If you get around to Microscope and enjoy it, it recommend both The Quiet Year and For the Queen.
When I played Microscope, I found that the game was a little too unconstrained and it was very hard to keep things from becoming totally silly, then in the close up scenes, everyone would basically want to default to playing a super rules-light generic TTRPG, and two or three of those scenes would dominate the session. I feel that it may get better with frequent play, but that's not really what it's designed for. Ben Robbins, the creator is a very talented game designer and is also famous for the West Marches style of D&D play, and has made numerous GMless TTRPGs since, and I've only ever heard great things about them.
The Quiet Year is a game with a more constrained setting, that basically uses a map you fill in as you please and a bunch of prompts tied to playing cards to play out the 4 seasons of a small settlement moving from it's founding to a final point where either the settlement is implied to die out, or is a fantastic springboard for a traditional TTRPG to take over. There are plenty of hacks online that move the tone from a post apocalypse feeling survival focused game to basically anything that charts a settlement for a year, including one by the creators called The deep forest which I understand to be a decolonising focused and a bit more cottagecore / cottagecore. I preferred this to Microscope mostly because of the fact that it's prompts constrain the tone from becoming all out silly.
Finally For the Queen has been one of the best games I've ever discovered. I've played the first edition but there is a second created by the same creator, Alex Roberts, produced by Critical Role's Darrington Press. If you're Critical Role averse for some reason, the first edition was not tied to them at all. This game is by far the easiest to teach new players, and is the first game I'd bring to play with absolute TTRPG newbies. In my opinion it generates the best story, although rather than being solely worldbuilding, it places a primary interest on your characters and relationships to a queen figure. I find that despite this, the world's that comes out of it are far more evocative and exciting to develop than other GMless TTRPGs, and a large part of that is the hard to hack reality that it's just got good prompts. Despite that it's got the most hacks of the original of anything here, as the original game is so streamlined and well playtested, which really shows while playing it.
I think modern TTRPGS in general steer towards things like temporary summons because of how it lets the players actually use them in combat. Nobody wants to play the necromancer who is suddenly just some guy because there are no corpses available where the battle kicks off.
I have an enormous soft spot for narratively putting in the legwork to assemble your undead hordes, and when I'm the GM, I'm always keen to set up good moments for the necromancer to build an army, but it's so easy for that to set up a situation where a player doesn't get to actually use their features. Making them temporary summons from nowhere in particular is the easiest fix.
I had a similar experience in my 5e game, no real combat but basically the intrigued that drove the game got tenfold more complex and was revealed to involve each member of the party in a varying but believable way.
Seperatly, I also played Alice is Missing the month before and it lived up to the hype I wanted, but it's very up.my street. What I seek in an RPG is being able to move between being immersed enough to feel what my character feels when I want it, but when I don't, be able to act as my own drama maker for later. AiM absolutely delivered that for me. It also didn't need magic or tech to deliver any agency which is a big plus to me.
Funnily enough The Witcher 3 is one of the games I always think of for the trope of not following the plot. Often I think of the ludonarrative dissonance specifically between Gestalt's paternal drive to find and protect Ciri Vs Gwent.
For large scale, AAA open world games, I mostly think of Breath of the Wild, which transparently sets itself up as being about taking as long as you need to get strong enough to save the world and Red Dead Redemption 2, which doesn't care about the stakes of the world.
I sometimes can't wrap my head around the fact that Witcher 3, BotW and RDR2 were each two years apart. I don't feel any open world game has occupied the cultural space those games did since.
This is Call of Duty 22.
I used to play call of duty way back in the day and fell off around the time Black Ops 2 came out, mostly because I felt like there are too many games and I didn't need another black ops.
There's now more Black Ops games than I've bought games this year.
This is definitely a selfish opinion but people who block adverts or torrent being a small percentage of users can be a good thing.
If they lose even 5% of their userbase to Firefox over this decision, they'll find a way to make grand modifications to Google search and YouTube in a manner that stops you blocking ads from alternative browsers, and while I'm happy swapping to an alternative search engine, it'll definitely becometedious to sidestep Google's gaze.
But if it's 0.1% of people who swap due to this, and Google already don't care about the small percentage they lose to Firefox then I would rather sit under the radar and not be cracked down on.
To be fair, modern AI voices sound pretty real. Making it artificial would have been a tell in it's own right.
Also the toxicity that is implied to exist by this post is pretty rare really. Even back when I was using Reddit, toxicity generally sank to the bottom of comment sections, and even more so here. When I got into D&D close to the beginning of 5e, some online voices on YouTube for example carried this toxicity but nowadays, most voices are far newer and friendly.
In general, most people are more interested in what happens at their table instead of all tables, and the rules are just guidelines to aid that.
Which was a crazy lore addition considering hell and Satan are totally real in that world.
I actually doubt it. 30% of all of Hasbro's revenue comes from WotC (I've heard higher than 50% before, but a quick Google says 30%). Of that I've heard people say as high as 90% of WotC's income comes from Magic: The Gathering.
Artists are paid a set rate, not commission for their art, but thousands of cards are purchased at very little cost to WotC. It's a golden goose that is literally keeping Hasbro afloat, they'd be fools to touch the operations of MtG with a 10ft pole, nevermind replace it's core with AI.
A pop star that has had an enormous rise to popularity this last year. By all accounts, she seems to be a very good person who's main controversies have been burn out and stress from becoming a household name overnight.
You'd probably recognise a fair few if her songs from just hearing them in public. A lot of songs from her album were very well received.
The most common cheat is probably gaining money or experience, but there have always been pretty extensive mod menus for GTA Online with tools from invincibility to making your vehicles rainbow, to randomly causing other players to explode or setting hundreds of muggers on them.
In 2015ish, I used to cheat, other than getting rich, all I was interested in doing was making an indestructible chrome bus with smoke trails that I'd drive around picking up players in, to teleport us all to North Yankton and back like a tour guide.
I deleted my comment because I came from the TTRPG network homepage and didn't realise I was responding to pathfinder. I gave quite a few D&D 5e specific examples and was a little worried people wouldn't be happy about it.
I loathe their lootbox system but I'd say valve is better than their rivals in most places. I'd put them far above Epic, Playstation, and Xbox for their games marketplace, far above meta in the VR space and on par with the game developers I respect in basically every aspect except lootboxes.
I don't think we should respect, like or trust any large businesses but Valve is certainly the lesser evil of many choices.
The game I always think of checking out is Assassin's Creed Mirage, just to find it hasn't been cracked.
I know assassin's creed is a bit of a crap franchise but I have a love / hate relationship with the game and think mirage looks made for me. Every few months since release I've looked up it's crack status and not just has it not been cracked but generally the comments around it are that it's from the new era of uncrackable games.
I don't play many AAA games but I'm forever gutted that the fight to make them able to be pirated is a losing battle. I want to pay for my indie games but on occasion I look online at the crack status of AAA games from oecen 2-3 years ago and they're still not playable.
It creates a weird dichotomy where people who pirate or at least don't buy expensive games don't take part in the mainstream gaming conversation at all, which is totally different from the rest of pirated media.
I'm just really hoping that whatever they intend to use AI for isn't art. Ideally there is enough backlash to this that they backpedal again for a year or so, but failing that, I do not want to see it touch the art at all.
In my opinion, WotC is an art company. I don't really see anything better in 2024 D&D 5e to what is expected in Tales of the Valiant 5e or is in Level up Advanced 5e, or for that matter, any RPG really. The only thing they excel on is the money behind them to have an entirely different relationship with artists. And that's not mentioning Magic the Gathering which needs the art even more.
There aren't that many avenues for AI in D&D. You can't really replace the game design due to the fact that AI can't really problem solve or innovate. It's already likely used internally by the finance departments etc, hell it's built into Microsoft programs, it course it is used. It can't really be sued to make the writing more efficient because the writing of a D&D book is sacred, you can't change the word prone to lying down for readability for example.
So it's likely coming for art or WotC are returning to the idea of AI DMs, which is silly and I have no interest in, and I can't imagine it being anything but a totally adjacent product to D&D.
I can't wait to see what evil and terrible way I'm proved wrong.
I thought the same. I assumed it was just people censoring themselves when they wanted to say son of a bitch in front a child, or anyone else who it's taboo to swear in front of.
This is for D&D 5e.
I'm currently making a reoccurring antagonist NPC that is a master thief. It's CR 6 and I want it to be capable of making three attacks per round like multiattack but also have their thief subclass's enhanced cunning action with fast hands.
This would normally mean they'd get 3 attacks and a varying options for bonus actions, however I'd want them to be able to trade up to three if these attacks to have more uses of cunning action (this would of course stack the ability to dash 4 times per round but I'd just not do that while running the monster). They also have a special once per day ability that I'd want them to be able to swap a single attack for.
It got me thinking, instead of trying to make an unwieldy combination of multiattack, a special action and cunning action, could I just give them three actions?
The simple way this NPC works that I want them to pick 3 options from:
- Dagger
- Crossbow
- Special action
- Dash
- Disengage
- Hide
- Make an ability check
- Use an object
- Use a set of tools
At this point, what do I actually lose from letting them take 3 actions? They aren't a Spellcaster so I'm not worried about them throwing out three fireballs or the like.