTLY differently by comparison.

I guess it's just different for TTRPG's, everything in degrees.

>>35506770
>They play VASTLY differently by comparison.

They're both played by teams on a field, usually in front of spectators. The goal is to get the ball to the other side to score points. Whoever has the most points wins.

The rules are different. But they're still played similarly.

In fact, like the other potential criteria mentioned, to an outsider they may even appear to be the same.

>>35506879
They only play similarly in the most utterly general sense.

In one you would see people only kicking the ball and scattering, you would see a goalie and a net, in the other you would see formations, people picking up the ball, no net or goal, entirely different scoring systems, different dress and protective gear, different announcements.

Taking the GURPS vs DnD example above you'd see different dice, being compared to a different success chart. Other than that, nothing noticeable even to a player would be different, no methods, no anything.

>>35506973
cont. Even though the numbers on their sheet might be different, the actual play would be identical.

I'll stick with >>35506770

>>35499671
Odd how a post like this could make me see TTRPG's differently now.

File: dolphin.jpg (19 KB, 604x233)

19 KB JPG

>>35499274
>be fishermen
>kill a dolphin
>swears vengeance against the party

>>35499222
Run Warhammer Fantasy RPG

>>35502021
>Oh look, it's one of the cancers who believes RPG's are the same thing as board games and that believability or consistency is unimportant!
Yes, and if my guy can get mauled, blasted with acid and nearly eviscerated and still stand and fight he can damn well walk through a fucking burning building.
THAT'S consistency.

>>35508976
Devil's advocate:

Getting mauled, blasted with acid, and eviscerated are nowhere near the amount of power of a burning building.

You're comparing a small angry badger to a dire bear with levels in barbarian.

>>35508636

>Dolphin starts making plots and connections
>Finds out where our 'heroes' live and work

>Players are offered job - sea-faring merchant has a valuable cargo he wants protected from pirates, offering good pay
>On the way, after one or two pirate encounters to relieve tension, ship gets attacked by kraken
>Players get swept off deck, or kraken destroys ship
>Players get grabbed by dolphin and kin, dragged to underwater ruins with no standing room, and barely any air pockets
>Now have to fight for more than just their life...

>>35509279
That's not devils advocate, that's just pointing out he's wrong.

>>35509476
What else are they fighting for?!

>>35509529
Air, of course. And a way out.

Anything else is the GM's discretion, really.

File: dolphinrape.jpg (13 KB, 259x194)

13 KB JPG

>>35509529
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolphin#Reproduction_and_sexuality

To protect their dignity.

>>35509584
Air is just part of their life!
>>35509647
Not this!

Magical reeeaaaalmmm!!

>>35499794
GM did this to us in a Paranoia game. We had to wander outside Alpha Complex for supplies and shit, and he showed the player on point a rough (very rough) sketch of what he could see, keeping in mind that he'd never left the complex before. It just turned out to be a wolf, but when you have no idea what the hell that weird thing in the trees is, it gets scary

>>35509715
Oh, sorry. Thought you meant 'they' as in the players. The dolphins are also fighting for revenge. And loot; hiring unsavory merchants and kraken to collect the players isn't cheap.

>>35509279
>You're comparing a small angry badger to a dire bear with levels in barbarian.
The talk was about level ~10 characters - they don't fight badgers, but devils, dragons, giants and other monstrosities. That's what you should compare to the burning building.

>>35509960
I suppose that's true.

If your enchanted armor is so hard, and your skin so resilient that you can survive getting bludgeoned by a giant, why shouldn't you be able to survive and breathe even in the sun.

>>35510207
I'm still not sure I would run my games to where my players being monster slayers makes them immune to the environment and hardship.

OP here. Those of you that have stayed on topic are being immensely helpful. Thank you.

>>35510770
Disrupt the player's sense of 'safe' and 'unsafe' :
-Have the threat steal from them (but make it suspicious when it happens, and have them catch the thief leaving, so it's not just 'you didn't want us to have that'
-Find out your players' phobias and play on those...
-Exploit real-world, but unusual, behaviors of creatures: did you know that Texas has annual tarantula migrations? Imagine the players waking to see a swarm of spiders approaching from the north, crawling over cacti and the dunes as if they weren't there...
-Ever had the party ambushed from below the ground? Like, oh say, kobolds digging into the camp and attacking in the dead of night?

>>35501477
because fire burns people. including wizards that dont have a spell that puts out lots of fire.

>>35503473
so you are both retarded AND pretentious?

i would almost like to say thats a rare combination

>>35503927
D&D is just a variation of yahtzee, because you use dice and play it on a table.

>ITT: "BUT MUH ROOLZ"

The rules are a suggestion for people who don't want to cook up a homebrew.

Oh, and if you're using the fact that fire does 1d6 damage as a justification for your character walking right into something that should, by any reasonable logic, kill him, then you need to learn what "in character" and "out of character" mean. If your hero's gonna run into the burning building and save the little girl, it's because he can't bear to see that girl die, or because the girl has important information, or even because he knows he'll be a hero for it--but it most certainly should NOT be "fire hurts less than my longsword", because that just doesn't make sense in-character. How does your barbarian know that he'll be able to resist the effects of a flame more easily than the effects of a sword?

Not to mention that that's a guaranteed 1d6 each round, inside of a building that's probably got quite a bit of rubble in your way already from being FUCKING BURNING TO THE GROUND. And there's more damage from suffocation, as well as having shit fall on you, and your gear's liable to catch fire if it isn't metal, and if it is metal, it's liable to heat to the point of both ruining the gear and causing severe burns to you.

>>35512818
>How does your barbarian know that he'll be able to resist the effects of a flame more easily than the effects of a sword?

Well, you know, I can tell you that getting your hand burned hurts a lot less than getting whacked with a sword. I've never had either happen to me.

Crazy, huh?