**Come here and talk about anything!**

​

This post will stay stickied for (at least) the week-end. Please enjoy this space where you can talk about anything: your last game, your current project, your patreon, etc. You can even talk about video games, ask for a group, or post a survey or share a new meme you've just found. This is the place for small talk on /r/rpg.

​

The off-topic rules may not apply here, but the other rules still do. This is less the Wild West and more the Mild West. Don't be a jerk.

​

----------

​

This submission is generated automatically each Saturday at 00:00 UTC.

**Come here and talk about anything!**

​

This post will stay stickied for (at least) the week-end. Please enjoy this space where you can talk about anything: your last game, your current project, your patreon, etc. You can even talk about video games, ask for a group, or post a survey or share a new meme you've just found. This is the place for small talk on /r/rpg.

​

The off-topic rules may not apply here, but the other rules still do. This is less the Wild West and more the Mild West. Don't be a jerk.

​

----------

​

This submission is generated automatically each Saturday at 00:00 UTC.

After absolutely loving A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms (and re-watching A Knight's Tale) I wondered how many RPGs are out there about knights?

I own the Pendragon starter set, that's about it for my knowledge.

I'm preferably looking for a game where everyone plays a knight.

From reading the Daggerheart book (haven't had a chance to play yet), the influence of Powered by the Apocalypse games (e.g. Apocalypse World, Dungeon World), and Forged in the Dark games (e.g. Blades in the Dark) is clear. So when I see people make a big deal about Spotlights and no turn order, I get a bit confused since it works perfectly fine (and even great) in PbtA.

But then with the Hope and Fear system, and the way adversaries work, I could see that potentially having a big impact. For example, generally in a PbtA game such as Dungeon World, if an enemy attacks you, the GM may use a 'soft move' and say 'the goblin is attacking you, what do you do?'. If the player then says they want to fight it, they then use the 'Hack and Slash' move. This move basically resolves both the PC's attack and the goblin's at the same time. If the PC rolls very well, they do damage and avoid the goblin's damage, if they roll less well, they may do damage but take damage, and if they roll poorly, they take damage. The roll generally covers an exchange of blows between the two btw. Obviously, you can get modifiers which will affect how well you roll. If the enemy is particularly strong the GM may use a harder move require you to 'Defy Danger' before you can even attack or even just force you to take damage. A key point is that pretty much only the player ever rolls, and the consequences of the story are based on that.

But in Daggerheart, if you attack, the GM can only attack back if you get a result with Fear, or if they spend Fear (edit: or if you failed your roll, or a couple other circumstances). Furthermore, an adversary can miss on their roll, without the player rolling anything. So in the above scenario, it sounds like the GM might spend Fear to take the Spotlight first, rolls an attack with the goblin, then the player goes and makes an attack back (and then the goblin could go again if they rolled with Fear)? Plus, it sounds like softer and harder moves depend on the combination of success/failure and fear/hope rather than GM decision.

I've also seen a few people say they are disincentivised to take multiple actions, since that gives the GM multiple opportunities to act. In PbtA games, you can often mitigate consequences by increasing your stats or with certain abilities (but of course all PCs have weaknesses too), but it seems like in Daggerheart, the GM will always have at least a 50% to act next (although you may be able to mitigate their actions e.g. evasion and armor). Does it feel worse to have the GM act/roll than to experience a consequence baked into a 'move'?

So in your experience, how much does Daggerheart play like PbtA games, particularly in combat? Does the 'spotlight' shift as smoothly as it does in PbtA? Does it have a concept of soft/hard moves beyond the Duality Dice mechanic? How much is the GM rolling vs. Player rolling?

For me it's definitely Lords of Madness from D&D 3.5. Even though I don't play D&D anymore, I just loved all the creative and disturbing ideas it held. Was my gateway drug to cosmic horror.

I enjoyed what I've played so far (the free quick-start content) but I wanted to know what high level play is like. Does it still feel fast and fun? I worry since a lot of 5e-like systems have high level play but just about all of them disappoint with power creep, character sheet bloat and long drawn out combats.

I'm particularly interested because of the promise of being able to convert 5e adventures to Nimble easily. I'm lazy, and the less work I have to do as a GM the better; I'm more of a light on the prep, heavy on the improvisation guy.

On another note, anyone run any OSR adventures in Nimble? I'd usually run those in Cairn but Nimble has been a hit at my table.

Hey everyone!

We've had some time to go through the No Ice in Minnesota bundle (3 days left if you didn't get it yet!).

So I thought it would be a good opportunity to get some help from other gamers if you are confused about some rules or the setting of particular games. 44 thousand people bought it, a few must be here!

I can start: In Substratum Protocol, I think I am missing something about Complications. Is there a mechanic tied to them? I only see a section about Hazards, which apparently are worse Complications.

What are some things you are wondering about?

Not talking about whole systems, but specific rule areas that feel overly complicated or unnecessary.

Things like magic, hacking/netrunning, vehicle combat, social conflict, crafting, survival and resource management, mass combat, chase rules, etc. The parts of a game that suddenly become their own mini game, but not in a good way.

Did your group actually use it, simplify it, or just ignore it?

I've been looking for some good actual play podcasts lately. I tend not to like ones with more than four people (including the GM) in them, as I will inevitably have difficulty differentiating the voices.

I also prefer actual play podcasts that take themselves and the world seriously. The focus should be on telling a good story rather than humor.

Finally, it's a bonus if the podcast does multiple systems, but it's not a real requirement like the last two are for me.

Currently I enjoy Red Moon Roleplaying, Worlds Beyond Number, and Undiscovered Countries

I saq a video a while ago on youtube reviewing a certain game, but I can't find it and I can neither remember the game's name nor which youtuber did the review.

But the game seemes cool, it wad about heists in a beach setting, or something along those lines. With the characters wearing swimsuits and a bunch of silly stuff like that

Does anyone know which one is it?

So I'm playing through Alan Wake 2 and reliving the awesome surreal horror that is this series. Does anyone have any systems, suggestions, or ideas on how to run a game that has the weird surreal moments that this game does? If it weren't so incredibly specific, id be inclined to use public access as a framework.

Some ideas I have right now.

1: Hand the players a vague but menacing page which predicts what the story is and guides the players in their investigations while allowing for the players to interpret it.

2: Some sort of safety/danger mechanic the theme of the darkness vs light and the usage of flashlights feels VERY osr coded and makes me think I could pull something like that into a game.

The biggest issue im having is the non linearity/hallucinatory vibes in the game where everything has this weird quality.