Forums of the Megaverse®

Well, with the self quarantine and creeping boredom, I decided to look into online games on Roll 20. As a result, I entred games of D&D 5th Ed and Pathfinder. Both felt really restrictive in comparison to the free-wheeling combat of Palladium. For example, I was in the middle of the initiative table. I fired a shot with a crossbow, moved, and reloaded. Then an NPC with a lower initiaive runs up to me and attacks in melee and there is nothing that can be done. Another time I'm facing off with an ogre and it has a big ole hammer it's swinging at me. No parry, no dodge, nothing. Just hope he doesn't hit me. It feels like there is such a paucity of interaction with the actions. Am I the only one?

-Vek
"I guess I need to run my own PFRPG game."

My usual suggestion for this is check out Hackmaster.

Veknironth wrote:Well, with the self quarantine and creeping boredom, I decided to look into online games on Roll 20. As a result, I entred games of D&D 5th Ed and Pathfinder. Both felt really restrictive in comparison to the free-wheeling combat of Palladium. For example, I was in the middle of the initiative table. I fired a shot with a crossbow, moved, and reloaded. Then an NPC with a lower initiaive runs up to me and attacks in melee and there is nothing that can be done. Another time I'm facing off with an ogre and it has a big ole hammer it's swinging at me. No parry, no dodge, nothing. Just hope he doesn't hit me. It feels like there is such a paucity of interaction with the actions. Am I the only one?

-Vek
"I guess I need to run my own PFRPG game."

No. That's one of the things that always irked me about D&D.

I like somethings about the 2 games and not others

IMO
Pathfinder and DND Have a better magic system, and as you don't get a large amount of attacks, and what attacks are done in one action the casters don't get left out.
And generally the magic system is better balanced. I like the way spells have to be energised and the speed you can re-energise the low level ones, and even though you might know every spell under the sun you can only have a certain amount prepared and ready to cast (Like diabolists really).

I rather dislike the grapple system, and power creep has certainly made many classes over powered
I like the difficulty system as I use it in palladium. A skill roll isn't just a success or not, it usually has degrees of success (I use this idea in my games, my skills don't stop at %98, you get bonuses that take you over and negatives that bring you under, and the more a roll is made by the better it is. eg 2 blacksmiths make a knife. Toms skill total is %37, Jeremy's Skill level total is %87. They both roll, Tom rolls a 2 and makes it by %35, Jeremy rolls an %81 and makes it by %6, this would means toms knife is better, and by the amount he made it by it would likely have +1 or +2 to damage.

The other games have also moved into the 21st century with lots of tools and addons to work with a computer/tablet/phone. I played in a pathfinder game where 1 of the characters used his phone to play. There are plenty of character generators and treasure generators and dungeon generators etc for them, but mostly none for palladium (except prysus's character generator) because of their cyber policy.


My palladium games certainly wouldn't be as fun without the other rpg's I have borrowed rules from.
But yes they have their good bits and disappointing bits, but I like palladiums story the most

Well, I think you hit the nail on the head with the lack of digital support for Palladium. I don't know how Pathfinder and D&D became so popular, I guess it's because of freedom with licensing? However, the games and resources for them are legion. I mean, you can purchase a module on Roll20 or Fantasy Grounds and it comes with everything you might need and is ready to go. I think the future of gaming is on those platforms, it's unfortuante Palladium doesn't have a larger footprint.

And I haven't looked, but does Hackmaster have the same large online footprint that Pathfinder and D&D have?

-Vek
"Wearing a mask while I type this."
"

Veknironth wrote:And I haven't looked, but does Hackmaster have the same large online footprint that Pathfinder and D&D have?

"

Not as large, but Jolly Blackburn is a big fan of Roll20, IIRC.

Mark Hall wrote:

Veknironth wrote:And I haven't looked, but does Hackmaster have the same large online footprint that Pathfinder and D&D have?

"

Not as large, but Jolly Blackburn is a big fan of Roll20, IIRC.

Well, when you consider you can easily adapt any D&D module to it...

That being said, the two HM books I bought will NEVER be used for gaming.

I never had problems adapting d&d modules to palladium either, and after including 2nd ed d&d's magic system im having a lot of fun with the magic
(Lightning bolts with ley lines can be a lot of fun, especially with forgetful mages)

Veknironth wrote:Well, with the self quarantine and creeping boredom, I decided to look into online games on Roll 20. As a result, I entred games of D&D 5th Ed and Pathfinder. Both felt really restrictive in comparison to the free-wheeling combat of Palladium. For example, I was in the middle of the initiative table. I fired a shot with a crossbow, moved, and reloaded. Then an NPC with a lower initiaive runs up to me and attacks in melee and there is nothing that can be done. Another time I'm facing off with an ogre and it has a big ole hammer it's swinging at me. No parry, no dodge, nothing. Just hope he doesn't hit me. It feels like there is such a paucity of interaction with the actions. Am I the only one?

-Vek
"I guess I need to run my own PFRPG game."

Its just two entirely different game types, opposed rolls vs passive actions.

While you complain (that seems.... i dunno, needlessly strong, but its what ive got) that you dont get a chance to interact with being attacked or what have you.. thats because in those systems your defenses are baked in. Your chances to dodge/parry/not get hit/avoid the attack in some way are factored in to your AC (in D&D).

Its just the nature of that type of system. In that system, you have to imagine that your character IS attempting to parry - he didn't just stand there like a chump - and that if the attack hits, he simply failed to do so (or he tried to dodge, or whatever). Combat in D&D in particular is extremely abstract. In 2nd Edition (when Rounds were still 1 minute) you were assumed to be making feints, light attacks, parries, dodging, ducking behind your shield, etc, for the entire round, and your one "attack" was just the once chance you had to make a meaningful attack. . Your one action wasn't the only thing your character did the entire round - you didn't just make one two second attack and stand there like a mook for 58 seconds.

5Th Edition is more like 2nd than anything since, so i'd go with that. Its not super mechanically balanced (the bounded accuracy rules make the math just fall apart completely after about 9th level), but it is, like 2nd, more about storytelling and imagination than crunch. Your character is assumed to be doing those things (dodging, parrying, feinting, et al) during the round. Those actions are baked into your AC.

Pathfinder is a LOT more crunchy, but in terms of defenses, still an abstract system - you dont make active opposed rolls (except Pathfinder, which i uh... not-so-affectionally like to call CrunchFinder, tries to have its cake and eat it to, so sometimes you DO make opposed rolls) - your defenses are baked into your AC and your character is assumed to be taking defensive maneuvers and actions during combat.

Im not going to get into wether one type of system or another is better - i like both - but they are very different. Just becaise you like one, doesnt mean you like them all.

Now, i will say that every opposed-roll system ive ever played in, Combat takes 20x longer than systems like 2nd Ed AD&D, d20 (3.0/3.5/Pathfinder), or similar... because there are an order of magnitude more rolls.

Again, its not really about one being better or not. Its all preference. If you dont enjoy systems with passive defense/simplified combat, thats cool.

Youll find that most people aren't willing to put up with the amount of time Palladium takes to play out combat, though. Its one of the reasons (one of many, but a big one) that the company and its games are not that popular in the modern RPG era.

Its also why (i bring this up mostly on the Rifts sub forum) the re-work im doing of hte core Palladium system (which is designed with Rifts in mind so itll have rules for guns, etc, but would be equally applicable for PF with very minor revisions) sticks with the opposed-rolls system - because that's the core of what makes the Palladium system feel like the Palladium system.

I could (and have) written and co-opted and adapted "better" or "simpler/more functional" systems before, but.... then it doesnt feel like you're playing Rifts/PF/Heroes.

So i guess the TL:DR is... yeah, i get it.

And i can agree that Palladium, if it wants to exist in another ten years, needs to get on the online bandwagon. Kev's gotta get over his technophobia and his inability to let people do things without making them pay him up front or trying to completely control the project even though he's ignorant of how to make it work (which is what has killed a number of such projects in the past).

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:Its just the nature of that type of system. In that system, you have to imagine that your character IS attempting to parry - he didn't just stand there like a chump - and that if the attack hits, he simply failed to do so (or he tried to dodge, or whatever). Combat in D&D in particular is extremely abstract. In 2nd Edition (when Rounds were still 1 minute) you were assumed to be making feints, light attacks, parries, dodging, ducking behind your shield, etc, for the entire round, and your one "attack" was just the once chance you had to make a meaningful attack. . Your one action wasn't the only thing your character did the entire round - you didn't just make one two second attack and stand there like a mook for 58 seconds.

One of the things that most people don't do with most RPGs is read the "flavour text." Since...forever...the TSR product states flat out that in the combat round, you are actively attempting to land your blows, and your opponent is actively trying to evade, while attempting to strike YOU... (Which is why the Berserker looses AC, he's not attempting to dodge/parry/etc, just kill YOU.)

That being said, most DMs don't bother narrating the combat, they just "roll to hit"...

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:Im not going to get into wether one type of system or another is better - i like both - but they are very different. Just becaise you like one, doesnt mean you like them all.

Well, I will... I prefer 2nd ed... 3 and beyond sucks. 4th is a sin against the gods of gaming, and an offence against the intended user...5th? A comment on how gullible they think their audience is...

Oh...You meant between Hasbro and PB...well, honestly, up to 2nd ed., I had no preference.
After 2nd ed., PB hands down.

Borast wrote:Well, when you consider you can easily adapt any D&D module to it...

That being said, the two HM books I bought will NEVER be used for gaming.

Sounds like you're talking about Hack4, which was built on an AD&D chasis. Check out Hackmaster Basic (above), which is really pretty similar to Palladium in a lot of ways.

Mark Hall wrote:

Borast wrote:Well, when you consider you can easily adapt any D&D module to it...

That being said, the two HM books I bought will NEVER be used for gaming.

Sounds like you're talking about Hack4, which was built on an AD&D chasis. Check out Hackmaster Basic (above), which is really pretty similar to Palladium in a lot of ways.

Yup, 2001 publishing. Have the Player's and GMG.

Borast wrote:

Mark Hall wrote:

Borast wrote:Well, when you consider you can easily adapt any D&D module to it...

That being said, the two HM books I bought will NEVER be used for gaming.

Sounds like you're talking about Hack4, which was built on an AD&D chasis. Check out Hackmaster Basic (above), which is really pretty similar to Palladium in a lot of ways.

Yup, 2001 publishing. Have the Player's and GMG.

I was really interested in the 2001 Hackmaster until I got to the monster books. 8 alphabetical books, $20 a pop, to have a full set of monsters. It wasn't "Here's a list of monsters. Here's another list." It was "Here's monsters A-Ca. Here's Monsters Ca-F."

New Hackmaster (Hack5, I tend to shorten it, since the previous one was styled Hackmaster 4th edition) is a bit tighter construction, but a lot slower release rate. I've also written like 4 books for them, one of which is in production now.

Palladium over Hack any day of the week.

They both like to pretend there is no errata but at least Palladium doesn't tend to change 1 or 2 mechanics between books in the same line. Hack - damage done by axes changes from the 1st monster book to the players book, spell failure for multi-class characters changes from players book to gm book. Minor things like that. Also you will find that if you pre-order one of the large books it will be years before said book is released. Or lets not forget the minor bits it missing. Rogue - Influence ability says to see the Reactions section in the GMG (no such section). Every class references level 21+ (no rules for past level 20), and pretty much all talk about land, forts, towers, etc and that the GM has the specifics (nope). The second half of the first adventure (Frandor's Keep released before any of the core books) has yet to appear. And they've been releasing bits and pieces of the class books as small downloads for you buy now in the beta state.

But lets talk about the biggest pain in the rear when trying to run the system with a full party or larger encounter.

Combat is counted by the second. So every single second that ticks by anyone not recovering from just swinging a weapon can move. You swing your weapon you wait X seconds to swing again. So small weapons wielders will be swinging more often. Spell casting takes X seconds (see spell for exact time) to go off and then you are unable to really do anything for 5ish seconds afterwards. Archery requires that you check to see if you hit every possible target along the path of the arrow. You have to track fatigue during combat for all combatants who are on their 2nd or more fights that day. Arrows taken cause penalties and possibly damage if you do anything depending on how many are stuck in you. Every hit you take has to be recorded seperatly because each one heals independently of the others. I know all of this makes for a much more realistic game but good god people that is a ton of work to keep track of.

Oh and I almost forgot everything is an opposed roll. Example: You want to kick in a door you roll and add STR feat mod and the door rolls and adds it's mod.


Give me palladium 1st ed from now until the heat death of the universe.

Lord Malachdrim wrote:Give me palladium 1st ed from now until the heat death of the universe.

+1

but my version has so many house rules now I would have to call it

PallaDunBonEarBatFallTunWarDreVamShadStarParExaPathium V1.5.7.113

kiralon wrote:

Lord Malachdrim wrote:Give me palladium 1st ed from now until the heat death of the universe.

+1

but my version has so many house rules now I would have to call it

PallaDunBonEarBatFallTunWarDreVamShadStarParExaPathium V1.5.7.113

I think you should change your version number to V1.5.7.1.13
Then when your players have a string of bad luck, they can blame it on the system version number.

On the topic of D&D or Pathfinder vs Palladium, the passive resistances don't bother me in combat as much as the dependence on having good stats. In Palladium, you don't need great stats, or at least nothing exceptional. Your skill progression from levels is enough to do all you need. If you have poor stats in Pathfinder/D&D, then it affects everything your character will ever do. I am more familiar with Pathfinder (haven't really played D&D since 2E in the early 90s), and some things there really bug me. Fighters, Paladins, and Clerics are all stupid (regardless of their actual INT score) and are pretty much worthless outside of open conflict due to their pitiful amount of skill ranks. If your 1 or 2 developed skills aren't need at the moment, you have little useful to do. The magic item upgrade treadmill can be a bit much as well sometimes. I much prefer Palladium's "your training will do you, and exceptional stats are just icing for your cake" attitude towards character stats. Yeah, there are OCC requirements, but most of them are pretty easy to hit. When running a game, I'm quite comfortable fudging up for them to qualify for an OCC they want to play.

I also really dislike the skills that replace roleplay with a dice roll. And, if your character isn't well trained in the social skills, you can do great damage to your party's cause if you open your mouth and need to make a diplomacy (or whatever) roll. If the characters need to gather information, I much prefer players tell me how they are going to go about gathering it. Who will they talk to? How will they structure their questions? Will they tailor their approach to certain npcs based on what they know about them? In Pathfinder, you roll your diplomacy skill versus the DC of what you are trying to gather and a 1d4 for how long it takes you. Doesn't that just immerse you in the game world? But that really comes down to the biggest difference between D&D (and any close spin offs like Pathfinder) and Palladium. In Palladium, combat doesn't need to be the be all and end all of the game. Heck, I run 1-shot games using 10 pre-generated characters that I let players choose between that are an entertainment troupe. The only ones with hand to hand training are the acrobats and tumblers, and the only one with a weapon proficiency is the knife throwing juggler. Their "real" weapons are their skills to get hard to reach places and a few smoke and stink bombs. So far, I have run them as some sort of mystery just to drag in unsuspecting D&D/Pathfinder players and let them know there is more to pen and paper games than killing things and taking their stuff. Because, in my experience so far, Pathfinder (the game system RAW and in their adventure paths) only rewards you for being as efficient as possible at killing things and taking their stuff, with maybe a small side of convincing people to tell you where to kill more things and take more stuff.

Kraynic wrote:
On the topic of D&D or Pathfinder vs Palladium, the passive resistances don't bother me in combat as much as the dependence on having good stats. In Palladium, you don't need great stats, or at least nothing exceptional. Your skill progression from levels is enough to do all you need. If you have poor stats in Pathfinder/D&D, then it affects everything your character will ever do. I am more familiar with Pathfinder (haven't really played D&D since 2E in the early 90s), and some things there really bug me. Fighters, Paladins, and Clerics are all stupid (regardless of their actual INT score) and are pretty much worthless outside of open conflict due to their pitiful amount of skill ranks. If your 1 or 2 developed skills aren't need at the moment, you have little useful to do. The magic item upgrade treadmill can be a bit much as well sometimes. I much prefer Palladium's "your training will do you, and exceptional stats are just icing for your cake" attitude towards character stats. Yeah, there are OCC requirements, but most of them are pretty easy to hit. When running a game, I'm quite comfortable fudging up for them to qualify for an OCC they want to play.

I also really dislike the skills that replace roleplay with a dice roll. And, if your character isn't well trained in the social skills, you can do great damage to your party's cause if you open your mouth and need to make a diplomacy (or whatever) roll. If the characters need to gather information, I much prefer players tell me how they are going to go about gathering it. Who will they talk to? How will they structure their questions? Will they tailor their approach to certain npcs based on what they know about them? In Pathfinder, you roll your diplomacy skill versus the DC of what you are trying to gather and a 1d4 for how long it takes you. Doesn't that just immerse you in the game world? But that really comes down to the biggest difference between D&D (and any close spin offs like Pathfinder) and Palladium. In Palladium, combat doesn't need to be the be all and end all of the game. Heck, I run 1-shot games using 10 pre-generated characters that I let players choose between that are an entertainment troupe. The only ones with hand to hand training are the acrobats and tumblers, and the only one with a weapon proficiency is the knife throwing juggler. Their "real" weapons are their skills to get hard to reach places and a few smoke and stink bombs. So far, I have run them as some sort of mystery just to drag in unsuspecting D&D/Pathfinder players and let them know there is more to pen and paper games than killing things and taking their stuff. Because, in my experience so far, Pathfinder (the game system RAW and in their adventure paths) only rewards you for being as efficient as possible at killing things and taking their stuff, with maybe a small side of convincing people to tell you where to kill more things and take more stuff.

Go on... let it all out... Tell us what you really think...

So, where is GURPS on your scale of dislike to hate?

Lord Malachdrim wrote:Or lets not forget the minor bits it missing. Rogue - Influence ability says to see the Reactions section in the GMG (no such section).

Page 65 of the GMG. "Encounter Reactions". I helped write that section.

Every class references level 21+ (no rules for past level 20), and pretty much all talk about land, forts, towers, etc and that the GM has the specifics (nope).

I mean, those rules haven't been written yet. They're not in the GMG, but they're working on them. In other cases, it's a matter of the rules changing due to playtesting.

Combat is counted by the second. So every single second that ticks by anyone not recovering from just swinging a weapon can move. You swing your weapon you wait X seconds to swing again. So small weapons wielders will be swinging more often. Spell casting takes X seconds (see spell for exact time) to go off and then you are unable to really do anything for 5ish seconds afterwards. Archery requires that you check to see if you hit every possible target along the path of the arrow. You have to track fatigue during combat for all combatants who are on their 2nd or more fights that day. Arrows taken cause penalties and possibly damage if you do anything depending on how many are stuck in you. Every hit you take has to be recorded seperatly because each one heals independently of the others. I know all of this makes for a much more realistic game but good god people that is a ton of work to keep track of.

Second by second combat is so awesome; I miss it every time I play a game without it. I'm sorry you don't like it, but the ability to keep engaged and doing things between your attacks is wonderful. I just cut down a goblin... now I can move to engage another goblin. But while I'm moving, so is he, rather than "It is my move. I essentially teleport to point B, while everyone else stands there immobile". Compare this to Palladium, where once you're out of actions for a round, you get to sit there for half an hour while everyone else's actions resolve themselves. And there are no movement rules, just "You can run this fast."

If a mage casts a spell, they have a period of spell fatigue... they're not incapable of doing anything, but they're significantly encumbered. A priest? A priest tosses off a spell and keeps going, because their magic works differently.

It is a lot to keep track of, but I found it fairly easy with a bit of organization.

Oh and I almost forgot everything is an opposed roll. Example: You want to kick in a door you roll and add STR feat mod and the door rolls and adds it's mod.

Some skill checks are simple, roll-under, successes, but yes, there are a lot of opposed roles. Of course, there's also difficulty rules and opposed checks built into the system, as opposed to either "I made my prowl role so I cannot be found" or "We added a mechanic 25 years into the system for perception, but it does not actually interact with our stealth rules."

Mark Hall wrote: Some skill checks are simple, roll-under, successes, but yes, there are a lot of opposed roles. Of course, there's also difficulty rules and opposed checks built into the system, as opposed to either "I made my prowl role so I cannot be found" or "We added a mechanic 25 years into the system for perception, but it does not actually interact with our stealth rules."

LOL so true
Per stat ftw, as everyone's perception isn't anywhere near the same.

Mark Hall wrote:Second by second combat is so awesome; I miss it every time I play a game without it. I'm sorry you don't like it, but the ability to keep engaged and doing things between your attacks is wonderful. I just cut down a goblin... now I can move to engage another goblin. But while I'm moving, so is he, rather than "It is my move. I essentially teleport to point B, while everyone else stands there immobile". Compare this to Palladium, where once you're out of actions for a round, you get to sit there for half an hour while everyone else's actions resolve themselves. And there are no movement rules, just "You can run this fast."

If a mage casts a spell, they have a period of spell fatigue... they're not incapable of doing anything, but they're significantly encumbered. A priest? A priest tosses off a spell and keeps going, because their magic works differently.

It is a lot to keep track of, but I found it fairly easy with a bit of organization.

Meh, I can take it or leave it.
Now I'm not sayin' I don't want more Car Wars in my life... But, when you think about what you can and can not do in a second, it seems a tad...unrealistic? Multiple manoeuvers, direction changes, and then a called shot!?!

Borast wrote:Meh, I can take it or leave it.
Now I'm not sayin' I don't want more Car Wars in my life... But, when you think about what you can and can not do in a second, it seems a tad...unrealistic? Multiple manoeuvers, direction changes, and then a called shot!?!

Is this Car Wars?

Mark Hall wrote:

Borast wrote:Meh, I can take it or leave it.
Now I'm not sayin' I don't want more Car Wars in my life... But, when you think about what you can and can not do in a second, it seems a tad...unrealistic? Multiple manoeuvers, direction changes, and then a called shot!?!

Is this Car Wars?

lol...

I was referencing the 1 second turn...but I guess you could do something GURPSish with Pally's rules.
But lets not discuss that.

If I am playing around a table I like playing D&D5, so long as there are miniatures and a play mat to play on.
Online chatrooms, I like playing PB cause it is not optimized for playing on a play mat with miniatures.

Borast wrote:
Go on... let it all out... Tell us what you really think...

So, where is GURPS on your scale of dislike to hate?

Years back I spent several hours making a character for a superhero game in GURPS. The game never happened, so I've never played it. I haven't even looked at it since, so it isn't even on a scale at all for me.

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:If I am playing around a table I like playing D&D5, so long as there are miniatures and a play mat to play on.
Online chatrooms, I like playing PB cause it is not optimized for playing on a play mat with miniatures.

Sigh...
Tell me about it. I tried to convert Robotech to tabletop back in the dim mists of time (using a FASA product map board).

Worked out about as well as a rabid skunk at a flower show... At 30m per hex, a MAC II destroid was able to run something like 50 hexes on a 30 hex column...don't get me started on a veritech! Even when I expanded the hex size to 100m, it was still unusable, so I gave-up.

Borast wrote:

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:If I am playing around a table I like playing D&D5, so long as there are miniatures and a play mat to play on.
Online chatrooms, I like playing PB cause it is not optimized for playing on a play mat with miniatures.

Sigh...
Tell me about it. I tried to convert Robotech to tabletop back in the dim mists of time (using a FASA product map board).

Worked out about as well as a rabid skunk at a flower show... At 30m per hex, a MAC II destroid was able to run something like 50 hexes on a 30 hex column...don't get me started on a veritech! Even when I expanded the hex size to 100m, it was still unusable, so I gave-up.

I did something similar, but I changed the mecha attack round to 3 seconds, made facing changes cost move points etc. Worked ok except for flying as flying things could fly on and off the board in the 3 seconds giving no warning of attack.