What price for Dune?

[KPhan2121]

49 minutes ago, Questbird said:

I like simpler systems. How about these principles:

1. Shield Fighting skill is added to weapon skill when attacking a shielded opponent
2. An activated shield blocks all fast-moving ranged weapons
3.  An activated shield makes parrying or dodging melee attacks Easy for the defender
4. Medium and Long melee weapons are Difficult to use against a shield

I have an even simplier system. Your energy shield provides two armor values, one high and one low. Most attacks target the high armor value, some attacks target the low armor value.

Edited August 1, 2018 by KPhan2121

[Algesan]

21 minutes ago, Questbird said:

I like simpler systems. How about these principles:

1. Shield Fighting skill is added to weapon skill when attacking a shielded opponent
2. An activated shield blocks all fast-moving ranged weapons
3. An activated shield makes parrying or dodging melee attacks Easy for the defender
4. Medium and Long melee weapons are Difficult to use against a shield

Or give the shield an armor rating so that it pretty much blocks all damage from melee weapons, which means a critical or special hit is needed to affect those inside.  Yes, nice and nasty there.  Potentially allow a trainable only version of MA: Shield fighting to exist.  Possibly add a Shield Fighting version of each weapon skill, which would mean someone trained to fight with shields may have a lower to hit chance in an unshielded fight (or simply start characters off as primarily shield or non-shield types and apply penalties that wear off after a while playing). 

I don't agree with Easy for parry/dodge, but perhaps a bonus to it, say +10/15/20 to base weapon skill for initial parry bonus?

Don't agree with the medium/long weapon issue for several reasons, but the dodge/parry bonus (either numerical or by being Difficult) should counteract that.  Given the last paragraph below, I'd say that only impaling type melee weapons are suitable ("a thrust of two inches in a vital area is generally fatal"), although "killing with the point lacks artistry", so maybe for formal duels disallow any MA (since virtually all historical knife/sword MA use the point heavily).

Coherent weapons cause ~1kt blast (max).

Interestingly enough, shields do act as inertial sinks for the wearer, so no huge kinetic effects would apply.  However, since this involves radiating the energy out it could be possible for some kinds of large kinetic weapons to cause radioactive issues (although normal use vs most weapons are merely a temporary minor non-hazardous raising of the local background radiation).  Note that this radiation goes outward and not inward (unless firing some kind of high kinetic energy device from inside a shield...= cooked user).

[TrippyHippy]

43 minutes ago, Algesan said:

Sorry, I must have been unclear.

Other than the specific bits that make them special and different for the purpose of the author's story, the major elements of both LOTR and Dune fit into the generic genres I've noted.  Of course Tolkien did not write a copy of Homer's Odyssey, but one of the genres you can place both LOTR & the Odyssey are in that of the epic and they are both quests (or journeys), which is what I was intending to state.

Both Tolkien and Frank Herbert borrowed heavily from multiple sources for their various books, this is true for all literature...heck, for everything.  There is nothing new under the sun. 

Your being pretty clear about not understanding what 'generic' means. Moreover, if you attempted to run either Tolkien's or Herbert's settings as generic fantasy or generic science fiction, respectively, then you would categorically be doing it wrong. If Cubicle 7 released a generic fantasy book with the moniker 'Adventures in Middle Earth' they would possibly face a trade desciption act. Middle Earth is not a generic setting.

Both Tolkien and Herbert had their influences, although you are downplaying the very significant creative work they did, but their creations are singular and unique. They are not open ended for adaptation or mix and matching from other sources, in the same way D&D or the like is. 

 

[Algesan]

BTW, for those who dislike Lynch's 1984 version, remember that Frank Herbert liked it as an interpretation of his novel.  IIRC, it is in the introduction to the short story collection "Eye" and that one short bit of commentary by an author who worked closely with the director and producer about translating from a prose medium to an AV one.  For example, most of the fighting scenes and the weirding modules...both are obvious ways to steer away from making a film Dune into the martial arts extravaganza that Mortal Kombat wanted to be, since that was not what the book was about. 

The "extended version" (four hours) puts in a lot of scenes that Herbert mentioned in his article, but I always wonder about his comment about there being six hours of film, half of it left on the cutting room floor.

[Raleel]

12 minutes ago, Algesan said:

Or give the shield an armor rating so that it pretty much blocks all damage from melee weapons, which means a critical or special hit is needed to affect those inside

this would be a good solution for mythras, but I think you still have to stay you can't bypass it with ranged weapons. 

[Algesan]

1 minute ago, TrippyHippy said:

Your being pretty clear about not understanding what 'generic' means. Moreover, if you attempted to run either Tolkien's or Herbert's settings as generic fantasy or generic science fiction, respectively, then you would categorically be doing it wrong. If Cubicle 7 released a generic fantasy book with the moniker 'Adventures in Middle Earth' they would possibly face a trade desciption act. Middle Earth is not a generic setting.

Both Tolkien and Herbert had their influences, although you are downplaying the very significant creative work they did, but their creations are singular and unique. They are not open ended for adaptation or mix and matching from other sources, in the same way D&D or the like is. 

 

No, you have totally missed the point and are barking up the wrong tree here.

Simply, I never said that either work was generic.  I CAN set up and run a LOTR setting from any generic fantasy game system though.  I CAN set up and run a Dune setting from any generic SF game system.  Understand now?

No, their creations are unique, but not very "singular" and this is not the place to breakdown and discuss literary works at that level.  Given the level of "mixing and matching from other sources" that I can point out (and already have a few as examples) that both authors' works include, why can they not be dissected for the actual unique parts and then use those to adapt to another platform that is more generic? 

I personally do not need any kind of officially licensed and paid for specific game system to run a campaign in either universe.  In fact, I was running a ME campaign before ICE ever even had a hint out about MERP.  My players thought it was lots of fun.  Earlier than that I ran a basic paraphrase of The Hobbit for one of my first OD&D campaigns and, again, my players thought it was fun.  So yes, at least in my case if not yours, I can handle both using a relevant generic game system.  In fact, I'm currently running one using the Dust 1947 universe and that one has even less support (which actually can be useful in some ways) in background.

[Algesan]

17 minutes ago, Raleel said:

this would be a good solution for mythras, but I think you still have to stay you can't bypass it with ranged weapons. 

Sorry, I left that one out because I figured it was understood about fast kinetics.  Specialty ranged weapons might affect it with poisons and "stunner pellets", but they are relatively slow, so would be very short ranged.  Interestingly enough, even the Fremen tend not to use any sort of firearms (except suicide lasgunners perhaps, it is even part of the culture according to the books).

On energy weapons, Dune only has lasers apparently, so the rest would be out of bounds.

 

EDIT: Oh and I was talking about mainly adapting generic BRP to Dune, I'm not sure how that would vary your comment.

Edited August 1, 2018 by Algesan

[Raleel]

2 minutes ago, Algesan said:

Sorry, I left that one out because I figured it was understood about fast kinetics.  Specialty ranged weapons might affect it with poisons and "stunner pellets", but they are relatively slow, so would be very short ranged.  Interestingly enough, even the Fremen tend not to use any sort of firearms (except suicide lasgunners perhaps, it is even part of the culture according to the books).

On energy weapons, Dune only has lasers apparently, so the rest would be out of bounds.

 

EDIT: Oh and I was talking about mainly adapting generic BRP to Dune, I'm not sure how that would vary your comment.

wasn't there one ranged weapon that went through the shield in the movie?

[TrippyHippy]

6 hours ago, Algesan said:

No, you have totally missed the point and are barking up the wrong tree here.

Simply, I never said that either work was generic.  I CAN set up and run a LOTR setting from any generic fantasy game system though.  I CAN set up and run a Dune setting from any generic SF game system.  Understand now?

No, their creations are unique, but not very "singular" and this is not the place to breakdown and discuss literary works at that level.  Given the level of "mixing and matching from other sources" that I can point out (and already have a few as examples) that both authors' works include, why can they not be dissected for the actual unique parts and then use those to adapt to another platform that is more generic? 

I personally do not need any kind of officially licensed and paid for specific game system to run a campaign in either universe.  In fact, I was running a ME campaign before ICE ever even had a hint out about MERP.  My players thought it was lots of fun.  Earlier than that I ran a basic paraphrase of The Hobbit for one of my first OD&D campaigns and, again, my players thought it was fun.  So yes, at least in my case if not yours, I can handle both using a relevant generic game system.  In fact, I'm currently running one using the Dust 1947 universe and that one has even less support (which actually can be useful in some ways) in background.

You said: 

Quote

Dune itself is nothing more than a generic space opera (kind of) with elements that can be found in all kinds of other stories

You also said: 

Quote

I know that, but my point was that Tolkien was writing an epic that has become the modern generic fantasy...and that what Tolkien was righting was merely a copy of older literature, for example, the Odyssey. 

All of which are entirely contentious, and make incorrect uses of the word 'generic'.

Just because a generic game like D&D references Tolkien does not make the original source generic in a reciprocal fashion. And no, if you were playing D&D, the tropes are different to that of Middle Earth - in terms of magic use, for example. You can use a generic system to run anything you like - agreed! - but that was not the point you were saying. Indeed, you continue to confuse an authors' set of influences when writing an original work as meaning same thing as 'generic'. It doesn't. George RR Martin's Game of Thrones series draws inspiration and influence from Tolkien's work, but neither of them are 'generic'. Moreover, you are using the term in a somewhat derogatory fashion without giving credit due to original qualities of these works.

Indeed, your interpretation of Dune seems very broad stroke too - generic science fiction does not consider the effects of spice, or the Bene Gesserat, or the Mentat, or the specific applications of technology, or the ecological themes, or the worms, and so on. Dune remains a pretty unique experience in science fiction literature, which is not going to be authentically captured in a roleplaying game environment without significant research and careful consideration. 

You may not like licensed settings, and prefer to do things yourself, but the very point of this thread is that other people actually like straight adaptations for non-generic settings they like - in this case, Dune. 

 

Edited August 1, 2018 by TrippyHippy

[Questbird]

On 8/1/2018 at 2:03 PM, Raleel said:

wasn't there one ranged weapon that went through the shield in the movie?

 

I think there was a 'Maula pistol' or some such; some kind of slow dart weapon. Remember the hunter-seeker? Maybe some sort of short range self-guided projectile might be usable against a shielded user, though it certainly wouldn't be good etiquette.

[g33k]

5 hours ago, Questbird said:

I think there was a 'Maula pistol' or some such; some kind of slow dart weapon. Remember the hunter-seeker? Maybe some sort of short range self-guided projectile might be usable against a shielded user, though it certainly wouldn't be good etiquette.

IIRC, the "hunter-seeker" was inside a bedroom, and no Shield was present.  We don't know if a Shield would have been relevant or not.

[soltakss]

On 8/1/2018 at 8:30 AM, TrippyHippy said:

You said: 

You also said: 

All of which are entirely contentious, and make incorrect uses of the word 'generic'.

In my experience, when a discussion/argument resorts to "You said/I Said" then it's time to stop. Two people are not going to admit defeat, especially on something that is as nebulous as "generic".

[TrippyHippy]

8 hours ago, soltakss said:

In my experience, when a discussion/argument resorts to "You said/I Said" then it's time to stop. Two people are not going to admit defeat, especially on something that is as nebulous as "generic".

From what I could see, the conversation had stopped before your intervention. While I can appreciate the attempt to diplomatically moderate, the point is that "generic" does not have a nebulous meaning, it has a clearly defined one. To say Dune is generic science fiction is simply incorrect, disparagingly so. 

Edited August 3, 2018 by TrippyHippy

[Algesan]

On 7/31/2018 at 11:03 PM, Raleel said:

wasn't there one ranged weapon that went through the shield in the movie?

A slow moving one

[Algesan]

On 8/2/2018 at 11:25 AM, g33k said:

IIRC, the "hunter-seeker" was inside a bedroom, and no Shield was present.  We don't know if a Shield would have been relevant or not.

IIRC, a shield would have slowed it down, but in the small room, even trying to activate the shield would have drawn the attention of the operator and allowed for a strike.

 

On 8/1/2018 at 2:30 AM, TrippyHippy said:

You said: 

You also said: 

All of which are entirely contentious, and make incorrect uses of the word 'generic'.

Just because a generic game like D&D references Tolkien does not make the original source generic in a reciprocal fashion. And no, if you were playing D&D, the tropes are different to that of Middle Earth - in terms of magic use, for example. You can use a generic system to run anything you like - agreed! - but that was not the point you were saying. Indeed, you continue to confuse an authors' set of influences when writing an original work as meaning same thing as 'generic'. It doesn't. George RR Martin's Game of Thrones series draws inspiration and influence from Tolkien's work, but neither of them are 'generic'. Moreover, you are using the term in a somewhat derogatory fashion without giving credit due to original qualities of these works.

Indeed, your interpretation of Dune seems very broad stroke too - generic science fiction does not consider the effects of spice, or the Bene Gesserat, or the Mentat, or the specific applications of technology, or the ecological themes, or the worms, and so on. Dune remains a pretty unique experience in science fiction literature, which is not going to be authentically captured in a roleplaying game environment without significant research and careful consideration. 

You may not like licensed settings, and prefer to do things yourself, but the very point of this thread is that other people actually like straight adaptations for non-generic settings they like - in this case, Dune. 

 

You are merely quibbling here and being purposefully obtuse by misinterpreting my sentences or clarifications.  It isn't simple ignorance anymore after I've clarified several times to get past that issue with you, but you chose to disregard that and press on with this silliness.

Okay, if you really, really, really, really just have to have LOTR & Dune be "unique", "singular" and super-duper-alley-ooper-special above all other things, then go right ahead.  You win.

Edited August 5, 2018 by Algesan

[Raleel]

9 hours ago, Algesan said:

A slow moving one

watched it in the mean time. One of the Sardaukar shot Duncan through a shield using some kind of projectile. it did not appear to be slow until it hit the shield, then it kind of stuck on it and bored through. I'm assuming this is not in the book

[Richard S.]

34 minutes ago, Raleel said:

watched it in the mean time. One of the Sardaukar shot Duncan through a shield using some kind of projectile. it did not appear to be slow until it hit the shield, then it kind of stuck on it and bored through. I'm assuming this is not in the book

Could be a special form of slow pellet gun (I think that's what they called the projectiles in the book). Shields are calibrated to stop anything moving above a certain speed, which makes traditional firearms useless, but offers no protection against slower strikes and lasguns (which have the unfortunate side-effect of causing a nuclear explosion on contact with a shield).

[TrippyHippy]

13 hours ago, Algesan said:

You are merely quibbling here and being purposefully obtuse by misinterpreting my sentences or clarifications.  It isn't simple ignorance anymore after I've clarified several times to get past that issue with you, but you chose to disregard that and press on with this silliness.

Okay, if you really, really, really, really just have to have LOTR & Dune be "unique", "singular" and super-duper-alley-ooper-special above all other things, then go right ahead.  You win.

I don't "win" anything for pointing out you are incorrect. The rest of your post is merely an expression of frustration and an inabilty to except that fact in good grace.

Edited August 6, 2018 by TrippyHippy

[Atgxtg]

On 7/31/2018 at 10:50 PM, Algesan said:

Other than the specific bits that make them special and different for the purpose of the author's story, the major elements of both LOTR and Dune fit into the generic genres I've noted.  Of course Tolkien did not write a copy of Homer's Odyssey, but one of the genres you can place both LOTR & the Odyssey are in that of the epic and they are both quests (or journeys), which is what I was intending to state.

Both Tolkien and Frank Herbert borrowed heavily from multiple sources for their various books, this is true for all literature...heck, for everything.  There is nothing new under the sun. 

Yes, plus early RPGs borrowed heavily from them. So, ultimately, they have a lot in common with generic Fantasy and generic Sci-Fi because they were sources that such games went to. Especially Tolkien. Prior to RQ, virtually every FRPG was Middle Earth with some tweaks, subtractions, and additions.  That's why so many Fantasy RPGs have orcs and haflings. 

[Atgxtg]

On 7/28/2018 at 7:44 AM, Rick Meints said:

While I can't say I know a large number of them personally, there are dozens of serious collectors who are willing to pay hundreds or thousands of dollars for specific rare RPG items. They are only interested in the original physical item, preferably in mint condition, or as near to it as they can find. If you want to see such RPG collectors discussing their hobby, take a look at www.acaeum.com and you'll see precisely that. They even have an annual dinner at Gen Con. Some of these people have RPG collections worth tens of thousands of dollars. 

Like any other "collectable", prices are strictly based on scarcity and desire. While most people would scoff at paying $1,000 for a crudely printed RPG item, there are some who would. 

Wow! I love my old RPG stuff, that's why I have boxes and boxes of it -but to think that some people would actually pay thousands of dollars for some of it. Wow. I don't want to sell any of it, but there would be a certain satisfaction to emailing my mother the receipts for the stuff that I "threw good money away on" back in the 80s. I might just check and see what I got multiple copies off.

[Algesan]

On 8/6/2018 at 5:22 PM, Atgxtg said:

Yes, plus early RPGs borrowed heavily from them. So, ultimately, they have a lot in common with generic Fantasy and generic Sci-Fi because they were sources that such games went to. Especially Tolkien. Prior to RQ, virtually every FRPG was Middle Earth with some tweaks, subtractions, and additions.  That's why so many Fantasy RPGs have orcs and haflings. 

Part of what makes it amusing is that elves, dwarves, halflings, fairies, pixies, brownies, goblins, leprechauns, etc. are quite possible different names for the same thing instead of the modern distinct "races" that are currently used.  The different names are simply those used in different small areas, but probably related to the same source.

Orcs are interesting and I think morphed through Tolkien's works.  The word origin points more towards Ogres and comes from Orcus, a Roman diety of the underworld.  This also makes more sense when you consider that Tolkien always linked his Ogres to giants in the sparse references and also that in the Hobbit, the party was captured by Goblins and the only mention there of Orcs was "the great Orcs" and gives the impression that they are bigger and nastier Goblins.   IMO, he originally was just using a fancy name for ogres and then as time went on (and the idea of Orcs = corrupted Elves) he discarded the Goblins for the Orcs and ignored the entire issue.

[Atgxtg]

Just now, Algesan said:

Part of what makes it amusing is that elves, dwarves, halflings, fairies, pixies, brownies, goblins, leprechauns, etc. are quite possible different names for the same thing instead of the modern distinct "races" that are currently used.  The different names are simply those used in different small areas, but probably related to the same source.

Yup. Both in real life and in Tolkien's works.

Tolkien even addressed that, mentioning that,  in Middle Earth,  orc and goblin refer to the same thing, with goblin being used in the Hobbit mostly to make them more accessible to children. Goblin was a word that children might have encountered before and have some understanding of, while orc was a more oscure word that, even if know, referred to something else.Likewise, Tolkien mentioned that Ent  is an old word for Giant, not a different type of creature. With LOTR being aimed at  more adult readers, Tolkien  felt that he could use more of his Middle Earth languages instead of more modern, well known words. 

In real life it gets even more confusing, since legendary creatures are far more nebulous, not as well defined as we'd like for an RPG, vary in abilities and characteristics by region,.  and could have been mixed up with something else when translated into another language or for another region (a mix of "monster syncretism"  and lost in translation). You can often find the same stories told with "different" monsters. Grendel being a great poster child. Is he a Druagar, troll, giant, orge, demonic spirit in humanoid form (orc)? Well, yes, depending on which source you read and how it was translated/interpreted. Plus, historically, they are all basically the same thing. It's only gaming that makes a distinction between them, or even needs such a distinction. In a story, it probably doesn't matter if the heros have to fight five orcs or five giants. In a RPG context it does. 

RQ3: Vikings even addressed this, even going so far as to note alternate names for various RQ: Viking creatures. 

Just now, Algesan said:

Orcs are interesting and I think morphed through Tolkien's works.  The word origin points more towards Ogres and comes from Orcus, a Roman diety of the underworld.  This also makes more sense when you consider that Tolkien always linked his Ogres to giants in the sparse references and also that in the Hobbit, the party was captured by Goblins and the only mention there of Orcs was "the great Orcs" and gives the impression that they are bigger and nastier Goblins. 

Not quite. There is the sword Orcist. Tolkien already had his Elvish languages, inclduing the word "orc". He just decided yo go with something more well known "goblin" as the  Hobbit was a Children's book. Goblin is also a bit more of a "G-rated" monster, having been toned down over the years. 

Just now, Algesan said:

  IMO, he originally was just using a fancy name for ogres and then as time went on (and the idea of Orcs = corrupted Elves) he discarded the Goblins for the Orcs and ignored the entire issue.

He already had orcs worked up in his notes , that became  the Silmarillion. He even notes that Man-Orc and Elf are really all the same species (that's why they can interbreed). You basically have Man, man in a "state of grace" and man that has been corrupted).  Much like how Trolls in LOTR are corrupted (Gi)Ents). But Orc and goblin in Tolkien are interchangeable, at least initially.  The same is probably true with his Half-Orcs and his HobGoblins. It gets more cofusing with the interbreeding and the ability of Maiar (supermnatural spirits) to take a physical form.

But most of the humanoid monsters in LOTR are really just a mix of man, (gi)ent,  embodied spirit (maiar) , and divine grace or corruption.  

[soltakss]

On 8/3/2018 at 1:14 AM, TrippyHippy said:

While I can appreciate the attempt to diplomatically moderate

Just like to point out that I am not a moderator, Lord, nobody would ever trust me to do something as sensitive as that.

[Atgxtg]

6 minutes ago, soltakss said:

Just like to point out that I am not a moderator, Lord, nobody would ever trust me to do something as sensitive as that.

I might, you're usually level headed and fair. Every so often you do something that causes a bit of unrest, but when that happens you are almost always blindsided by something, and, once on the same page, are usually level headed and fair. If you were a moderator, I suspect that your sense of responsibility as a moderator would probably make your a tad more careful about your posts, too.

 

Yeah, a forum could could do worse.

[soltakss]

2 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

If you were a moderator, I suspect that your sense of responsibility as a moderator would probably make your a tad more careful about your posts, too.

Highly unlikely ...