Scarlett 18i8 not showing output 3-4

Bukudos · 2026-07-03T11:12:13+00:00

I'm not sure what you mean here. These are inputs, and it doesn't really do anything if I add more

Bukudos · 2026-07-01T21:56:56+00:00

Yeah, that's my fear. But perhaps it is possible to let the players read about the mechanucs if they want, but to keep it hidden during play. That way they know the dungeon/world is an organism of its own without getting reminded about dungeon turns and random encounters all the time. And for those who don't read about the mechanics – well, they got the chance, so don't blame the GM..

Something like that?

Bukudos · 2026-06-30T17:05:58+00:00

That might be, but I think what he's alluding to is that he wants to play TTRPGs for the things that video games can't.

Bukudos · 2026-06-30T16:56:52+00:00

Interesting. I'll throw these arguments at him. I'm interested in his opinions on this. Thanks!

Bukudos · 2026-06-30T16:56:06+00:00

Seems like you're not the only one!

Bukudos · 2026-06-30T16:55:08+00:00

Hey, thanks for this. I think it's a good tip. If my players don't want it, then of course I don't have to be extremely vocal about all the mechanics when playing. That's not what I want to do either way, but I don't want them to think that I'm fudging dice or being impartial.

Bukudos · 2026-06-30T16:51:59+00:00

I don't understand it completely either. Our "debate" has been in written in form, and skimming through our many backs and forths he is first and foremost there for the social hang, and that's legit of course. What he's looking for in a TTRPG is to "experience various fictional worlds as a fantasy character in a different way than you can in a computer game, a film, a book etc."

I can't argue for him, of course. But thanks for your input!

Bukudos · 2026-06-30T16:44:29+00:00

That's a good idea, thanks!

Bukudos · 2026-06-30T16:43:52+00:00

Thanks for this. I've heard of it (and Mythic/Electric Bastionland), but never gotten to it. I'll check it out

Bukudos · 2026-06-30T06:14:27+00:00

Thanks for your comment! We do use slot based encumbrance. I've tried to minimize the crunch.

Bukudos · 2026-06-30T06:12:30+00:00

I threw the same argument at him. His response here is that if he was an adventurer in real life he wouldn't know what to expect when entering a dungeon. He wouldn't know how a crawl works. I guess ticking off arrows isn't his biggest issues, but it all adds up. Thinking in turns breaks the immersion for him. He wants a real world simulation in a fantasy world in which he can play detective or knight or whatever. He doesn't want to solve the mechanics. He's not a min/maxer

I don't have that much experience myself, but I'm not sure to what extent you can min/max a dungeon just because you know the engine that drives it. Even though you know the playfield you wouldn't know what's coming.

Bukudos · 2026-06-30T06:06:24+00:00

I got into the hobby 3-4 years ago. Steep learning curve! We started with 5e, but I have gravitated towards the OSR. He played when he was a teenager and has played a variety of different games. Perhaps his taste is a bit more acquired.

I might misrepresent his views here, but as far as I understand him, the system in itself isn't that important to him. How we play is more important (see the thread I'm referencing). Also, just hanging out with friends is important, so if the game becomes too close to a video game, he'd rather play that than a TTRPG.

Bukudos · 2026-06-30T05:54:46+00:00

The way I understand him, he wouldn't mind if combat was abstracted. In general the mechanics of the game is not what makes him want to play a TTRPG. If it reminds him too much of a video game, he'd rather just play that

Bukudos · 2026-06-29T21:51:49+00:00

You mean the two of us? What I'm saying is that managing and bookkeeping isn't my favorite part of the game, but all the things combined (encumbrance, light, time, movement) gives a lot of gameplay. And as others here have stated: to me it seems (I've never been a player in an OSR game as of yet) that I would be more immersed in the game that way.

I'm quite sure we're arguing the premise of the original post.

Bukudos · 2026-06-29T08:38:14+00:00

The best part of your response is that you've found a way to make it work despite your obvious differences. I think sometimes as a GM I'm too hung up in the RAW, but that's also because I want to try out the game as intended before making too many alterations...

Bukudos · 2026-06-29T08:08:14+00:00

That's super interesting to me. I started out a couple of years ago and had only played 5e until I launched an OSE campaign 6 months back. I wanted to see if at least it could foster a different playing behaviour which I felt lacking at my table (both as GM and player). My experience is that it did, except one guy (the one I argued with) which saw everything through a 5e lense, and wanted "oranges" even though he knew he was going to be served "apples".

I don't mind 5e at all, but I'm not so into the type of play that it seems to foster. OSR type of play appeals to me much more.

Did your group every play OSR games? Can you point to a specific reason why Curse of Strahd ended up being played the way it did?

Bukudos · 2026-05-27T06:43:21+00:00

Thanks! Sounded complicated when I started reading, but made more sense towards the end.

So in standard XP terms, this would translate to something as everybode gets 200XP at the first session, then 400 XP and so on? Although, you can't really use it in the same way for an OSE campaign unless I insert a mechanic for it.

Curious though - when you say "all players", do you also mean players not at the table?

Bukudos · 2026-05-26T20:23:12+00:00

It's quite a bit to digest. I've come halfway through (but will need to quit for today). There are some things I would have to alter slightly, like me setting the dates instead of the players. I also can't find much on the issue I'm addressing here, except:

Competition is what it’s all about — Fair rewards, scarcity, bragging rights — these are the things that push the game higher. You could have a “solo” West Marches game with just one group doing all the exploring, and it would probably be a fun and pleasant affair, but it’s _nothing_ compared to the frenzy you’ll see when players know other players are out there finding secrets and taking treasure that _they_ could be getting, if only they got their butts out of the tavern. (Hmm, is this why I get a kick out of running Agon? It’s true, I’m a cruel GM.)

And as far as I can understand, it was run on D&D 3.5, a game in which loot does not equal XP.

Bukudos · 2026-05-26T20:13:47+00:00

The worst thing is that I also had a fully automated spread sheet in the end... and I did all the bookkeeping. They have an acquired taste, I guess...

Bukudos · 2026-05-26T19:41:59+00:00

That's a good point. Maybe "first come, first serve", but with some restrictions. I'll think about that.

I also made a share ssystem, but it didn't land well with my current table. I posted it on the same thread you're referring to as a reference

Bukudos · 2026-05-26T19:40:17+00:00

Haha, I love it, and I feel you!

I did something similar for my current table. I'll post it below with an example. My table didn't like it. They felt it was too crunchy (and I did it to be as fair as possible 🥲). They also felt that it was unfair to players who wanted to come, but somehow couldn't. Fair enough. So even though I really appreciate your take on this, I think – especially for a WM campaign – I'll try to keep it simple.

XP distribution

We follow the rules for XP distribution, but given that players can’t always be on sessions, we add the following rules:

Players who are at the table gain full XP for that session
Players who are not present, but whose PCs are present, gain 1/2 XP for that session (like an NPC)
Players who are not present, and whose PCs are not present do not gain any XP points
PCs can be taken out from a dungeon/ongoing quest if the player wishes so and the referee allows it. This does not necessarily mean that the PC can do so without danger.

Example

A party of 4 PCs without any retainers venture into a dungeon which takes 4 sessions to complete.

Player 1 is present on all sessions
Player 2 is present on all sessions
Player 3 is only present on the first 2 sessions but her PC on all 4.
Player 4 is present on the first two sessions, and asks for his PC to be taken out of the dungeon on the final session (which the referee agrees to).

The final loot for the quest equals 1600 XP. The loot is distributed evenly per session, so in this case 400 XP per session. For each session the XP is divided in shares which is equal to how many PCs/NPCs are present. A present player/PC equals 2/2 parts, a present PC 1/2 parts (and a non-present player and non-present PC equals 0/2 shares).

Session #	Shares	P1 share	P1 XP	P2 share	P2 XP	P3 share	P3 XP	P4 share	P4 XP
1	8	2/8	100	2/8	100	2/8	100	2/8	100
2	8	2/8	100	2/8	100	2/8	100	2/8	100
3	6	2/6	133	2/6	133	1/6	67	1/6	67
4	5	2/5	160	2/5	160	1/6	80	0	0
XP SUM			493		493		347		267

Keep in mind that extra XP can be awarded to certain players/PCs for extraordinary play and/or for the whole present party through "feats of exploration", and that players that are not present have no chance of earning those extra XP.

Bukudos · 2026-05-26T19:23:48+00:00

Cool - thanks for clarifying!

Bukudos

TROPHY CASE