So what's that mean? I'm breaking the Canon by customizing my owned mechs?
11
Do You Like The New Boating Restriction System?
Started by AntiCitizenJuan, Jul 16 2013 02:17 PM
545 replies to this topic
#542
-
-
- 3,195 posts
Member
- LocationEquestria
Posted 22 July 2013 - 10:23 PM
Dart Nimrod, on 22 July 2013 - 09:44 PM, said:
So what's that mean? I'm breaking the Canon by customizing my owned mechs?
there are plenty of tabletop books dedicated to refitting mechs and i think most of the old mechwarrior games allowed for some kind of modification. i know pretty much all of the games i played did (although i did mostly stick to the mercs series).
#543
-
-
- 967 posts
Member
Posted 23 July 2013 - 12:08 AM
Dart Nimrod, on 22 July 2013 - 09:44 PM, said:
So what's that mean? I'm breaking the Canon by customizing my owned mechs?
Yes and no.
It's kind of like D&D, in a sense - there are rules for how you're supposed to do things, and there are a dozen and a half additional books that outline how you can do things you're not supposed to be able to do.
A lot of the 'canon' builds are your reference stock designs. They are cited as being common out-of-the-factory designs.
Custom builds and field refits did exist, but were a complicated affair and usually only afforded by top-tier pilots holding elite positions within military/mercenary forces, or just exceptionally resourceful pirates/outlaws/independents.
In -theory-, you could take something like a Bushwacker and make it a centurion with 5 extra tons. (actually, I'd say the Bushwacker is actually an upgrade to the centurion in role and spirit). Mechs could be reduced to a "paper doll" that you see in the mech lab - differing only in tonnage available (which is kind of dull, if you ask me).
In practice, the costs of doing so were so high that most people wouldn't ever bother with it - or would, instead, simply order a custom-build from a factory if available. Other factors were supposed to be involved, there, such as time.
Though the "meta" of tabletop battletech is largely like the "meta" of D&D - there's a more strict structure around the meta-mechanics of Battletech, but players are pretending to be mercenaries or military commanders in an imaginary universe with a story-line that is moderated by one person or even a couple people (depending upon how big the game is).
Like D&D, BattleTech has several different rule books that introduce new components, alter rules, etc - and also has expansions.
D&D 2.0, D&D 3.0 and D&D 3.5 all have their little quirks and differences. No one talks about D&D 4.0 - that's what happens when you try and make tabletop games compete with computer games. Two different experiences and two different markets. They tried to emulate the console RPG experience on a tabletop game... and it didn't pan out too well. Apparently making everyone super-powerful 'chosen ones' right out of the gate makes challenging players difficult by time they are level 8 and *****-slapping dragons out of the sky.
While I'm not as familiar with the various editions of BT - I'm sure there are sacrilegious and taboo editions and rule publishings among its history (some people seem to particularly dislike the clans).
#544
-
-
- Legendary Founder
- 10,644 posts
Member
Posted 23 July 2013 - 01:07 AM
Aim64C, on 23 July 2013 - 12:08 AM, said:
Yes and no.
It's kind of like D&D, in a sense - there are rules for how you're supposed to do things, and there are a dozen and a half additional books that outline how you can do things you're not supposed to be able to do.
A lot of the 'canon' builds are your reference stock designs. They are cited as being common out-of-the-factory designs.
Custom builds and field refits did exist, but were a complicated affair and usually only afforded by top-tier pilots holding elite positions within military/mercenary forces, or just exceptionally resourceful pirates/outlaws/independents.
In -theory-, you could take something like a Bushwacker and make it a centurion with 5 extra tons. (actually, I'd say the Bushwacker is actually an upgrade to the centurion in role and spirit). Mechs could be reduced to a "paper doll" that you see in the mech lab - differing only in tonnage available (which is kind of dull, if you ask me).
In practice, the costs of doing so were so high that most people wouldn't ever bother with it - or would, instead, simply order a custom-build from a factory if available. Other factors were supposed to be involved, there, such as time.
Though the "meta" of tabletop battletech is largely like the "meta" of D&D - there's a more strict structure around the meta-mechanics of Battletech, but players are pretending to be mercenaries or military commanders in an imaginary universe with a story-line that is moderated by one person or even a couple people (depending upon how big the game is).
Like D&D, BattleTech has several different rule books that introduce new components, alter rules, etc - and also has expansions.
D&D 2.0, D&D 3.0 and D&D 3.5 all have their little quirks and differences. No one talks about D&D 4.0 - that's what happens when you try and make tabletop games compete with computer games. Two different experiences and two different markets. They tried to emulate the console RPG experience on a tabletop game... and it didn't pan out too well. Apparently making everyone super-powerful 'chosen ones' right out of the gate makes challenging players difficult by time they are level 8 and *****-slapping dragons out of the sky.
While I'm not as familiar with the various editions of BT - I'm sure there are sacrilegious and taboo editions and rule publishings among its history (some people seem to particularly dislike the clans).
It's kind of like D&D, in a sense - there are rules for how you're supposed to do things, and there are a dozen and a half additional books that outline how you can do things you're not supposed to be able to do.
A lot of the 'canon' builds are your reference stock designs. They are cited as being common out-of-the-factory designs.
Custom builds and field refits did exist, but were a complicated affair and usually only afforded by top-tier pilots holding elite positions within military/mercenary forces, or just exceptionally resourceful pirates/outlaws/independents.
In -theory-, you could take something like a Bushwacker and make it a centurion with 5 extra tons. (actually, I'd say the Bushwacker is actually an upgrade to the centurion in role and spirit). Mechs could be reduced to a "paper doll" that you see in the mech lab - differing only in tonnage available (which is kind of dull, if you ask me).
In practice, the costs of doing so were so high that most people wouldn't ever bother with it - or would, instead, simply order a custom-build from a factory if available. Other factors were supposed to be involved, there, such as time.
Though the "meta" of tabletop battletech is largely like the "meta" of D&D - there's a more strict structure around the meta-mechanics of Battletech, but players are pretending to be mercenaries or military commanders in an imaginary universe with a story-line that is moderated by one person or even a couple people (depending upon how big the game is).
Like D&D, BattleTech has several different rule books that introduce new components, alter rules, etc - and also has expansions.
D&D 2.0, D&D 3.0 and D&D 3.5 all have their little quirks and differences. No one talks about D&D 4.0 - that's what happens when you try and make tabletop games compete with computer games. Two different experiences and two different markets. They tried to emulate the console RPG experience on a tabletop game... and it didn't pan out too well. Apparently making everyone super-powerful 'chosen ones' right out of the gate makes challenging players difficult by time they are level 8 and *****-slapping dragons out of the sky.
While I'm not as familiar with the various editions of BT - I'm sure there are sacrilegious and taboo editions and rule publishings among its history (some people seem to particularly dislike the clans).
D&D 4 is awesome! [/random edition war snapshot]
#545
Posted 23 July 2013 - 05:50 AM
Aim64C, on 23 July 2013 - 12:08 AM, said:
While I'm not as familiar with the various editions of BT - I'm sure there are sacrilegious and taboo editions and rule publishings among its history (some people seem to particularly dislike the clans).
MustrumRidcully, on 23 July 2013 - 01:07 AM, said:
D&D 4 is awesome! [/random edition war snapshot]
*COUGH* BS *COUGH*
#546
-
-
- 3,195 posts
Member
- LocationEquestria
Posted 23 July 2013 - 01:10 PM
MustrumRidcully, on 23 July 2013 - 01:07 AM, said:
D&D 4 is awesome! [/random edition war snapshot]
4 was nice if you wanted to play some D&D and you also wanted to get into the meat of the game quickly. it was less about proper role playing and more about RPG combat.
i liked it when i played, but it is in my opinion not proper D&D. if it were a computer game, i would say that it were shifted more toward the arcade end.
Aim64C, on 23 July 2013 - 12:08 AM, said:
D&D 2.0, D&D 3.0 and D&D 3.5 all have their little quirks and differences. No one talks about D&D 4.0 - that's what happens when you try and make tabletop games compete with computer games. Two different experiences and two different markets. They tried to emulate the console RPG experience on a tabletop game... and it didn't pan out too well. Apparently making everyone super-powerful 'chosen ones' right out of the gate makes challenging players difficult by time they are level 8 and *****-slapping dragons out of the sky.
as far as players being over powered. a proper GM shouldn't have any issues with that and should be able to create a proper enemy or situation that challenges players.
white wolf games has released several series that revolve around supremely powerful player characters.
- vampire
- werewolf
- exalted - this is a role playing game where you play as different demi gods. there are low level abilities that allow players to fire an arrow and hit a target miles away. my first battle in that game involved me throwing fallen trees at my opponent, running up tree trunks, and conducting a sword fight as me and my opponent ran and leaped through tree branches 50 feet off the ground. this all happened AFTER i had run down his horse while i was on foot.
23 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 23 guests, 0 anonymous users
