9 ms·

The most promising evolution of rpg i've seen was the microsoft surface table ( the big tables, not the tablet) prototype some guys did. It seemed to be built a

by bsaul 12y ago

The most promising evolution of rpg i've seen was the microsoft surface table ( the big tables, not the tablet) prototype some guys did. It seemed to be built as a helper for combats and not much more. Obviously you don't want humans to compute bonuses or damages, because that's what computers are for, but you want to keep the freedom and imagination of paper rpgs. I don't know what the whole thing has become though.

Pamar 12y ago
I have been playing the contrarian to this idea since... 1998 I believe? (that was on the Italian usenet RPG group). My point: unless you want to play an RPG _exclusively_ as a miniatures tactical game, the GM has to be able to "cheat" sometimes in order to adjust things. If you accept this premise, "automated bookeeping systems" like Surface or any other kind of computer assisted combat processor risk becoming a burden: as soon as you decide that the killing blow from (or to) an NPC has to be changed in order not to spoil the fun of your players the system will go out of synch with the shared narrative, and you either have to manually realign it, or accept that yeah, the death really happened, no matter how detrimental to the rest of the adventure. Also, it tends to negate any attempt at being creative in using spells or even just inventing novel tactics: if the computing model hasn't it hardcoded, there is literally no way to use a decorative mirror on the other side of the room to hit your enemy in the back with your beam weapon, for example. So, Surface is great for wargames, a complicated and ultimately limiting system for RPGs.
- bsaul 12y ago
  That's just a matter of fine tuning. You may very well imagine an inteface which lets the gm adjusts computed bonus or even cheat the dices. But imagine having precise maps of every places your characters go into. How many times have you heard a player say "but he can't hit me, because i said was behind that wall ! But the wall isn't there, it can't cover you, etc.." Or the GM drawing shite last minute maps... With a table, you have unlimited possibilites for in-game accessories, drawings, sound effects, automation, etc. Then buying a scenario would actually mean something ! You would buy tons of assets, that you could later reuse, etc.. Your concerns ar valid, but seing the table as a helper rather than a simulator would avoid many pitfalls i suppose.

by bsaul 12y ago

Pamar 12y ago

I have been playing the contrarian to this idea since... 1998 I believe? (that was on the Italian usenet RPG group). My point: unless you want to play an RPG _exclusively_ as a miniatures tactical game, the GM has to be able to "cheat" sometimes in order to adjust things. If you accept this premise, "automated bookeeping systems" like Surface or any other kind of computer assisted combat processor risk becoming a burden: as soon as you decide that the killing blow from (or to) an NPC has to be changed in order not to spoil the fun of your players the system will go out of synch with the shared narrative, and you either have to manually realign it, or accept that yeah, the death really happened, no matter how detrimental to the rest of the adventure. Also, it tends to negate any attempt at being creative in using spells or even just inventing novel tactics: if the computing model hasn't it hardcoded, there is literally no way to use a decorative mirror on the other side of the room to hit your enemy in the back with your beam weapon, for example. So, Surface is great for wargames, a complicated and ultimately limiting system for RPGs.

bsaul 12y ago
That's just a matter of fine tuning. You may very well imagine an inteface which lets the gm adjusts computed bonus or even cheat the dices. But imagine having precise maps of every places your characters go into. How many times have you heard a player say "but he can't hit me, because i said was behind that wall ! But the wall isn't there, it can't cover you, etc.." Or the GM drawing shite last minute maps... With a table, you have unlimited possibilites for in-game accessories, drawings, sound effects, automation, etc. Then buying a scenario would actually mean something ! You would buy tons of assets, that you could later reuse, etc.. Your concerns ar valid, but seing the table as a helper rather than a simulator would avoid many pitfalls i suppose.