User avatar
Milkey
Topic Author
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon 13 Sep 2021, 13:32

Game rules.

Mon 13 Sep 2021, 13:38

So, like everybody else I have the alpha version but have just looked at the art and layout and not bothered learning the rules. So, my questions are: do you guys think there will be substantial changes to the basic rules or is it worth reading them now and making myself comfortable with them before the final pdf drops?
 
Sebastian
Posts: 64
Joined: Thu 01 Oct 2020, 04:58

Re: Game rules.

Mon 13 Sep 2021, 14:58

I couldn't resist and already read and played the Alpha. There might be some minor changes, sure. But I don't think, it will bother me much, to go through the rules again with all the finished art.
 
User avatar
Milkey
Topic Author
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon 13 Sep 2021, 13:32

Re: Game rules.

Mon 13 Sep 2021, 17:11

I couldn't resist and already read and played the Alpha. There might be some minor changes, sure. But I don't think, it will bother me much, to go through the rules again with all the finished art.
Did you like it?
 
Sebastian
Posts: 64
Joined: Thu 01 Oct 2020, 04:58

Re: Game rules.

Mon 13 Sep 2021, 18:40


Did you like it?
Totally! I’ve had some issues with the new Hope mechanic, but I‘ve quickly overcame that. Like TOR 1 it hits the mark with rules and Middle-earth go hand in hand. Fast and story-centered gameplay! One of my favorite games. (I play RPGs for like 20+ years).
 
Dunheved
Posts: 167
Joined: Wed 11 Mar 2020, 02:07
Location: UK

Re: Game rules.

Mon 13 Sep 2021, 23:42

Reflecting on the level of debate when the alpha landed, the majority of the rules were accepted as OK or better than TOR1e (or so it seemed to me) on first look.
Later, people who have played some initial games report that the new system works well for them - and is notably a quick playing experience.

So with that sort of feedback, imho rule revision is going to be nominal. It seems sensible to get reading now and get a strong feel for the new version of this game.
 
User avatar
eternalsage
Posts: 87
Joined: Tue 31 Aug 2021, 19:41
Location: Bree

Re: Game rules.

Tue 14 Sep 2021, 00:42

IIRC they basically said when they sent out the PDFs that all the revisions that were going to be done were within the first few weeks and were expected to be only grammatical errors. Almost positive that it was said in a Kickstarter update around the time the alpha rules were sent out. I have been treating them as the final product for that very reason.
“It is useless to meet revenge with revenge; it will heal nothing.” - Frodo Baggins, Return of the King
 
gull2112
Posts: 57
Joined: Thu 26 Aug 2021, 19:11

Re: Game rules.

Wed 15 Sep 2021, 22:11

The fact that it's already printed and beginning fulfilment kinda says they're done. :lol:
I prefer fewer, more elegant rules. Any idiot can think up a new rule, table, or modifier; what is the minimum number of rules to yield the most authentic gaming experience, is my gold standard. The rules should draw you into the world, not take you out of it! This happens every time you have to stop and look up a rule, or check a chart. Obviously, there has to be some formal structure, but refer back to the previous sentence.
 
Sebastian
Posts: 64
Joined: Thu 01 Oct 2020, 04:58

Re: Game rules.

Thu 16 Sep 2021, 12:37

Pretty subjective standards you have there, which is okay. But if for you a game has too many rules and isn't "elegant" enough, maybe for someone else it is. All that wouldn't be a problem, but did you really had to insult game authors, who write RPGs, that in your eyes have "too many and not elegant rules"? Sure everyone can make up rules. The question is, if everything is working together. And let me tell you this: A lot of people love TOR since first edition and a lot of people would disagree. But again, that's just your opinion.

I, myself, also like low to medium crunch systems. D&D, Pathfinder and the like is too much for me. But I don't go to their Forums and start insulting people. Grow up, would you?
 
User avatar
eternalsage
Posts: 87
Joined: Tue 31 Aug 2021, 19:41
Location: Bree

Re: Game rules.

Thu 16 Sep 2021, 16:39

While largely subjective, I think there are plenty of objectively overly complex systems (many of which are simulationist and thus proudly proclaim this, at least unofficially) to understand what he means without accusations of essentially slandering authors and systems. I think, even as a fan, that many would argue against Rolemaster, HERO System (at least 4th through 6th eds), or most editions of Shadowrun (I've played 3rd through 6th) being on that list, after all. And I cop to having a nearly complete set of HERO 5th, so I also consider myself a huge fan.

Similarly, while it gets to be much more subjective in the middle, I also think that many who've played them would agree that some games are clearly designed with simplicity in mind. Some that come to mind are the Black Hack, Blades in the Dark, and by extension anything Powered by the Apocalypse. I would most certainly call those games elegantly designed, and I see that as a positive.

I think it's safe to assume that is what gully was talking about, and as an amateur game designer I've definitely been the idiot making my share of tables, and I am not in the slightest offended by it. Anyone can make rules and most, if not all of us, do in the form of house rules and homebrew, and some of that can get really gnarly. You don't even want to see my D&D 3.5 houserules... they are plain bad, lol.

While there may have been better ways to have said it, there is some objective standards that I feel most would agree with on the issue. Now, whether you feel like HERO or Rolemaster is a better experience than Black Hack or Blades in the Dark etc, that is purely subjective. These days I lean heavily toward simple while 15 years ago I would have scoffed at the notion. It's all relative.

As for 1e vs 2e TOR, I would have to say that it is more of a "simplifying and streamlining" series of changes, and for that reason I think gully and myself are both going to be very happy, while sadly others will end up staying with 1e because that suits them better. It's all good.
“It is useless to meet revenge with revenge; it will heal nothing.” - Frodo Baggins, Return of the King
 
gyrovague
Posts: 395
Joined: Tue 28 Apr 2020, 16:52

Re: Game rules.

Tue 21 Sep 2021, 05:05

I prefer fewer, more elegant rules.
I wholeheartedly agree with this, but of course it all comes down to how one defines "elegant".

My definition was expressed by Jon Hodgson, who said: "Simple rules, deep implications". And I think that means trying to navigate between the Scylla of "easily optimized" and the Charydbis of "it's all random so just pick something". The goal is to give players interesting decisions to make, meaning that their choice matters, but the best choice isn't obvious.

I've often (probably even somewhere on this forum) used armor as an example: in D&D better armor is...well, better. The choice is so obvious that they have to gate access to it behind proficiency and cost, which for the most part doesn't lead to interesting decisions. It's just about whether or not you find it, or can afford it, and if you can use it.

But TOR is diabolical in its simplicity. Everybody can use any armor, and you can start the game with any armor you want. But....there is no "best" armor. It's a trade-off between encumbrance and protection. I think it's brilliantly done.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests