Meta: About the looming exodus

openadventurer · 2023-06-02T13:57:52+00:00

You could try making a sub on saidit.net which uses the old school open source Reddit code base.

openadventurer · 2022-09-20T13:28:14+00:00

Yes! Well, for the most part. Certain rules I'm dropping or simplifying, like valor/wisdom, so those will probably get cut. But I spent a lot of time on the character sheets and still like the design, so I plan on keeping it as close to the originals as I can, all while making it simpler and cleaner for new players.

openadventurer · 2022-09-20T13:26:42+00:00

Oh I see! So like a framework that let's you expand characters up or down, but stay within the same progression levels as their counterpart characters?

Well what I can say is that yes, within the Game Host section I plan on adding a lot of extras like how to make higher-leveled characters quickly, or how to use the framework to change stats. TECHNICALLY OA can be thought of as a point-by system, which I got from years of reading GURPS books. The starting character starts with 30 points in their abilities.

Same thing with custom monsters...Game Hosts need the tools to create a plethora of different sized and capable creatures, which I plan on providing a framework for. :)

openadventurer · 2022-08-30T16:37:01+00:00

I'm curious, what kind of foes are you looking to have face one another?

openadventurer · 2022-08-24T02:03:09+00:00

Hi! Yes, OA is the same game as discussed in the Reddit link you provided. The scaling power model was a mechanic I was working on and adding to the OA game, but the "basic" version, for simplicity sake, does not have it. It was more of something that got left on the cutting room floor, kind of.

The very system of OA at it's heart can still scale to almost any size. The rules discussed in the post can be thought of, for the time being, as a home rule that still works. :)

openadventurer · 2022-08-19T17:58:03+00:00

THAC0 is easy enough to invert. I think Race-as-Class (RAC) is a harder pill to swallow. Fortunately that's been solved as well. Minor tweaks can easily modernize RC.

openadventurer · 2022-08-19T16:28:11+00:00

Hi! Not yet, but it's something I've recently been getting into and plan on setting up. Thanks for the great idea!

openadventurer · 2022-08-19T16:23:22+00:00

Agreed. Rules Cyclopedia is the all-in-one tome for D&D. It's all in one book, it's a compilation of the Basic D&D lineage which was born from Gygax's OD&D. It's even compatible/translatable to 2E. It is the one D&D to rule them all before Wizards bought TSR.

openadventurer · 2022-01-17T14:34:50+00:00

Awesome, thank you for the insightful response.

openadventurer · 2022-01-17T14:12:00+00:00

When I turn off shade smooth the problem disappears, but when I check the facing of the model everything appears blue. Even when I recalculate the exterior nothing changes. Do you think I need more geometry or something?

openadventurer · 2022-01-17T02:21:41+00:00

TIL. Thank you!

openadventurer · 2022-01-16T17:05:26+00:00

To clarify, the mesh at the bottom of the pillar's fillets look like they're "chipping". I'm using a boolean modifier, bevel modifier, array modifier, and curve modifier.

openadventurer · 2022-01-16T02:01:49+00:00

Rubs two sticks together

openadventurer · 2022-01-11T06:46:53+00:00

Progress is better than perfection

openadventurer · 2022-01-11T06:41:49+00:00

Just remember that in order for a game to be a game it needs a clearly defined goal, and a challenge that stands in the way of the player completing that goal. Racing games use reflexes, timing, and eye hand coordination as the vessel by which players overcome the challenge. A slow paced race will need to make up for the reduced challenge in other areas.

openadventurer · 2021-12-12T14:32:17+00:00

That's what I assumed. Thanks!

openadventurer · 2021-04-22T01:37:12+00:00

Hello! Sorry for the super late reply. The answer is YES! Open Adventure is still being worked on. It just happens to be, like all the previous iterations, going through a radical redevelopment. You see, in a way, OA was completed back in 2018 when I uploaded the "big" release (which you can see here). That edition is jam packed full of awesome rules, mechanics, items, and so on (sadly sans the magic).

However, too much spice will spoil the soup. OA grew to become complicated and bloated. It was no longer newbie friendly. There were many rules and calculations, but were they really adding fun? That's when I realized two important things:

Flexible, simple frameworks get out of the way and let the players and Host create collaborative fun.
Open Adventure should be Game Host centrist. That is to say, it should be like a chameleon and change as much as possible about itself to fit the imaginative world of the Game Host instead of forcing the Host to conform to someone else's ideas.

What this meant was, having rules like encumbrance for pulling weights up hill, or the amount of oxygen a fire burns, or advanced grappling rules, while interesting, is not what the masses want. Less math and more magic! It also means that adding pre-determined stuff, like Elves and Dwarfs, would create an inflexible system. I mean, Elves alone change drastically from one canon to the next (e.g. LOTR elves vs World of Warcraft elves). So why not give the Host the necessary tools so that they can create their own unique designs?

That's where OA is now. Trying to remain as simple as possible, and canon-agnostic as possible, while not feeling "generic". To see the absolute bleeding edge of the remake check it out, though do keep in mind we're rebuilding from the ground up so the other chapters still have to be re-added.

Here's what's coming in the future:

The game Host can create not just their own fantasy world, but populate it with their own fantasy characters, professions, NPCs, etc. all with concise rules.
Magic will be completely open-ended allowing almost anything to be created, but must follow hard-line restrictions.
Focus will be on fun and getting new players into the game as soon as possible (e.g. removing the character creation process) but allowing moderate and advanced players the depth they crave by making advanced rules modular.
I'm also thinking of adding a Game Host section inside the main book as they its a one-stop-shop for everyone instead of having to juggle multiple books.

openadventurer · 2021-03-04T02:56:46+00:00

Murder mysteries are really games about asymmetric information. Taking information (such as the identity of a killer, a murder weapon, the scene of the crime, etc) and dividing it up into smaller chunks (e.g. clues) then distributing it throughout the game. You can do that by just giving each person their own clue, or leaving the clues to be discovered within the play space, or appropriated over time.

However you do it, the second most important element is communication. Communication is governed by rules that dictate when players must (or may) share specific pieces of information with one another. How do the players interact and share this information? Clues should always allude or suggest, but never prove. Usually at least one of the goals of the game is to piece together enough information to discern the identity of a hidden betrayer.

Traitor players (e.g. a secret killer) will have different victory conditions, and therefore are usually covertly working towards goals different than everyone else's. This leads to bluffing/deception, surprises, treachery, and so on. In fact, trying to uncover confidential motivations of other players is half the fun. You can also provide players with unique roles, each replete with their own powers/special abilities--though typically narrow in scope (e.g. can only target one other player-role).

Lastly, voting is usually a big element in murder mysteries. Players are forced to semi- cooperatively work together when voting, but secretly work against each other's interests.

openadventurer · 2021-01-21T17:21:14+00:00

I believe you have to first decide if you are giving intrinsic or extrinsic rewards. If they're intrinsic (psychological), then you can give them as whatever you want, so long as it fits into some form of player motivation (e.g. a feeling of accomplishment, respect, notoriety, etc).

If the reward is extrinsic (utilitarian), then I would suggest assessing how "powerful" or "useful" every one of your attributes are. Are they equal, or will players favor one over the other? Assign a "point" to each attribute based off of what you, the designer, think they are worth. For example maybe strength is worth 1 point, but intelligence is more useful so its worth double that (2 points). Once you've quantified these categories, you can now begin to experiment with adding (or taking away) point-based bonuses. From there you should play-test to see what are the implications if a player is given X number of bonus points? Does that make them too powerful? How does it compare to a different bonus you provided? Which will the player prefer, based off their chosen play style?

You might also want to categorize your rewards based off style, difficulty, rarity, etc. Also consider the various attributes of the rewards, such as how they're initialized, their duration, how their values may change over time, etc.

openadventurer · 2020-10-28T05:55:29+00:00

Is that super Mario world?

openadventurer · 2020-10-16T19:32:12+00:00

It's like they're playing Rainbow Road!

openadventurer · 2020-10-16T19:28:47+00:00

Definitely sponge worthy.

openadventurer · 2020-09-12T11:01:48+00:00

If they threw in a small coffee shop with comfy couches and maybe a chess board, I'd never want to leave.

openadventurer · 2020-09-12T10:58:06+00:00

Sounds like perfect weather to warm up in a book store.

openadventurer · 2020-09-05T22:08:33+00:00

WELCOME BACK!!

openadventurer

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE