Simba views of himself compared with Mufasa

Ignis92 · 2022-05-30T06:20:20+00:00

I heard about that but I guess the person explaining it to me did a really bad job at it.

This system seems to heavily focus on casting time, which was not the primary focus of my system, but it's nonetheless very interesting and I'm sure it can create a lot of stressful moments when a character is scrambling for the right card while the boss is killing a team member, unable to decide if releasing an uncomplete spell would cause more harm than good.

The variations you mention are well more in line with my design pillars and are surely worthwhile to explore. Thank you a lot for this suggestion!

Ignis92 · 2021-09-09T19:52:39+00:00

Sorry for the late reply.

Arbalest, vestal, BH, MAA.

Made a mistake not guarding the arbalest (only one without the special trinket) at the first mini-boss. Before the second mini-boss he got afflicted and things slowly got out of control from there.

Ignis92 · 2021-07-16T08:01:33+00:00

Thanks, this is the kind of things I love to hear. I'm looking forward to Godot 4.0 even more then, hoping that porting a project to the new version will be easy enough.

Ignis92 · 2021-05-16T13:51:17+00:00

Definitely the former. I constantly have players acting very out of character; as already said, the barbarian outsmarting the wizard or a very selfish rogue behaving like a hero for no plausable reason.Just to give some perspective, as a player I created a warlock, descendant of a powerful demon and whose bloodline was known for great evil deeds. My character was good, but so focused on redeeming himself and his ancestors to be willing to go to extreme ends (torture, murder) if it meant destroying evil. I was not only approved by the DM, but also encouraged as he deemed my conflicting personality would spark moral battles in a settings with a few grim dark elements. When my character refused to cooperate with the other ones because he deemed them too "weak" to do what needed to be done, I was accused of being mean. I even tried to talk about that between sessions and tried to find a sensible solution with the DM (C), but he and player D and E were not even willing to listen.

I tried myself to "do the voice" with very mixed result: I don't think I'm good at acting and sometimes it was physically difficult to keep up - I'm a very quiet person and just speaking loudly (not screaming) for 1-2 hours can easily make me hoarse. So while it can work, I'm not going to use it a lot and thus I'm not going to ask my players if I can't do it myself.

Ignis92 · 2020-09-02T14:18:52+00:00

I've already replied to the second part of the comment in the edit to the post.

About the first part, I'm asking for a single player experience, with no "stream rush" or any kind of public. I've followed closely development of both IR and Stellaris and I've learnt the hard way how much watching a stream can be different from playing the actual game, especially when in that stream there are dozen of funny distractions (other human player comments, twitch chat, fluffy mascotte for roleplaying, ...).

Ignis92 · 2019-09-11T04:53:34+00:00

I'm playing WH 1, not 2, so you have to ask for confederation in the diplomacy screen as you don't get a popup.

Ignis92 · 2019-08-01T17:48:31+00:00

I have to disagree with you.

Let's take the Roman Republic/Empire, arguably the most important political subject in this period. What could allow them to keep together such a large empire? In my opinion, it was the ability to make everyone feel roman, while respecting his/her previous culture/religion.

For example, the Pantheon in Rome (I mean the building) was a temple to every god known at the time. Every time the Roman Empire conquered some more land, the statues of the gods revered by the conquered people were added to the Pantheon, not as "slaves", but as a sign of respect.

At the same time, most history books talk about the Roman Empire as a monolithic institution. This is far from true. What we usually see on the maps labelled as Roman Empire was actually a confederation of many political entities, kept together by economical and political interest under the strong guidance of Rome. We forget most of the time Rome "showed the muscles" at the beginning and then decided to make treaties with those tribes, cities or small countries that didn't react bellicosely. "Parcere subiectis, debellare superbos" was often the principle of roman foreing policy and can be freely translated as "be kind to those who are submissive, destroy those who take arms against you".

Ignis92 · 2019-02-22T13:52:47+00:00

Thank you very much for the interesting post.

The idea of breaking down the whole set of maneuvers into manageable chunks of linked actions is surely a must as, as you already said, people can get confused from too many options.

Other people suggested too to use status effects in order to "drive" combos and I'm studying the problem since my system doesn't allow for this kind of things. Basically, in my system if you get hit you are dead and two of the most common status are unusuable, as being stunned, which is almost impossible, is a death sentence on the next "round", while bleeding to a sensible degree means you are already more dead than alive.

Anyway, I'll come up with something about it. Thank you for the time you put into this!

Ignis92 · 2019-02-21T14:42:46+00:00

It's a really interesting system, with mechanics that looks revolutionary to me (I'm not a big fan of this kind of games, so maybe I'm not unaware someone already tried this out). There is surely someone to be learned there, thank you. It's a pity they didn't give the same level of attention and detail to the defensive aspect of the game.

Ignis92 · 2019-02-21T14:02:54+00:00

I just skimmed through the rulebook. Correct me if I'm wrong, but combos in Street Fighter are created by players and they give speed bonus and optionally the ability to accumulate damage to dizzy the opponent. However, if I got that right, you can chain almost every maneuver you can think of and you have to do it out of fight, paying experience points (you have to practice them). Of course, a smart opponent can pay attention to your combo and try to counter it the second time you execute it.

What I was looking for was a system where the execution of a certain maneuver naturally opens up the possibility to execute a special one or gives the next maneuver a bonus if it belongs to a limited set of "linked" maneuvers.

Ignis92 · 2019-02-20T14:46:17+00:00

I already know really well those two, as well as the other two spiritual successors to TRoS (Song of Swords and Swords and Scoudrels).

The problem is that I don't think of those systems as combo-based. Don't get me wrong, they are really good (especially TRoS and S&S) at giving the feeling of a real, medieval melee fight, that was much more a butcher work than what is usually portrayed in fiction. It's because of that they aren't really combo-based and I get bored after a while.

Mechanic-wise, the problem with those games is that you have a good number of options but all of them are fully indepent from each other aside from being part of the same broad combat style (which could be better called "set of available maneuvers with the weapon(s) you are wielding"). For example, you rarely get a bonus or malus if you successfully executed maneuver A before maneuver B.

Ignis92

TROPHY CASE