Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

So has anyone played Ruin Masters? I like Trudavang but Rune Masters seams similar enough to Forbidden Lands that I don't need both. But I'm curious what others think.

I know very little about RuinMaters, but after looking over the kickstarter they have going and doing some digging I can say the biggest difference between it and Forbidden Lands is going to be the combat and general exploration element. Maybe the level class?


FL has no levels. It's a semi structured point buy for character creation and health is low and damages high. things are deadly and dangerous. There are no rules for miniatures and a map for dungeon crawling. Combat is tactical in that your limited actions means you need to be careful how you spend them so you can defend yourself and not be overwhelmed.

Ruin Masters appears to be a cross between the hex crawl world exploration that FL shares but more DnD in the rest of it's mechanics.

I could be wrong about that. Happy to have someone more knowledgeable step in and fill in some gaps.

What is the oldest Non-Dungeons and Dragons RPG you have played?

I think the two that come to mind for me are Marvel Super Heroes from TSR (but we used custom heroes) and Top Secret from TSR.

How about you?

I was first introduced in 3rd edition dnd. The first non DnD game I played was White Wolf (I think it was Vampire the Masquerade ?) or maybe just basic Story Teller.

I'm a late comer to actual TTRPGs. I think the first system I played other than 5E was L5R.

 Easy E wrote:
What is the oldest Non-Dungeons and Dragons RPG you have played?

Potentially Call of Cthulhu, but I don't know what edition the DM was running.

The first long-term face to face game I played was 1st edition warhammer fantasy rpg ('86) mashed together with the advanced fighting fantasy setting books.
Several games of the original cyberpunk 2020 ('88) including one earlier this year. A few brief tries at shadowrun ('89), a number of early 90s games like starwars d6, kult, vampire,

 Easy E wrote:
What is the oldest Non-Dungeons and Dragons RPG you have played?

I think the two that come to mind for me are Marvel Super Heroes from TSR (but we used custom heroes) and Top Secret from TSR.

How about you?

Traveller and Call of Cthulhu but it was 6th edition for me, COC just had its 40th anniversary a few days back.

 Easy E wrote:
What is the oldest Non-Dungeons and Dragons RPG you have played?

I think the two that come to mind for me are Marvel Super Heroes from TSR (but we used custom heroes) and Top Secret from TSR.

How about you?

It may be that same Marvel game. Or MERP (Middle Earth Roleplaying) based on Runequest (which I've only every played a game of 3rd edition of that, much later. 2nd attempted failed trying to coach people through character creation with a single copy of the rulebook).
Edit: Oh! Forgot Star Frontiers! The rules were simple (closer to the D&D boxed sets than AD&D), but we had a blast with that.
Not sure on dates anymore, to be honest.

Other contenders:
Palladium Fantasy RPG & Beyond the Supernatural (don't recommend either) TMNT and Robotech (also from Palladium, and bad for the same reason, though TMNT is crazy enough to be actually fun), Paranoia, Twilight 2000 (I actually have fond memories of this, but vaguely think I shouldn't) , WHFRP 1st edition (which I also GMed most of the original campaign, it died in Something Rotten in Kislev), Shadowrun (1st-3rd), West End's Star Wars. Toon, a couple times. Call of Cthullu and Elfquest (uses the same basic system, bizarrely enough). I think I played Champions briefly (another superhero game), and it probably wasn't Mutants and Masterminds.

We also played a game of Cyberpunk in the long ago. One of the worst character creation experiences (bar Runequest), and half the party died in the first fight. Ended early, didn't play again. Went back to rotating DMs for D&D 2nd edition.

Vampire & Werewolf I didn't think I hit until their second editions (played in college, natch). Mage was definitely a later game and also college.

Some older games I played later, not when they were new, though many of those were high school.
Skyrealms of Jorune I have, but never actually got to play it. Its... interesting, but a little gonzo. And mechanically
Had but never actually played GURPS. never liked the concept of generic RPG systems, to be honest.

Twilight 2000 has a new edition coming out soon. Kickstarter was last year. I think the public release is a month or 2 away.

Systems I've played or ran include,

Talislanta 3rd and 5th editions (GM)
Marvel Super heroes (player and GM)
Shadowrun 2nd ed (player) shadowrun 3rd ed (gm)
Deathwatch (player)
Starwars-weg (player)
starwars-d20 (player and GM)
Gurps (player and GM)
Rifts (player)
Pathfinder 1st ed (player)
D&D 2nd, 3rd, and 5e (player and GM)
Old school white wolf games -Vampire and Werewolf (player)
Vampire (Larp)
NERO (Larp)

and a couple other minor one shots over the years I dont recall

Oldest non-AD&D played for me would be:

Gamma World 1E
Stormbringer - not sure which edition though - maybe 3rd?
Hawkmoon

I still have my Gamma World and Hawkmoon stuff...somewhere. I wish I still had my Stormbringer stuff though!

(...and of course a whole lot of 1E AD&D, which to be honest, is where most of my RPG time was spent.)

Voss wrote:
We also played a game of Cyberpunk in the long ago. One of the worst character creation experiences (bar Runequest), and half the party died in the first fight.

Cyberpunk 2020 was simultaneously incredibly lethal and non-lethal, and both the players and DM had to be on the same page about what they were doing in terms of helping the unarmoured/unmodded characters avoid ending up as collateral damage.
Or everyone just takes skinweave, but that was always a bit of a cop-out that somewhat forced escalation of lethality to compensate.

Just finished my last session of True Detective vs the Mythos; it didn't get as far as I'd hope (hoped it'd reach the final confrontation, but we're a while away from it). They're investigating into a murder of a local gang leader and just encountered the pair of DEA agents who he was informing for, and one of them was a complete donkey-cave, It was so fun to roleplay, and the PC's hate him right from the get-go (they're both cult members who murdered the gang boss to essentially draw the PCs into a trap, as the PC's know too much, in truth, it was a tactic from both of them to get them flustered so they might spurt out more information they don't know, it worked as they confessed they'd had a run-in with the FBI in an earlier session, as their masters didn't inform them of this information when they go the assignment)

Sounds super fun!

Players never get as far as anyone expects.

 Easy E wrote:
Sounds super fun!

Players never get as far as anyone expects.

you'd think at this point we would all know to plan for extended shopping trips sessions and the like

Gamma World, totally forgot about that one!

Has anyone played those systems where the players actions/inactions generate "points" that the GM uses to set challenges for the players? How does that experience differ from other RPGs?

It feels a bit..... contrary(?) to the way most TTRPGs work, but have no experience myself and would like to hear more.

Not all systems are equal and there are some that are definitely not great experiences for anyone. But I have some experience with several that have been really wonderful. I guess one of my favorite systems is Coriolis.

That game has "Darkness Points" here after called DP (ha ha ha. Get it out of your systems).

Each published adventure says the GM starts with x amount of DP as a recommendation but you could ignore that and just keep whatever you have from your previous sessions. Its up to however you are running the game.

The players generate DP for the GM in a number of ways. The main one is probably "Praying to the Icons". Basically if the players make a roll and it doesn't succeed they can reroll once. That reroll, in other games by the same company is called Pushing the Dice and represents a concentrated effort on the part of the players. They reroll a hand full of d6s and any 6s are successes but any 1s on the reroll generate DP.

That DP is then spent on all kinds of stuff. You can have the players gun go empty, requiring them to take a fast action to reload. It fuels the special abilities of the monsters. A creature has the ability to regenerate health... for an action and a DP. Or it can sprint at an amazing burst of speed... for a DP. Or can create an area of what amounts to magical darkness... for a DP.

You get the idea. Imagine DnD but a dragons breath weapon isn't on a dice roll or a timer. It costs currency. But then also environmental effects like pit traps. It's not a meticulously planned map of a dungeon where the players need to search every nook and cranny because the GM is crafty. It's the GM thinks this would be a good spot to spring a thing, spends the points (if hes got them) and the players make rolls to avoid it.

It cuts out what has traditionally been a kind of bad part of RPGs (there are whole articles on why traps are bad - https://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/45020/roleplaying-games/rulings-in-practice-traps ) and instead turns it more into an indiana jones style cinematic event. Clink 2 tokens over your DM shield, tell a player that the stone under their foot sinks into the floor with a "click" and get ready.

It can also mean when the players do something cinematic you can spend the points to add complications "that fireball got um, but now that pillar is looking weak. ::Clink clink:: You see the piller shift and dust and debris falls from the ceiling. You think you might have seconds..."

And my favorite part about them, which I have mentioned elsewhere before, it makes the GM into a real player. They start looking at their points, their powers, their options. Considering when and how to spend and to what effect. A whole asymmetrical mini game emerges behind the GM screen. The players are in on it. They know when that rolls has 1s that they just fed the DM something. And when the DM drops the tokens onto the table the players know the GM isn't just arbitrarily doing things to them. They gave the GM those points. They knew you were going to spend them eventually. Tons of fun.

The more I look into Call of Cthulhu 7th edition, the more I like it. It seems to be in the middle of not being too simple but not too complex in my eyes. Although I haven't delved much into the magic stuff or Weird Science yet as we're playing Pulp Cthulhu, not CoC (which fits my original setting as there's sorta a sorcery vs science theme behind it), Right now, I'm sorta sticking with sorcery and stuff that's for the plot or whatnot. I've been doing a lot of prep, and I've written down the description of the big bad monster the PCs (and a couple of allied NPCs will fight. So here it is, it's damned gruesome; I don't know where I get this stuff from...

 Lance845 wrote:
Not all systems are equal and there are some that are definitely not great experiences for anyone. But I have some experience with several that have been really wonderful. I guess one of my favorite systems is Coriolis.

That game has "Darkness Points" here after called DP (ha ha ha. Get it out of your systems).

Each published adventure says the GM starts with x amount of DP as a recommendation but you could ignore that and just keep whatever you have from your previous sessions. Its up to however you are running the game.

The players generate DP for the GM in a number of ways. The main one is probably "Praying to the Icons". Basically if the players make a roll and it doesn't succeed they can reroll once. That reroll, in other games by the same company is called Pushing the Dice and represents a concentrated effort on the part of the players. They reroll a hand full of d6s and any 6s are successes but any 1s on the reroll generate DP.

That DP is then spent on all kinds of stuff. You can have the players gun go empty, requiring them to take a fast action to reload. It fuels the special abilities of the monsters. A creature has the ability to regenerate health... for an action and a DP. Or it can sprint at an amazing burst of speed... for a DP. Or can create an area of what amounts to magical darkness... for a DP.

You get the idea. Imagine DnD but a dragons breath weapon isn't on a dice roll or a timer. It costs currency. But then also environmental effects like pit traps. It's not a meticulously planned map of a dungeon where the players need to search every nook and cranny because the GM is crafty. It's the GM thinks this would be a good spot to spring a thing, spends the points (if hes got them) and the players make rolls to avoid it.

It cuts out what has traditionally been a kind of bad part of RPGs (there are whole articles on why traps are bad - https://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/45020/roleplaying-games/rulings-in-practice-traps ) and instead turns it more into an indiana jones style cinematic event. Clink 2 tokens over your DM shield, tell a player that the stone under their foot sinks into the floor with a "click" and get ready.

It can also mean when the players do something cinematic you can spend the points to add complications "that fireball got um, but now that pillar is looking weak. ::Clink clink:: You see the piller shift and dust and debris falls from the ceiling. You think you might have seconds..."

And my favorite part about them, which I have mentioned elsewhere before, it makes the GM into a real player. They start looking at their points, their powers, their options. Considering when and how to spend and to what effect. A whole asymmetrical mini game emerges behind the GM screen. The players are in on it. They know when that rolls has 1s that they just fed the DM something. And when the DM drops the tokens onto the table the players know the GM isn't just arbitrarily doing things to them. They gave the GM those points. They knew you were going to spend them eventually. Tons of fun.

Thanks for the info. Sounds interesting and a divergence from normal GM and Player roles. Normally, I see RPGs as cooperative and the GM as the facilitator of the adventure. Here it feels a bit more "antagonistic" in nature. I suppose it depends on how the players play it, as the points are basically "story beats", "Plot Points", or "Complications" that the GM is triggering.

Does this promote a GM vs Player thought process via the mechanics?

Some of the systems that use them can create a DM versus the players dynamic. Others make it more a narrative element.

It depends on the exact system and how they are generated. Especially if the points have a bit of back and forth with the players.

FF starwars for instance has little tokens that sit in the middle of the table. Light side points on one side and dark side points on the other. When a players spends a LSP to boost their roll they flip it and it becomes a DSP. When the GM spends a DSP it flips back and becomes available for the players. The GM isnt just doing a thing to be "antagonistic", the players also get a resource for it. I think that goes a long way to being friendly and cooperative. Vader gets to do a cool force choke and luke gets to do a sweet flip tossing these points back and forth together.

Again, it really depends on the system itself and how it fits into the bigger mechanics of the game.

Probably depends a bit on group dynamic too.

I've heard both good and bad experiences on FF Star Wars. I think a lot of it really comes down to investment. If the group can't invest nothing really works. If it can then almost anything can work.

Yea I can agree with that. I have heard of players in the FF SWs getting all the tokens flipped to Light Side and then, as a group, deciding to never spend them so that the GM has no DSP.

Which you know... bad form.

There are a lot of different attempts at meta currencies out there. The best ones have multiple ways for them to generate and a lot of ways for them to be spent. As long as the spending is balanced (both in the power of the things you spend them on (Just activating "Bonus Actions" for the monsters as an example) and keeping a balance between generation and spending so that it's not an infinite supply but neither are you starved) then I think it adds a lot to the game play for everyone at the table.

I almost hate to ask, but is GM Fiat something that is really divisive in the RPG world at the moment? It feels like there is a lot of effort to remove this element from games and I am unsure why? Is there someplace I can look to get more context on this discussion?

So. Professionally i work a lot of system/process analysis and from that perspective i can say with 100% certainty that it is ALWAYS better to have a system in place that controls than to leave it up to individuals who can have any number of biases.

Now... Thats not saying that in this creative game of story telling that there shouldnt be freedom. But completely unrestricted freedom traditionally left in the hands of teenagers is a recipe for a lot of bad calls. Even in the hands of practiced adults a lot of missteps get made. I can look back at myself year by year and see how i have improved as a GM and how my old philosophies and decisions are things i would never do now. And i hope 10 years from now that i can look back to now and feel the same way. It means im getting better.

But that also means that a system of standardization and control to help reign in bad calls and put newer people into a better place with better guard rails so to speak can only be a good thing.

Think of board games like decent and dungeon quest. There is basically a DM there with super restrictive rules and no actual RP. Loosen up a little. Give the players and DM a little more freedom. Get half way between the GM is just god and does what he wants and "everything the gm can do is on the cards he draws from his deck" and you will get a more consistently good experience for everyone involved.

GM Fiat I think works a lot like suspension if disbelief.

In a certain mechanical sense, everything in an RPG happens by GM fiat (excluding of course GM-less sytems). As long as the players can remain in the fiction, they don't care and it doesn't matter. As long as everything flows right and the experience is enjoyable, the GM can use any number of contrivances and it doesn't really matter. When GM fiat gets too obvious, or in this case maybe a better word is onerous, it's like pulling back the curtain and revealing the man behind the machine. The suspension of disbelief is broken and the whole fiction collapses.

Hey guys, I'm looking for some advice. For my currently running Pulp Cthulhu scenario the ending before the monster comes is a big action set-piece where the player characters are holed up in a mansion and fighting off waves of attackers (three) made up of local gangs of Baton Rouge. One of them is a far-right racist biker gang who have allied with African-American gangsters, as they'd seen the monster and driven them so mad with fear they're able to get past their racism and work together, therefore, foreshadowing the Flesh Golem.

But the problem is, the Pulp Cthulhu/Call of Cthulhu rules aren't made for such large-scale battles (neither was Rogue Trader but it wasn't hard to house rule the horde rules from Deathwatch to fix that) This is also made more complicated due to the latest edition having disadvantage and advantage rolls like in DnD 5th edition, which the NPC attacker will almost always be at due to the PCs taking cover (as they're smart enough to) Also, the way initiative is run is that those with the higher Dex always goes 1st, then the 2nd and 3rd and all the NPCs have the same Dex. I guess I could make some have different Dex stats, but both PCs have high Dex so they'll probably be going at the same time, anyway. so they'll all go at the same time, so I'll be spending ages rolling for them while my PCs have to sit around waiting, I'm thinking of pre-rolling, but even that has issues.

Anyone here have a similar problem GMing Call/Pulp Cthulhu? If so, how did you fix it?

Use a horde, a collection of multiple enemies you treat, for convenience, as a single entity. Set 1-2 HP thresholds (2/3s health and 1/3 health for example) where the horde's behavior or actions change as the number of enemies making it up decrease from damage dealt. It's the best way to handle large scale set pieces where you don't want the mechanics of taking turns to grind the game to an effective halt. It also helps with action economy so that players don't get overwhelmed by numerous enemies. You could simply let the horde have advantage through numbers to kind of even it out.

TLDR: Don't treat it like your players are fighting 50 npcs. Instead, have 2 hordes, one for each gang, and describe the hordes as made up of 25 guys each. When your players shoot or fight, they take a guy out. Maybe another runs. Use mechanics to cover over the annoyance with more abstraction.

Hey thanks, LordofHats! That will work very well, indeed.

I agree with Hats. I have seen a lot of systems group same monsters together if the number of monsters in a combat starts to exceed the number of players to keep things moving fast. Each "monster" in the group is a +1/+2/whatever-makes-sense-for-the-combat-system to their roll and some extra HP. It's a good way to handle large amounts of mooks or turn fighting through waves of monsters into a kind of mini game combat.

Could also just use some basic skill checks, where success means that the PCs have fought off X, while a failure indicates that they were hurt in the fight.

I recently played a game of D&D where we individually fought off 50+ individual monsters, and it was boring as all hell.

Better to treat it as a skill test, with the PCs narrating a bit about how they are tackling the issue.