Forums of the Megaverse®

It's just occured to me that all present books Fantasy, Heroes, After the
Bomb, Beyond the Supernatural, Rifts have all gotten updated and made
into second edition. In fact Rifts appears to be on a 3rd edition and the
Power Unlimited Books have given Heroes a 2.5 edition. So what are the
odds good old Nightbane will be left behind? The combat rules don't
even match the rest of the current books (like Deathblow says
auto kill). Skills don't match and many spells don't match. Will Nightbane
be left out in the cold to join System Failure or will someone step up
and revised the franchise?

You know why Nightbane hasn't gotten a second edition and only minimal support? Because Big Kev didn't create it, and these days he has no use for other people's creations. Personally, I'd like to see Palladium license the setting to another company who'll publish a second edition using a modern game system. All of the changes in "newer" games have been largely lateral and haven't altered the fundamental problems of Palladium's system (for example, no mechanism for balancing races and classes, no single core mechanic, no advantage/disadvantage system, no option to use a point-buy method for attributes, a lack of internal consistency, and so forth).

Heh well ya never know there moght be a 2nd ed.

Currently I'm reading everything.

And I se lots of info that needs to be congealed into one source instead of spread across the 5 books.

Depending on my levle of under taking I might pitch it to Kev. Woudl be nice to conglom all teh books into one nice fat hardbound wiht the info set up so it's really clear consice and useful. Like a tiem line that incorporates all teh tid bits from all the books. Things like that.

Midnght wrote:Heh well ya never know there moght be a 2nd ed.

Currently I'm reading everything.

And I se lots of info that needs to be congealed into one source instead of spread across the 5 books.

Depending on my levle of under taking I might pitch it to Kev. Woudl be nice to conglom all teh books into one nice fat hardbound wiht the info set up so it's really clear consice and useful. Like a tiem line that incorporates all teh tid bits from all the books. Things like that.

You know I was wondering if you had the time and inclination to take over the reins of the Nightbane line. No pressure though.

See if ya can get the missing material from Shadows of Light added in (with proper author credits)

Jefffar wrote:See if ya can get the missing material from Shadows of Light added in (with proper author credits)

Excellent... I ditto this.

Raist25m wrote:If Nightbane ever goes D20, I'm stabbing myself in the eye with a spork.

Because you couldn't believe someone would change a Palladium game to a good system? Yeah, I wouldn't believe it either.

Raist25m wrote:If Nightbane ever goes D20, I'm stabbing myself in the eye with a spork.

U'm Palladium already is D20. }:>P

Or is there some specific's to the D20 system that I'm not understanding?

d20 isn't my favorite system, but it's much better than Palladium's at the least. Consider this:

d20 has relative (not perfect) balance between character classes, a method for factoring the power level of a race/species into a character, a more flexible class system than Palladium's, an advantage system (which some versions of d20 have used for disadvantages as well), a single core mechanic - yes, that means that skills and combat work the same way (heaven forbid that Big Kev could allow that to happen), an option for point-based attributes, and not least of all, a fairly organized and coherent magic system that manages to classify each spell and its effects and how spells interact much better than Palladium's. Oh, yes- and a cleaner skill system that not only accounts for class leanings, but allows much more freedom to players to select and improve the skills they want to tailor their character, instead of Palladium's arbitrary "all skills go up at next level".

The matter of so-called "dramatics" is largely a matter of a gaming group...most that I know of - and I've probably been gaming as long or longer than most folks on here - do not act like that. It's a false stereotype.

I rest my case. Like it or not, you cannot logically claim it is a better system than Palladium's. It's as simple as that.

As much as I would like to disagree with Beelzebozo I cannot. The D20 system is not perfect but the advantages Beelzebozo mentions is what made myself and my current gaming group switch over almost completely to it. We still play other games but D20 for the moment is our system of choice. Ymmv.

The only negative thing we have come across is that Wotc writers want to over balance everything and I mean everything. That and they give some creatures favored classes that make no sense. An example is the Bugbear whose favored class is Rogue. Rogue? Did they even bother to look at the picture of the monster before deciding that? The art screams fighter type not stealthy type. Look through the D&D 3.5 monster manual to see what I mean next time you look through your books.

Palladium is still fun to play and it does do some things better it just not as easy to run imo.

Not liking it doesn't matter. It's an important aspect of RPGs - RPGs aren't just storytelling, but also *games*, and for most - not all, but most - groups, having a yardstick to measure characters' overall abilities is desirable and useful. It's why point-based systems are dominant in the overall market (not counting most of the d20 bloc, but even several versions of d20 - Green Ronin's "True 20" games like Blue Rose and Mutants and Masterminds or Guardians of Orders' BESM d20 - use point-build and classless or semi-classless systems).

Ironic that on here I sound like a rabid WotC supporter because I choose to disagree with the mindless d20 bashing, but over on the TVGA boards they accuse me of "hating" d20 because the "default" D&D world isn't interesting enough to get me to play often.

Palladium's system, on the other hand...in the early-mid 80's, meshing BRP/Call of Cthulhu's skill mechanic with D&D's basic combat mechanics made it a useful and relatively flexible system (within the confines of the relatively strict class-based RPGs of the day, anyway). Even into the mid-90s, when dice pool mechanics started to dominate (with the rise of World of Darkness), the system was dated but usable. Now...it hasn't aged well at all. Compared to modern systems...as I said, the changes made in recent games aren't enough to salvage it.

Too much work to convert Nightbane over to d20, though (even though d20 Modern would work fairly well - all three of its "default" settings share elements with the Nightbane world). If I ever run it again - not likely, because the rest of my group has an intense loathing for Palladium's system that discourages them from even looking at the games - I'll probably use Tri-Stat (the Silver Age Sentinels d10 version, most likely).

In case you didn't notice, Der Klown is a serious student of game design theory.

Beelzebozo wrote:

Raist25m wrote:If Nightbane ever goes D20, I'm stabbing myself in the eye with a spork.

Because you couldn't believe someone would change a Palladium game to a good system? Yeah, I wouldn't believe it either.

D20 is a system with too many rules that don't allow for heroics. I don't like Palladium's skill system, but I prefer the rest of it to D20. The only thing I change about Palladium when I GM is rank system for skills instead of a percentile system.

Sightblinder wrote:I don't like "balance".

I do like balance as long as it's not taken to an extreme like the developers at Wotc occasionaly do.

Specter wrote:D20 is not a system with too many rules that don't allow for heroics.

Edited for truth, because becoming it's painfully obvious that Specter has never even read a d20 book, much less actually played it. There're lots and lots of feats set up specifically to allow characters to do the "kewl" moves that are the essence of "heroics". And at the same time, not every chump can do 'em (which makes the player characters unique and special). It's also better to have "too many" rules than too few (because while you can always leave some out, it gets cumbersome to have to fudge rules for everything). Consider this: Palladium's system doesn't actually have a mechanic for *using* a character's attributes. Oh, yes, there's a listing for how much a character can lift, but is there a mechanic to let him use that strength against another character's strength? Not one built into the core mechanics, that's for sure.

Personally, I think my favorite system for "homebrew" settings is probably BESM - simple and flexible, but it has all the right rules built in. I'd like to try using SAS instead, but haven't had a chance. d20, for what it's worth, has some faults - but not the ones that people on here are claiming (which seem to be based on the generic "we hate WotC and d20" nonsense that's been all the rage among holier-than-thou gamers for years now).

Beelzebozo wrote:Not liking it doesn't matter. It's an important aspect of RPGs - RPGs aren't just storytelling, but also *games*, and for most - not all, but most - groups, having a yardstick to measure characters' overall abilities is desirable and useful. It's why point-based systems are dominant in the overall market (not counting most of the d20 bloc, but even several versions of d20 - Green Ronin's "True 20" games like Blue Rose and Mutants and Masterminds or Guardians of Orders' BESM d20 - use point-build and classless or semi-classless systems).

Ironic that on here I sound like a rabid WotC supporter because I choose to disagree with the mindless d20 bashing, but over on the TVGA boards they accuse me of "hating" d20 because the "default" D&D world isn't interesting enough to get me to play often.

Palladium's system, on the other hand...in the early-mid 80's, meshing BRP/Call of Cthulhu's skill mechanic with D&D's basic combat mechanics made it a useful and relatively flexible system (within the confines of the relatively strict class-based RPGs of the day, anyway). Even into the mid-90s, when dice pool mechanics started to dominate (with the rise of World of Darkness), the system was dated but usable. Now...it hasn't aged well at all. Compared to modern systems...as I said, the changes made in recent games aren't enough to salvage it.

Too much work to convert Nightbane over to d20, though (even though d20 Modern would work fairly well - all three of its "default" settings share elements with the Nightbane world). If I ever run it again - not likely, because the rest of my group has an intense loathing for Palladium's system that discourages them from even looking at the games - I'll probably use Tri-Stat (the Silver Age Sentinels d10 version, most likely).

In case you didn't notice, Der Klown is a serious student of game design theory.

I don't get it. palladiums system hasn't actually changed much, so how can it be bad now and good back then?

Beelzebozo wrote:

Specter wrote:D20 is not a system with too many rules that don't allow for heroics.

Edited for truth, because becoming it's painfully obvious that Specter has never even read a d20 book, much less actually played it. There're lots and lots of feats set up specifically to allow characters to do the "kewl" moves that are the essence of "heroics". And at the same time, not every chump can do 'em (which makes the player characters unique and special). It's also better to have "too many" rules than too few (because while you can always leave some out, it gets cumbersome to have to fudge rules for everything). Consider this: Palladium's system doesn't actually have a mechanic for *using* a character's attributes. Oh, yes, there's a listing for how much a character can lift, but is there a mechanic to let him use that strength against another character's strength? Not one built into the core mechanics, that's for sure.

Personally, I think my favorite system for "homebrew" settings is probably BESM - simple and flexible, but it has all the right rules built in. I'd like to try using SAS instead, but haven't had a chance. d20, for what it's worth, has some faults - but not the ones that people on here are claiming (which seem to be based on the generic "we hate WotC and d20" nonsense that's been all the rage among holier-than-thou gamers for years now).

*rolls eyes* [whiney]Why don't they have more mechanics and rules?[/whiney] Yes, I've both GMed and played in multiple D20 games. And, when I have 3lvlBarb/4lvlDruid dwarf with a freaking celestial lion mount (Pulled it out of a randomized bag of wishes) and I get hit like 5 times from attacks of opportunities because I leapt amongst a group of 3-5 orcs. The game has too many rules that don't favor heroism.

D20 is too rigid for my liking. Palladium while some would argue is too loose, I think that's just what is needed. Something flexible. You can literally do anything in Palladium, in D20 if it's not in the books, there's no way around it. Unless you houserule... but wait.. that's why you wanted to play a system other than Palladium's right?... hrm.

Raist25m wrote:

Midnght wrote:

Raist25m wrote:If Nightbane ever goes D20, I'm stabbing myself in the eye with a spork.

U'm Palladium already is D20. }:>P

Or is there some specific's to the D20 system that I'm not understanding?

D20 system uses a D20 for skill rolls, saving throws, and pretty much everything except for damage rolls.

Ah okay where as pally uses d20 for init attack saves perception only.

Skills are still percentile.

Gotcha.

May I make a suggestion. That those want to talk about the flaws and advantages of both D20 and Palladium start a new thread. This thread has gone from talking about Nightbane second edition to a pro vs con of both systems. Let's stop the threadjacking and get back to topic please.

DavidGallaher1 wrote:I'm not talking about the flaws of Palladium, just what I did to make the game easier for my first time Nightbane players.

I don't think Nightbane really need a second edition as much as it needs a better listt of comprehensive morphus and talents - and a better skill selction system - more like BTS2 or the Skill Program Education Table.

But, outside of that - I don't see a reason for a whole new series of books.

I do agree with you Nightbane needing a better list of talents and it including the new skill system . The problem is that the only way to do that would one of two ways. A new core rulebook for Nightsbane which I think would be the only way to do it or a Rifter dedicated completely to updating Nightbane. On way or the other it's going to be necessary to print a book. Or at the very least spend money on a new book. I do not see any other way around it.

Raist25m wrote:Sorry about that. I've had conversations on this and other boards in the past about people wanting to convert NB to D20. I'd meant only to voice my opinion on the subject.

I am not one to tell someone what to post. You are more than welcome to your opinion. It just that I prefer that those who post start new threads about topics rather than starting them in a topic.

In any case I did not consider anything you wrote out of line anyway. Hell feel free to ignore what I wrote. I am not a moderator after all.

Nekira Sudacne wrote:I don't get it. palladiums system hasn't actually changed much, so how can it be bad now and good back then?

Let me introduce you to the concept of trimming quotes. See how much easier it is to read when you cut out what you don't need?

To answer your question, I was speaking mainly in comparison to other systems at each time. As designers gain more experience with RPG systems, the systems themselves have generally improved.

My biggest problem with Palladium is that without a core mechanic, there's not even a good way to fudge or 'house rule' things...not only does it lack a lot of essentials, it doesn't have the means to *get* them. And as I said before, having what some have incorrectly called 'too many' rules and not using some of them is better than not having the right rules and not having a good yardstick for making them up.

But feel free to continue being wrong.

Beelzebozo wrote:

Nekira Sudacne wrote:I don't get it. palladiums system hasn't actually changed much, so how can it be bad now and good back then?

Let me introduce you to the concept of trimming quotes. See how much easier it is to read when you cut out what you don't need?

To answer your question, I was speaking mainly in comparison to other systems at each time. As designers gain more experience with RPG systems, the systems themselves have generally improved.

My biggest problem with Palladium is that without a core mechanic, there's not even a good way to fudge or 'house rule' things...not only does it lack a lot of essentials, it doesn't have the means to *get* them. And as I said before, having what some have incorrectly called 'too many' rules and not using some of them is better than not having the right rules and not having a good yardstick for making them up.

I disagree. people get too ***** if you take out too many rules because they wanted to use them. most people don't mind necessary houserules

But feel free to continue being wrong.

There's no wrong way to have fun roleplaying. so be polite or can it.

Beelzebozo wrote:But feel free to continue being wrong.

~ Josh

Der Klown. I was wondering what you mean when you say that PB systems have no core mechanic. From my POV PB system has quite a bit of a Core mechanic ISO as it has a base system that covers all Characters will have HP, SDC (and MDC for those systems that use that) and Skills that all have roughly the same percentile. (I do have my own way of dealing with the discrepancies of the skills between systems but I will not go into that atm unless needed to) but from everything I can see PB has a Core mechanic unless I am missing something.

Nekira Sudacne wrote:I disagree. people get too ***** if you take out too many rules because they wanted to use them. most people don't mind necessary houserules

It all depends on the amount of house rules. for me it just got too much to run the game. whenever it's gets brought up on these boards the usual excuse is either "house rule it" or "any and all rules are optional".

The main problem with house ruling something is that sometimes certain players take advantage of them and second without concrete rules on certain things how do you houe rule. As a friend of mine told me "how do you house rule a rule when in some cases there is no rule?"

Although many elements are common in the palladium system they are sometimes implement in such a fashion as to be either contradictory, poorly implemented and in some cases one explanation is different from another. I think the solution is to have a set of definite rules for everything. You than pick and choose what you like.

I dislike having the same core rules being printed over and over again. Even White wolf stopped doing that and released a core World of Darkness book which is just the core rules. All other sourcebooks in most cases is just new information.

Beelzebozo wrote:But feel free to continue being wrong.

While I agree with many of your points you are not helping your case with these comments. This type of comments can also get you banned

Nekira Sudacne wrote:There's no wrong way to have fun roleplaying. so be polite or can it.

I agree.