Official ICE Forums
Gamer's Corner => General Discussion => Topic started by: Vladimir on January 05, 2022, 04:04:51 AM
-
Other than the usual fluff in sourcebooks, is there any?
Is there fanfiction?
I've played games with hundreds of published novels and literally thousands of stories of varying quality, most based upon gameplay.
I used to keep logs of sessions when I GMed, if just to remind the players of the choices they previously made.
I'm sure many of you have plenty of stories worth reading.
-
Have to admit I used to run play-by forum games, that due to it's often complex combat sequencing, I found easier to narrate ALL the combatants actions in a single post, in a round to round fashion, after all the players had made their rolls. That lead to some quite amusing reading.
Now, I often do "Catch-up" posts, not only for players who might have missed a session... but also to remind ME what happened. After all, my Grey cells are just getting greyer.
-
There's also Terry's The Loremaster Legacy novel.
-
I've got ideas rolling around, but I'd need the free time (i.e. retire or win the lottery) to put them to 'paper' so to speak.
If you read the initial one page short story in the Channeling Companion there exist rough backgrounds of most the named characters, even if most are only mentioned in passing. Some day hopefully I'll have the time to truly work on the setting for public consumption.
-
Back in my 20s, I ran a campaign that I "storified" after the sessions, basically writing the story out and embellishing it with details that we could not engage in during the play-through. I think I still have the bits somewhere on my HD, but I'm afraid to look at them as even the stories that I wrote a few years later are pretty awful in retrospect. Way too clogged-down with detail, really, at the expense of action. I even embellished my players' 1 or 2 page backstories into 30-40 page novellas... :P
Still, I think it would be a great way to keep the story recorded and accessible to even those who are not part of the game (if the focus is kept on story and the system-specific details are left out - I don't quite get those types of books...).
-
One of my GMs had a blog that recorded his weekly campaign sessions that he tied together in a series of stories that eventually had all the previous campaigns intersect at one point. It made for interesting reading as it revealed how the various campaigns leaped from one point in the historical timeline to another and while come campaigns earned no mention in the timeline while others were very significant. All tied together, it was a good read. I wish I had saved it.
-
There have been other Shadow World novels besides Terry's Loremaster Legacy. I have Stormriders, by Roxanne Longstreet/Ian Hammel, and it looks like she wrote 3 other Shadow World novels in the late 80's/early 90's.
-
Hmmm... https://smile.amazon.com/Stormriders-Shadow-Fantasy-Playing-Environment/dp/155806138X/ (https://smile.amazon.com/Stormriders-Shadow-Fantasy-Playing-Environment/dp/155806138X/) by Roxanne Longstreet who was https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Caine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Caine)
It looks like Ian Hammell who appears to really be https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clayton_Emery (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clayton_Emery) wrote the others:
https://www.amazon.com/Burning-Goddess-Shadow-World-Book/dp/044100086X/ (https://www.amazon.com/Burning-Goddess-Shadow-World-Book/dp/044100086X/)
https://www.amazon.com/Clock-Strikes-Sword-Shadow-World/dp/B00BI45GMY/ (https://www.amazon.com/Clock-Strikes-Sword-Shadow-World/dp/B00BI45GMY/)
https://www.amazon.com/City-Assassins-Shadow-World-Book/dp/B00BNW1990/ (https://www.amazon.com/City-Assassins-Shadow-World-Book/dp/B00BNW1990/)
Reviews are kind of interesting regarding how those three books are (and are not) related.
-
Interesting. Ian Hammell appears to be an Ace Books house name, with at least three authors using it, probably more.
Roxanne Longstreet wrote Stormriders, looks like Clayton Emery wrote Burning Goddess and Shadow of Assassins, and Stephen Billias wrote Clock Strikes Sword, possibly with Clayton Emery (since it seems to be a prequel for one of his).
Stormriders was ok. Not great, but it did at least feel like Shadow World.
-
Interesting. Ian Hammell appears to be an Ace Books house name, with at least three authors using it, probably more.
Roxanne Longstreet wrote Stormriders, looks like Clayton Emery wrote Burning Goddess and Shadow of Assassins, and Stephen Billias wrote Clock Strikes Sword, possibly with Clayton Emery (since it seems to be a prequel for one of his).
Stormriders was ok. Not great, but it did at least feel like Shadow World.
I listened to the Clock Strikes Sword audiobook and while it gives you some idea of the races involved, as well as the types of magics and technologies, it sounds fairly generic fantasy.
Since I haven't yet played SW yet (my GM plans to teleport the party from MERP to SW) I have to listen carefully so I don't miss any important details.
-
I listened to the Clock Strikes Sword audiobook and while it gives you some idea of the races involved, as well as the types of magics and technologies, it sounds fairly generic fantasy.
Since I haven't yet played SW yet (my GM plans to teleport the party from MERP to SW) I have to listen carefully so I don't miss any important details.
Not to sound pedantic or anything, but I think you would be better off starting a new campaign (with a starting level similar to the one your characters have in MERP if you want to get the same power feel). Transplanting characters come will all kinds of issues - for characters as well as players.
Think about it: unless you only have no spell users at all in your MERP campaign, magic comes from a totally different source of power in Middle Earth and in Shadow World, which means that all spell users would basically be powerless. Characters would not have any cultural or linguistic reference, no social network, nothing except the clothes on their back and the gold in their pouch (which would be criminally undervalued because the coin would not be recognised as "official") and no way to communicate except through grunts and signs (because, you know... no magic) until someone takes pity on them and brings them to a caster who *can* use magic to speak *their* language.
It can lead to hilarious situations (and very interesting roleplaying), but unless you then "time jump" a couple of years in the future and say 'OK, during this time, you have learned the basics of the local language and superficial customs so that you're at least able to function', the hilarious situation might become a bit too much very quickly.
Now *converting* characters is something else entirely :)
-
The GM has yet to iron out the details but he's been playing since the 1990s so I'll wait and see. He wanted to run a legacy campaign and considered MERP too restrained, but I didn't care -I wasn't interested in the LOTR storyline as we were somewhere earlier in the timeline, so we'd be long dead before all that.
I'm thinking he'll just convert our characters to SW inhabitants with whatever equivalent skills fit in. We have a Paladin and no other spell users; My Rogue would fit anywhere, really. He may give the other players the option to start new characters at reduced level, as he usually does, which is why I'd rather keep my Rogue -He was on the verge of retiring as a borderland Lord and I'm going to do it, carve out a new kingdom because that's what I do and the GM knows it. Whenever I join a campaign I give my party members a short questionnaire on what they want to do in the campaign and their ultimate goals. One of the regular players passed away so in his memory I game with gusto and take greater risks for greater rewards. So if a player wants to help me achieve my goals I'll do my best to help them achieve theirs.
I'm guessing the GM may just isekai (Japanese, "otherworld"; a fantasy genre where characters are transported) the party to SW as part of some divine mission, which will explain any adaptations we may or may not have. The GM did ask if I had a problem with firearms and I'm fine with them if I have the same chance to get them, as the players starting new characters might have them.
-
Think about it: unless you only have no spell users at all in your MERP campaign, magic comes from a totally different source of power in Middle Earth and in Shadow World, which means that all spell users would basically be powerless. Characters would not have any cultural or linguistic reference, no social network, nothing except the clothes on their back and the gold in their pouch (which would be criminally undervalued because the coin would not be recognised as "official") and no way to communicate except through grunts and signs (because, you know... no magic) until someone takes pity on them and brings them to a caster who *can* use magic to speak *their* language.
As a GM who's done just that to the party in the past, meh, no big deal. Different power source? Channelling users require a bit more work, but not the others. Why would you think a Mentalism (if using the Rolemaster ruleset rather than MERP) or Essence caster from Middle Earth would be powerless on Kulthea?
Gold undervalued? On a world with a timeline as long as Shadow World's, with that many lost or distant civilizations? Doubt it. Most merchants/innkeepers would probably have a bit better rate for local currency (unless it's known to be intentionally debased), but would be VERY used to adventurers trying to buy stuff with some Second Age coinage from a kingdom they've never heard of that they found in a tomb somewhere.
Characters would not have any cultural reference? Given that the rulesets use very similar material, not so. I did end up with the only Halfling on Shadow World, who most people assume is a 12-year old Human...:)
No way to communicate? I got around that with some divine-level magic, I could also have let them pre-spend DP from their next level for a few ranks in Erlin if they'd put some work into it over a few sessions.
Oh, and I did isekai my party, when they got too powerful to run in Middle Earth. Divine interventions gets rid of any minor problems!
-
Oh, and I did isekai my party, when they got too powerful to run in Middle Earth. Divine interventions gets rid of any minor problems!
That's awesome! I wish my party members had enough attention span to stay with one character and level them up but they'd get bored and accept the reduction in levels to play something new. Level 3-5 characters won't cut it in the Barrow Downs (I played it when it was a new scenario...) and the GM tosses enemies at the party that my 10th Level Rogue has trouble with.
I agree with the currency part -If MERP gold coins aren't devalued, their weight value will be fine, unless gold is so common in SW that everything
is made of gold... Most monetary standards in RPGs are generic: Elf, Human and Orc gold have the same weights and values, so the monetary system isn't so complicated (the Medieval method would be used, just using scales to determine value and as a RL jeweler, I know methods of determining the purity of metals).
Dropping players into Medieval Europe would not be much of a problem, a little time for getting used to primitive variants of languages but nothing impossible. Getting dropped into a totally alien world will take time and players would have to devote gaming time to gain language fluency. Again, not a critical problem, so I'm not worried at all.
I think of the Roman Empire at near its collapse, under Augustus (27 BCE) a denarius was 90% silver and the remaining 10% bronze (that alloy made coins last longer in circulation), by the reign of Gallienus almost 300 years later, a denarius was only 5% silver. Sure, the government could mint more coins but people knew the coins were using far less silver so prices (which increased 1,000%) reflected that fact. By that time, only Barbarian mercenaries were paid in gold. ...End economics lesson...
Right now I've opened negotiations with the GM on how we're handling the transition from ME to SW. I've been playing my current character on and off for five years and other players have come and gone. I have items crafted by Dwarves in Moria, which the GM said would be similar to owning divine artifacts in SW and he's cool with that, I earned them, especially the ogre skull mounted in mithril that I use for a drinking vessel...
-
As a GM who's done just that to the party in the past, meh, no big deal. Different power source? Channelling users require a bit more work, but not the others. Why would you think a Mentalism (if using the Rolemaster ruleset rather than MERP) or Essence caster from Middle Earth would be powerless on Kulthea?
First, because mentalism does not exist in Middle Earth (otherwise, you're not playing in Middle Earth, but in another fantasy world with ME trappings, which is OK but different).
Second, because all magic in ME comes either from the Valar or from the Great Enemy, Morgoth (which is a Valar in many ways, so...). There is no Essence magic either. Only Channeling, and very special channeling - namely, the Valar imbued some individual (or races) with deeper understanding, which allowed them to alter the world in ways lesser people consider "magic", and dark casters worship Morgoth or an incarnation of his power (Sauron in one of his myriad forms).
Third, because Channeling is based on the link you have with the superior being. And obviously, Kulthea and Shadow World don't share the same pantheon at all. They don't even share the same foundation myth (because Kulthea does not have one). So you transport the characters on Kulthea and, lo and behold, even the elves have lost their connection to the creation song.
Obviously, they can learn new ways. But it takes time.
And saying "OK, the MERP rules are close to the RM rules, so we just have to change the name of deities and all is fine" is not teleporting characters to another world, it's basically converting characters, only without going the extra mile and converting their background as well so that they actually fit the new game world.
To each their own, I suppose.
I'm not talking about rulesets. I'm talking about settings. Settings are much more important than rules.
-
You can make that as much or as little of a problem as you want. If the character is channeling power from the Valar, a deity could have the same relationship with the world, even if the names are different. Elves lost their connection to the creation song? Perhaps they can hear the new song of Kulthea which gives them insight into how things work here. Or it could be totally different and starting from scratch if that seems more interesting.
-
From what I've read, specifically the Middle Earth Campaign Guide it does not indicate any restrictions on magic other than a division of "Blessed" and "Unblessed" in the West with risks in other forms of magic; By the Third Age, with the exception of Elves, the Maiar, and a handful of sanctioned seers, magic is fading, although "Magic is very rarely used outside the confines of a collection of closed societies".
There are exceptions for the South and East where "Spell-casting and magic may be relatively common" albeit weaker than in the West. Tolkein wrote the ME to be viewed through the filter of the West while the East and its peoples served to supply Sauron with cannon fodder after he corrupted or killed their leaders.
I don't believe RM meant to straightjacket GMs or players with solid rules prohibiting spell users and I found this:
"Isildur, High King of Gondor and Arnor. 3 Ranger and 3 Essence (RM Mentalism) spell lists to 10th Lvl. Sword is of mithril, does an additional Electricity critical..." among the NPC descriptions in Arnor: The Land. There were even more references to Essence users. So, perhaps the ICE version of ME isn't fully Tolkein's version, or the whole Channeling/Mentalism/Essence issue is up for individual interpretation (which has started many a war)... I'll leave it up to the GM.
BTW the GM is letting a new player come in as a vampire... and I've already said that he is on his own and if the villagers are peeved when people start dying I won't protect him.
The party has already seen lazy players take lycanthropes for the benefits without looking at the drawbacks and it usually winds up with a dead PC and a new character at reduced levels...and they don't learn. I'm guessing the Paladin may also have issues with a vampire in the party...
I made a couple of typos in previous posts and the site doesn't allow editing after awhile... Grrrr.
-
I don't believe RM meant to straightjacket GMs or players with solid rules prohibiting spell users and I found this:
"Isildur, High King of Gondor and Arnor. 3 Ranger and 3 Essence (RM Mentalism) spell lists to 10th Lvl. Sword is of mithril, does an additional Electricity critical..." among the NPC descriptions in Arnor: The Land. There were even more references to Essence users. So, perhaps the ICE version of ME isn't fully Tolkein's version, or the whole Channeling/Mentalism/Essence issue is up for individual interpretation (which has started many a war)... I'll leave it up to the GM.
To be perfectly honest, I think that MERP did a pretty poor job on the magic section - it was basically slapping RM-light rules and spells onto the setting. I could not play in Middle Earth with RM magic rules at all, and I think TOR did a much better job staying true to the setting on that point.
BTW the GM is letting a new player come in as a vampire... and I've already said that he is on his own and if the villagers are peeved when people start dying I won't protect him.
The party has already seen lazy players take lycanthropes for the benefits without looking at the drawbacks and it usually winds up with a dead PC and a new character at reduced levels...and they don't learn. I'm guessing the Paladin may also have issues with a vampire in the party...
Depends - in Middle Earth, once again, this would be a very big no-no since vampires were creations of Morgoth. However, in Shadow World, you have may more options, including non-magical ones. Ancient technology (not necessarily K'Taa'Viiri, mind you, other high-tech civilisations existed in Kulthea's pas) might have come up with some kind of vampire-like biological constructs (think replicant, who would have to compensate their inner chemical imbalance with blood in order to avoid fast cellular degeneration). The character could even be unaware of why they are that way.
Even if they are "real" vampires (i.e. undead), they are not necessarily of an evil moral disposition and may view their condition as a curse. Vampires do not necessarily need to drink their victims dry to survive. Of course, unwilling victims might feel a bit vengeful after the act, and it is difficult to come out as a vampire in most societies.
-
Depends - in Middle Earth, once again, this would be a very big no-no since vampires were creations of Morgoth.
Yeah, we had a player wanted to play a Lich in ME and none of the party was in favor of that idea.
The GM called me last night and said the new player asked him if he had any problem with PKP. *sigh*
The last time I killed a fellow player in a RPG was in 1986...and he (and several stupid kids who followed him) plotted to kill me. I got the first move and the other half of the party sided with me. I am strongly opposed to PKP, especially in-party. Having a player even inquire about PKP is a red flag. Having a Vampire ask about PKP is a potential death sentence for that player. I told the GM he had better convince me that he is a benefit to the party and not a liability, so I'm willing to afford him a chance, depending what he says and does in character.
The other players might not give him that chance. We shall see.
-
Depends - in Middle Earth, once again, this would be a very big no-no since vampires were creations of Morgoth.
Yeah, we had a player wanted to play a Lich in ME and none of the party was in favor of that idea.
The GM called me last night and said the new player asked him if he had any problem with PKP. *sigh*
The last time I killed a fellow player in a RPG was in 1986...and he (and several stupid kids who followed him) plotted to kill me. I got the first move and the other half of the party sided with me. I am strongly opposed to PKP, especially in-party. Having a player even inquire about PKP is a red flag. Having a Vampire ask about PKP is a potential death sentence for that player. I told the GM he had better convince me that he is a benefit to the party and not a liability, so I'm willing to afford him a chance, depending what he says and does in character.
The other players might not give him that chance. We shall see.
I don't like PvP (Player vs. Player). I would be dead set against it.
-
Big red flags right there.
- David.
-
This is one of the topics that is part of the explicit social contract prior to the start of the game, because, you know, fun for everyone - what is fun for someone (PvP) is not necessarily fun for others. Same as traitor PC, explicit sexual content, graphic descriptions of abuse, violence on children... the list is potentially as long as the list of potential triggers.
Which means that, if one of the players wants to include PKP, this is not asked between the player and the GM, but at the table with everyone having a say in it, and if *anyone* taps the X card, then it's a big no-go. Conversely, if no one disagrees, then it means everyone is aware that this is an option and plans accordingly.
-
We just finished a session and I had a long talk with the player bringing in a vampire. I gave him my views of PKP and how I would protect all party members within reason and any player that proves to be a liability isn't particularly welcome. We came to an agreement: He would use his current character to learn the RM mechanics and then ask the GM to convert a character from another game to the campaign. We actually agreed on the issue of PKP and he was more worried about how the group would accept him. PKP is in effect in the campaign and everybody knows my stance and how my character won't tolerate it.
The above being said, the only person the party has concern about is a player (who models his character after Sub Zero from Mortal Combat) who, tries to convince people to do things when he has no communication skills at all, and insists on being a "ninja" when has has no perception skills... He's a tank wannabe who thinks he's powerful (4th Lvl Fighter) but hasn't figured out OB allocation for defense as we haven't met anything strong yet. The GM is giving us two sessions to learn and will cull the herd after the fourth session. I've already explained the combat mechanics to him and we'll see if he's learned anything. We were attacked by a small band of Lizardmen; the Nightblade and my Rogue killed most of them before "Sub Zero" managed to kill one. He even accused me of hiding during the fight...then saw me recovering arrows from the Lizardman bodies he never even saw. I said nothing. The Nightblade stifled a laugh.
-
The above being said, the only person the party has concern about is a player (who models his character after Sub Zero from Mortal Combat) who, tries to convince people to do things when he has no communication skills at all, and insists on being a "ninja" when has has no perception skills... He's a tank wannabe who thinks he's powerful (4th Lvl Fighter) but hasn't figured out OB allocation for defense as we haven't met anything strong yet. The GM is giving us two sessions to learn and will cull the herd after the fourth session. I've already explained the combat mechanics to him and we'll see if he's learned anything. We were attacked by a small band of Lizardmen; the Nightblade and my Rogue killed most of them before "Sub Zero" managed to kill one. He even accused me of hiding during the fight...then saw me recovering arrows from the Lizardman bodies he never even saw. I said nothing. The Nightblade stifled a laugh.
I see. You were using your character as a watch, killing lizardmen with arrows. As for the PKP guy as a vampire, I suggest letting him run for a while, to see how he likes the game. You're playing Classic, correct?
-
The GM prefers RM 2nd Edition. I did have to point out the typos in the FRP manual and that so many of the Companions were written for the 1st Edition.
The vampire player is refreshingly reasonable (as we've had so many D&D/Pathfinder players unable to transition to RM) and he has a better grip of the rules and mechanics in one session than some of the players who've been with the party for months.
-
I see. You were using your character as a watch, killing lizardmen with arrows. As for the PKP guy as a vampire, I suggest letting him run for a while, to see how he likes the game. You're playing Classic, correct?
In military terms I was applying sniper overwatch. That is, posted at an observation point overseeing the battle and targeting enemy forces as the appear. In RPG settings I prefer stationing 1-2 snipers in locations where one or both snipers are presented with flank shots. Since there was no apparent missile or magic users among the attackers, the sniper didn't have to apply "fire and move" doctrine to confuse the enemy.
One advantage of being a veteran US Army squad leader is a lot of my tactical skills can be applied to RPGs, from command and control to post combat zone security.
As far as the vampire is concerned, the GM is allowing him to use the temporary character to learn the rules and gameplay, and he has adapted very quickly to the flow of combat. His PKP reference concerns a player that has not adapted to the game at all and we all came up with a contest to eliminate the player without getting caught, sort of "Clue" but with all the players being murder suspects and not just one... BTW, the vampire player has gamed with the other player and says that he always plays the same character with the same personality, no matter the class. Red flags there...
As I said, I'm usually against PKP but this guy intends on being a liability to the party in SW, where saying something stupid or offensive isn't taken lightly. He carries a cask of whiskey about and leads off by handing out drinks to anybody present and he contends that downing 20 shots "is nothing"... (4 shots would impair an average human) and he insists on dominating negotiations while having no communication skills. Me, I step back and let him talk and he hasn't learned yet.
-
One advantage of being a veteran US Army squad leader is a lot of my tactical skills can be applied to RPGs, from command and control to post combat zone security.
I wanted to ask - do you always play characters that are experts at small unit tactics ?
Because, at least in my opinion, one of the core tenets of role-playing is to isolate player knowledge from character knowledge as much as possible (both ways, as a matter of fact, which is why most Lore skills exist).
And there is a delicious irony in intentionally doing less-than-optimal things in game, *knowing* that they are less than optimal. Just like it is delicious to *know* something is fishy because *you* (as the player) have world knowledge from past campaigns, but your character does not and remains blissfully ignorant of what doom is about to happen. Anticipation is much sweeter than surprise :)
-
I wanted to ask - do you always play characters that are experts at small unit tactics ?
Because, at least in my opinion, one of the core tenets of role-playing is to isolate player knowledge from character knowledge as much as possible (both ways, as a matter of fact, which is why most Lore skills exist).
And there is a delicious irony in intentionally doing less-than-optimal things in game, *knowing* that they are less than optimal. Just like it is delicious to *know* something is fishy because *you* (as the player) have world knowledge from past campaigns, but your character does not and remains blissfully ignorant of what doom is about to happen. Anticipation is much sweeter than surprise :)
If I played a Healer or Dirt Farmer, I wouldn't bother with tactical combat at all. Fighters in RPGs engage in tactical combat 99% of the time and I usually play a professional, who should at least have an idea what they should be doing. I know players who have been gaming for decades and still don't apply basic principles of tactical combat -I call them "hordes" and "meat shields".
From personal experience, very few players even learn rudimentary tactical combat. When I played Battletech some players criticized me for employing WW2 tactics in winning battles and my reply was "I don't Roleplay at war." The BT universe is a thousand years into the future so soldiers would be as familiar with WW2 as I am with the Norman Conquest.
Considering that Tactics is a purchasable skill, what prevents me from simply wasting the points on a skill based on personal knowledge and then applying those skills? Any child could learn squad level tactics by picking up a common Field Manual or simply listening to war stories from veterans around a campfire.
Players should play the kind of character they desire, with skills and equipment to be the character they want to play. Organized warriors will beat a similar number of warriors with like skills and equipment that are not organized. That is simple common sense and how much common sense should I abandon from one character to the next? Face it, most RPG players eventually improve with experience, most. How many players choose to be a helpless, green noob with each adventure? Now, I have played a Farmer levee into a lord's warband, with minimal skills, so he just followed orders and did grunt work around camp. If I "just followed orders and did grunt work around camp" in EVERY campaign, my party wouldn't do anything.
-
Players should play the kind of character they desire, with skills and equipment to be the character they want to play. Organized warriors will beat a similar number of warriors with like skills and equipment that are not organized. That is simple common sense and how much common sense should I abandon from one character to the next? Face it, most RPG players eventually improve with experience, most. How many players choose to be a helpless, green noob with each adventure? Now, I have played a Farmer levee into a lord's warband, with minimal skills, so he just followed orders and did grunt work around camp. If I "just followed orders and did grunt work around camp" in EVERY campaign, my party wouldn't do anything.
That's my answer - you *do* play according to your character's knowledge - it's just that you tend to prefer playing characters that do have those kinds of skills.
No offense meant - it's just that, from everything you said, I got the feeling that your gaming experiences were focused on tactical combat and I was wondering how much of it was context and how much of it was from player's background.
Especially since I've never played a military-oriented RPG campaign - it's just not my style nor my idea of fun. Situational one-shots, yes, but not more. So I have a very different outlook on roleplaying experience from yours.
-
That's my answer - you *do* play according to your character's knowledge - it's just that you tend to prefer playing characters that do have those kinds of skills.
No offense meant - it's just that, from everything you said, I got the feeling that your gaming experiences were focused on tactical combat and I was wondering how much of it was context and how much of it was from player's background.
Especially since I've never played a military-oriented RPG campaign - it's just not my style nor my idea of fun. Situational one-shots, yes, but not more. So I have a very different outlook on roleplaying experience from yours.
I would love to play a campaign with no combat at all but throughout my decades of playing, at least 90% of the other players ache for regular battles. Few could sit through a basic Call of Cthulhu scenario and actually do simple detective work, interview people and find crucial clues without arming up and wanting to fight something. Even the GM realizes that we have to toss them a combat bone on a regular basis to keep them interested.
One of the reasons I've started the current Legacy campaign was to wean some of the players out of the hack and slash mindset and into the intrigues of empire building, with diplomacy and negotiation taking the forefront of gameplay. I've got two of the four regular players onboard and the GM has allowed them to redesign their characters away from their usual pure combat orientation. There are some players who will never make the transition and will be left behind in rank and responsibilities. The early portion of the Legacy campaign is to identify leaders and potential nobles capable of administering property and negotiating contracts with other organizations. All of my characters are designed for kingship, but the parties rarely want to get past the disposable, hack and slash stage.
For over two decades, I gamed with a group that was intensively aimed at empire building. We'd pick a leader to set the theme and the players would work to promote that leader to his goal. I have yet to find a party with anything resembling the kind of synergy the Xai team possessed. Xai was a world where the party could start as primitive cave dwellers or space fairing immortals and everything in between. In one campaign, the entire party started out as chattel slaves. Xai is described here: https://ironcrown.co.uk/ICEforums/index.php?topic=20485.0 (https://ironcrown.co.uk/ICEforums/index.php?topic=20485.0)
Combat tactics is just a means, it is never an end. Winning in combat just means more loot and levels. If I could teach one player to adopt basic squad leadership then I could help them advance to the next level of logistics management and command. Some players never learn. For five years I GMed a group where none of the players wanted any role in leadership. None wanted positions of responsibility or deal with bureaucracy. Fine. They all became grunts who worked with a NPC commander who exploited them and got very wealthy off their willingness to take risks. They didn't care and none of them had any concept of empire building. Their idea of a fun game was annihilating an enemy and taking slaves. Not one of them could RP their way out of a paper bag but skill wise, they were gods on the battlefield, which is all that mattered. ...and these guys sucked at Call of Cthulhu...
-
I would love to play a campaign with no combat at all but throughout my decades of playing, at least 90% of the other players ache for regular battles. Few could sit through a basic Call of Cthulhu scenario and actually do simple detective work, interview people and find crucial clues without arming up and wanting to fight something. Even the GM realizes that we have to toss them a combat bone on a regular basis to keep them interested.
I've never run an entire campaign without hack n' slash, but I've had several sessions that were non-combat. There is certainly plenty of fun to still be had. For one group, I set up a scenario for two level 1 PCs. One was lowest rank in the thieves guild (which may or may not exist) and one was hoping to get into the guild (that absolutely, totally, does not exist).
The initiate is contacted via a note from a higher ranking member because he's been observed picking pockets or petty thieving and is told that he may be a good fit. There's going to be a challenge for initiates and the winner gets taken aboard as a member. The initiate has no idea how many are competing nor who is also in the challenge. All initiates will have to take a specific item from a tavern at one end of town and bring it to a tavern at the other end of town without being caught and there can be no killing. One mustn't draw attention to the guild. The initiate to succeed is let in.
The existing probationary-level guild member is assigned an initiate and his job is to aid his initiate in succeeding. If the initiate finds out he is being helped, both are disqualified. If either is caught, both are disqualified. If the member's initiate succeeds, the member is moved from probationary member to lowest level member.
What the PCs don't realize is the the actual challenge is for the existing low-level member. The initiate is just a fall guy should something go wrong. If the initiate is caught, he has no ties at all to the Guild and nothing can be betrayed.
We had a 'falling out of our seats, tears in our eyes laughing session' that lasted a good 2 hours. At level 1, the necessary thieving skills are all low, if they even have the skills they need. I wanted the Thieve and Rogue PCs to get an idea of the skills they should be investing in if they wanted to play those professions. I ran through all of the non-combat skills RMC-II had. Stalk/Hide, Sense Ambush Assassin, Hide Item, Duping, Acting, Lie Perception, Sprinting, Disguise, Acrobatics, Tightrope Walking, Grappling Hook, Rope Mastery, Pick Pockets, Surveillance, Improvised Weapon, etc. Obviously they couldn't have all of those skills, so there were plenty of -25's and failed attempts and much hilarity ensued.
The initiate wanted to distract an NPC by throwing a mug. He fumbled the throwing skill spectacularly and creamed the tavern owner's wife in the face and knocked her out. He turned to run, fumbled his Sprinting skill and fell flat on his face. A couple of thugs were on him and he rolled very well for Acting and was able to convince the thugs it was another patron "It was him! Look! He's the only one here without a mug of ale! It was obviously him!!!"
Then the fight started...
-
Long, long ago there was a Dragon Magazine article called 'Death of an Arch-mage' which is essentially a murder mystery. You actually setup a timer and certain things happen certain times in certain places within a mansion. Was one of the more fun gaming sessions our groups have had and there was virtually no combat. At the end the group had to make their judgement on what happens (who is charged with what, etc). The GM also used the one false accusation that was made to create a running enemy of the group that lasted years (the one thing we got wrong and charged an innocent, but evil, mage with one of the crimes).
-
I've pretty much played every form of RPG, some good, some an incredible waste of time.
Call of Cthulhu was great. As a long-time Lovecraft reader, I was looking for a great adventure along the lines of the Randolph Carter stories but they were mostly short, detective story vignettes and most GMs never even heard of Randolph Carter. The gameplay of CoC pretty much minimalizes combat, which was fine for me, unlike John Carter, Randolph Carter never turned into a muscular warrior when he traveled to an alien world, he remained the same, genteel, intellectual he had always been.
As I've said elsewhere, over 90% of RPGs are geared to be combat centric, and I've played many of them, from Empire of the Petal Throne to The Morrow Project to Metamorphosis Alpha. One GM ran a "come as you are" campaign for Twilight 2000 (a "come as you are" game in my club would be a scenario that allowed players to bring figures or vehicles they had on hand and play them) where one player had a M-1 Abrams tank, which he always had trouble refueling, I had both mounted and standing figures of a Cossack with modern weapons, a horse, a loaded packmule and a German Shepherd. This is all in 1/35th scale. One player was a foot soldier who carried a RPG launcher and a backpack brimming with reloads. He lost a fight with a light armored car when a 23mm round went through him and hit his ammo:
Mark: "Where's Gary?"
Me: "You're breathin' him."
Me: "The answer is, 'four days.'"
Mark: "What was the question?"
Me: "What is the half-life of one of Gary's characters?"
Good times.
-
Last night we closed a chapter in our Shadow World campaign -The Vampire left the party as scheduled, he was only playing the character to learn the rules.
One player died when the party Lycanthrope (werebear) lost control and pulped him. A month ago, I had pointed out the the SW world has several moons and the player didn't have adequate time to determine which moon was tied to his condition. So...when the party was attacked by werewolves, our Lycanthrope was unable to maintain control, crushed one of the werewolves, killed an (annoying) NPC and crushed our Necromancer. I pointed out that Lycanthrope characters are rarely worth the hassle and that particular player assured me he had his condition under control.
I messed up -I trusted him. The party has no defined leader as I almost always wind up being the leader and this is what happens when the players are allowed to think for themselves in tactical combat situations.
I will do what I always do: Assume command and assign each player a number, because I won't remember character names.
Me: "Three zero four, move up."
304: "I'm not a number."
Me: "Yes, you are. Three zero four, you are fined five gold, move up."
304: "Yes, sir."