Forums of the Megaverse®

Subjugator wrote:I've not heard him say so, but I'll bet you the Palladium book of your choice (that's under current publication at the time of bet fulfillment) that he'd back up Nightmask and not you.

I accept.

I have had Kevin say to me that the Coalition does not have some special plot immunity. I'm willing to bet you any book of your choice that it is not untouchable. As you yourself said, Kevin is dedicated to what makes the best story. It just happens (that whether some people agree or not) the best story was for Tolkeen to fall. It gives the most story opportunities. Likewise, Tolkeen wasn't erased from the city. Most of them are in Lazlo now (hence the higher crime rate as per R:UE). There are plenty of people from Tolkeen still alive and within the setting. Its just now they are a stateless nation.

Akashic Soldier wrote:

Subjugator wrote:I've not heard him say so, but I'll bet you the Palladium book of your choice (that's under current publication at the time of bet fulfillment) that he'd back up Nightmask and not you.

I accept.

I have had Kevin say to me that the Coalition does not have some special plot immunity. I'm willing to bet you any book of your choice that it is not untouchable. As you yourself said, Kevin is dedicated to what makes the best story. It just happens (that whether some people agree or not) the best story was for Tolkeen to fall. It gives the most story opportunities. Likewise, Tolkeen wasn't erased from the city. Most of them are in Lazlo now (hence the higher crime rate as per R:UE). There are plenty of people from Tolkeen still alive and within the setting. Its just now they are a stateless nation.

No it does not have the best story opportunities. Yes it has story opportunities but whether they are the best ones or not is subjective. And really Killing Tolkeen actually limits a WHOLE bunch of potential good stories. Killing Tolkeen opens one set of stories and kills another set of stories. Leaving the Canon back at 105 leaves both sets of stories as viable. Moving the time line forward makes one set of stories easier and the other set of stories more difficult and more work to run. I would rather Game companies show potential stories. And by showing potential stories i mean showing both sides of a conflict. IE show what would happen if Tolkeen won as well as if Tolkeen lost. That is FAR more useful to a GM as it allows them to more easily pick the option that fits their story. But really game companies should not be picking winners or losers in the game. That is what Novelists do.

Daeglan wrote:No it does not have the best story opportunities. Yes it has story opportunities but whether they are the best ones or not is subjective. And really Killing Tolkeen actually limits a WHOLE bunch of potential good stories. Killing Tolkeen opens one set of stories and kills another set of stories. Leaving the Canon back at 105 leaves both sets of stories as viable. Moving the time line forward makes one set of stories easier and the other set of stories more difficult and more work to run. I would rather Game companies show potential stories. And by showing potential stories i mean showing both sides of a conflict. IE show what would happen if Tolkeen won as well as if Tolkeen lost. That is FAR more useful to a GM as it allows them to more easily pick the option that fits their story. But really game companies should not be picking winners or losers in the game. That is what Novelists do.

*Reevaluates his opinion*
*Flips through two of the SoT books on his desk*

Nope. This war gives me more story hooks; story hooks I can run during the war and story hooks that I can run following the war. Besides, essentially Tolkeen is redundant. Any "Tolkeen" story I can either tell before or during the SoT.

Afterwhich I am left with a lot of potential Tolkeen revenge stories or those involving the refugees impact on Lazlo... or the CS trying to tame the magical city! Heck, on top of that, I can either use the Federation or Magic or Lazlo if I want to run "questionable magic empire" or "peace-loving magic empire" stories.

I do not agree with your assessment of the situation at all.

Akashic Soldier wrote:

Daeglan wrote:No it does not have the best story opportunities. Yes it has story opportunities but whether they are the best ones or not is subjective. And really Killing Tolkeen actually limits a WHOLE bunch of potential good stories. Killing Tolkeen opens one set of stories and kills another set of stories. Leaving the Canon back at 105 leaves both sets of stories as viable. Moving the time line forward makes one set of stories easier and the other set of stories more difficult and more work to run. I would rather Game companies show potential stories. And by showing potential stories i mean showing both sides of a conflict. IE show what would happen if Tolkeen won as well as if Tolkeen lost. That is FAR more useful to a GM as it allows them to more easily pick the option that fits their story. But really game companies should not be picking winners or losers in the game. That is what Novelists do.

*Reevaluates his opinion*
*Flips through two of the SoT books on his desk*

Nope. This war gives me more story hooks; story hooks I can run during the war and story hooks that I can run following the war. Besides, essentially Tolkeen is redundant. Any "Tolkeen" story I can either tell before or during the SoT.

Afterwhich I am left with a lot of potential Tolkeen revenge stories or those involving the refugees impact on Lazlo... or the CS trying to tame the magical city! Heck, on top of that, I can either use the Federation or Magic or Lazlo if I want to run "questionable magic empire" or "peace-loving magic empire" stories.

I do not agree with your assessment of the situation at all.

You don't think there are just as many stories to be told about the CS getting their face smashed in, then picking themselves back up? Or a new tech state with a different out look rising from the ashes?

Akashic Soldier wrote:

Daeglan wrote:No it does not have the best story opportunities. Yes it has story opportunities but whether they are the best ones or not is subjective. And really Killing Tolkeen actually limits a WHOLE bunch of potential good stories. Killing Tolkeen opens one set of stories and kills another set of stories. Leaving the Canon back at 105 leaves both sets of stories as viable. Moving the time line forward makes one set of stories easier and the other set of stories more difficult and more work to run. I would rather Game companies show potential stories. And by showing potential stories i mean showing both sides of a conflict. IE show what would happen if Tolkeen won as well as if Tolkeen lost. That is FAR more useful to a GM as it allows them to more easily pick the option that fits their story. But really game companies should not be picking winners or losers in the game. That is what Novelists do.

*Reevaluates his opinion*
*Flips through two of the SoT books on his desk*

Nope. This war gives me more story hooks; story hooks I can run during the war and story hooks that I can run following the war. Besides, essentially Tolkeen is redundant. Any "Tolkeen" story I can either tell before or during the SoT.

Afterwhich I am left with a lot of potential Tolkeen revenge stories or those involving the refugees impact on Lazlo... or the CS trying to tame the magical city! Heck, on top of that, I can either use the Federation or Magic or Lazlo if I want to run "questionable magic empire" or "peace-loving magic empire" stories.

I do not agree with your assessment of the situation at all.

Just because Palladium happened to publish a bunch or story hooks for one option does not negate all the potential stories the other option has.

I have a challenge for you. Go through ALL of those hooks you are talking about. Flip it from Tolkeen losing to Tolkeen winning and look at them from that perspective. I bet you could come up with just as many hooks and stories with the other ultimate outcome. And that is just by taking those existing hooks and flipping them on their head. Spend a few minutes thinking about what the results of Tolkeen winning would be and I am sure you could come up with all sorts of story ideas. Publishing an outcome dos not make that out come better.

Galroth wrote:

Akashic Soldier wrote:

Daeglan wrote:No it does not have the best story opportunities. Yes it has story opportunities but whether they are the best ones or not is subjective. And really Killing Tolkeen actually limits a WHOLE bunch of potential good stories. Killing Tolkeen opens one set of stories and kills another set of stories. Leaving the Canon back at 105 leaves both sets of stories as viable. Moving the time line forward makes one set of stories easier and the other set of stories more difficult and more work to run. I would rather Game companies show potential stories. And by showing potential stories i mean showing both sides of a conflict. IE show what would happen if Tolkeen won as well as if Tolkeen lost. That is FAR more useful to a GM as it allows them to more easily pick the option that fits their story. But really game companies should not be picking winners or losers in the game. That is what Novelists do.

*Reevaluates his opinion*
*Flips through two of the SoT books on his desk*

Nope. This war gives me more story hooks; story hooks I can run during the war and story hooks that I can run following the war. Besides, essentially Tolkeen is redundant. Any "Tolkeen" story I can either tell before or during the SoT.

Afterwhich I am left with a lot of potential Tolkeen revenge stories or those involving the refugees impact on Lazlo... or the CS trying to tame the magical city! Heck, on top of that, I can either use the Federation or Magic or Lazlo if I want to run "questionable magic empire" or "peace-loving magic empire" stories.

I do not agree with your assessment of the situation at all.

You don't think there are just as many stories to be told about the CS getting their face smashed in, then picking themselves back up? Or a new tech state with a different out look rising from the ashes?

You could, but those stories wouldn't make any sense with the setting as presented, sinse there's no way a tiny nation like tolkeen could put up the fight it did. honestly, with crap like the TW Iron Juggernauts and all the other gear palladium pulled out of nowhere to give to tolkeen, as well as new spells to make them able to resist artillery/nuclear bombardment, the only reason that tolkeen put up as much fight as it did was writers fiat.

Seriously, to anyone who says the only reason the CS won was because it was protected by Writers Fiat, I challange them to show a way for tolkeen to win without all of the new spells/equipment/TW gear that was printed in the SoT books...that only exist because of writers fiat.

Bear in mind, find a way for them to win when the opening attempt was a nuclear strike.

Without the Swollowing Rift spell, that came into exsitance ONLY to give Tolkeen plot immunity from nuclear strikes, they lose right away.

Nekira Sudacne wrote:

Galroth wrote:

Akashic Soldier wrote:

Daeglan wrote:No it does not have the best story opportunities. Yes it has story opportunities but whether they are the best ones or not is subjective. And really Killing Tolkeen actually limits a WHOLE bunch of potential good stories. Killing Tolkeen opens one set of stories and kills another set of stories. Leaving the Canon back at 105 leaves both sets of stories as viable. Moving the time line forward makes one set of stories easier and the other set of stories more difficult and more work to run. I would rather Game companies show potential stories. And by showing potential stories i mean showing both sides of a conflict. IE show what would happen if Tolkeen won as well as if Tolkeen lost. That is FAR more useful to a GM as it allows them to more easily pick the option that fits their story. But really game companies should not be picking winners or losers in the game. That is what Novelists do.

*Reevaluates his opinion*
*Flips through two of the SoT books on his desk*

Nope. This war gives me more story hooks; story hooks I can run during the war and story hooks that I can run following the war. Besides, essentially Tolkeen is redundant. Any "Tolkeen" story I can either tell before or during the SoT.

Afterwhich I am left with a lot of potential Tolkeen revenge stories or those involving the refugees impact on Lazlo... or the CS trying to tame the magical city! Heck, on top of that, I can either use the Federation or Magic or Lazlo if I want to run "questionable magic empire" or "peace-loving magic empire" stories.

I do not agree with your assessment of the situation at all.

You don't think there are just as many stories to be told about the CS getting their face smashed in, then picking themselves back up? Or a new tech state with a different out look rising from the ashes?

You could, but those stories wouldn't make any sense with the setting as presented, sinse there's no way a tiny nation like tolkeen could put up the fight it did. honestly, with crap like the TW Iron Juggernauts and all the other gear palladium pulled out of nowhere to give to tolkeen, as well as new spells to make them able to resist artillery/nuclear bombardment, the only reason that tolkeen put up as much fight as it did was writers fiat.

Seriously, to anyone who says the only reason the CS won was because it was protected by Writers Fiat, I challange them to show a way for tolkeen to win without all of the new spells/equipment/TW gear that was printed in the SoT books...that only exist because of writers fiat.

Bear in mind, find a way for them to win when the opening attempt was a nuclear strike.

Without the Swollowing Rift spell, that came into exsitance ONLY to give Tolkeen plot immunity from nuclear strikes, they lose right away.

So wait, the CS is allowed to have 'Coalition War Campaign', getting to develop entirely new weapons and technology as a lead-in to the war but Tolkeen is to be denied any option of having done its own military build-up in defense of its nation when it's had a hostile nation nearby (relatively speaking) for enough decades they'd have had to be welded to a forest of idiot balls to have NOT developed at least something new in preparation of the inevitable battle?

Sorry but no, just because they were revealed during the Siege Of Tolkeen books does not make it 'writer's fiat' with them just having a bunch of things appearing from nowhere to have them put up a good fight before the writer's fiat of their certain destruction because 'failure is the only option'. There was no reason until the war to reveal the actual troops and weapons of Tolkeen's army, just as they brought out the new CS stuff just before going into the war.

Daeglan wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:

Nekira Sudacne wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:Every setting has meta-plot it is inescapable.
Unless the game is settingless there will be meta-plot.

Ninjas and Superspys dosn't have metaplot.

GURPS has many optional settings but no metaplot in many of them

Nightbane has no metaplot.

The Valley of the Pharoahs (an olllld palladium product from before the megaversal system) had no metaplot

So....yea. it's completely possible to have a setting with no metaplot

N&SS is settingless...
Gurps itself is settingless (but its settings have built in metaplot)
NB has no MP? what do you call all the NL's plots to conquer the world? Let alone each new book advances the SL a little more each time...
Valley of the Pharoahs... I have no knowledge of this game...

The GURPS Settings do not have meta plot. They haveNPCs with goals etc. But the story never advances because they leave that to the GM.
Having plots to conquer the world but never having those plots advance means no metaplot just a fleshed out characters that have goals and plans.

Gurps settings have no meta plot?
Gurps settings I am familiar with...
Horseclans... Based on a book series that covers over 1000 years (yeah no meta-plot there...)
The Highlander... (yeah no meta-plot there either)
I could go on but this proves my point.

Nightmask wrote:

Nekira Sudacne wrote:

Galroth wrote:

Akashic Soldier wrote:

Daeglan wrote:No it does not have the best story opportunities. Yes it has story opportunities but whether they are the best ones or not is subjective. And really Killing Tolkeen actually limits a WHOLE bunch of potential good stories. Killing Tolkeen opens one set of stories and kills another set of stories. Leaving the Canon back at 105 leaves both sets of stories as viable. Moving the time line forward makes one set of stories easier and the other set of stories more difficult and more work to run. I would rather Game companies show potential stories. And by showing potential stories i mean showing both sides of a conflict. IE show what would happen if Tolkeen won as well as if Tolkeen lost. That is FAR more useful to a GM as it allows them to more easily pick the option that fits their story. But really game companies should not be picking winners or losers in the game. That is what Novelists do.

*Reevaluates his opinion*
*Flips through two of the SoT books on his desk*

Nope. This war gives me more story hooks; story hooks I can run during the war and story hooks that I can run following the war. Besides, essentially Tolkeen is redundant. Any "Tolkeen" story I can either tell before or during the SoT.

Afterwhich I am left with a lot of potential Tolkeen revenge stories or those involving the refugees impact on Lazlo... or the CS trying to tame the magical city! Heck, on top of that, I can either use the Federation or Magic or Lazlo if I want to run "questionable magic empire" or "peace-loving magic empire" stories.

I do not agree with your assessment of the situation at all.

You don't think there are just as many stories to be told about the CS getting their face smashed in, then picking themselves back up? Or a new tech state with a different out look rising from the ashes?

You could, but those stories wouldn't make any sense with the setting as presented, sinse there's no way a tiny nation like tolkeen could put up the fight it did. honestly, with crap like the TW Iron Juggernauts and all the other gear palladium pulled out of nowhere to give to tolkeen, as well as new spells to make them able to resist artillery/nuclear bombardment, the only reason that tolkeen put up as much fight as it did was writers fiat.

Seriously, to anyone who says the only reason the CS won was because it was protected by Writers Fiat, I challange them to show a way for tolkeen to win without all of the new spells/equipment/TW gear that was printed in the SoT books...that only exist because of writers fiat.

Bear in mind, find a way for them to win when the opening attempt was a nuclear strike.

Without the Swollowing Rift spell, that came into exsitance ONLY to give Tolkeen plot immunity from nuclear strikes, they lose right away.

So wait, the CS is allowed to have 'Coalition War Campaign', getting to develop entirely new weapons and technology as a lead-in to the war but Tolkeen is to be denied any option of having done its own military build-up in defense of its nation when it's had a hostile nation nearby (relatively speaking) for enough decades they'd have had to be welded to a forest of idiot balls to have NOT developed at least something new in preparation of the inevitable battle?

Sorry but no, just because they were revealed during the Siege Of Tolkeen books does not make it 'writer's fiat' with them just having a bunch of things appearing from nowhere to have them put up a good fight before the writer's fiat of their certain destruction because 'failure is the only option'. There was no reason until the war to reveal the actual troops and weapons of Tolkeen's army, just as they brought out the new CS stuff just before going into the war.

Allright. I'll take out all the stuff in Coalition War Campaign if you take out all the Seige on Tolkeen stuff. for both sides.

CS still wins

It's writers fiat both ways. That's my point

How much MDC does a super nuke have?

How about the ICE Middle Earth system, and the Loremaster system. Both had scores of books, that never moved the timeline, there was a 'meta plot' if you call the basic history of the world...but it was the same history in every book...

Nekira Sudacne wrote:

Galroth wrote:

Akashic Soldier wrote:

Daeglan wrote:No it does not have the best story opportunities. Yes it has story opportunities but whether they are the best ones or not is subjective. And really Killing Tolkeen actually limits a WHOLE bunch of potential good stories. Killing Tolkeen opens one set of stories and kills another set of stories. Leaving the Canon back at 105 leaves both sets of stories as viable. Moving the time line forward makes one set of stories easier and the other set of stories more difficult and more work to run. I would rather Game companies show potential stories. And by showing potential stories i mean showing both sides of a conflict. IE show what would happen if Tolkeen won as well as if Tolkeen lost. That is FAR more useful to a GM as it allows them to more easily pick the option that fits their story. But really game companies should not be picking winners or losers in the game. That is what Novelists do.

*Reevaluates his opinion*
*Flips through two of the SoT books on his desk*

Nope. This war gives me more story hooks; story hooks I can run during the war and story hooks that I can run following the war. Besides, essentially Tolkeen is redundant. Any "Tolkeen" story I can either tell before or during the SoT.

Afterwhich I am left with a lot of potential Tolkeen revenge stories or those involving the refugees impact on Lazlo... or the CS trying to tame the magical city! Heck, on top of that, I can either use the Federation or Magic or Lazlo if I want to run "questionable magic empire" or "peace-loving magic empire" stories.

I do not agree with your assessment of the situation at all.

You don't think there are just as many stories to be told about the CS getting their face smashed in, then picking themselves back up? Or a new tech state with a different out look rising from the ashes?

You could, but those stories wouldn't make any sense with the setting as presented, sinse there's no way a tiny nation like tolkeen could put up the fight it did. honestly, with crap like the TW Iron Juggernauts and all the other gear palladium pulled out of nowhere to give to tolkeen, as well as new spells to make them able to resist artillery/nuclear bombardment, the only reason that tolkeen put up as much fight as it did was writers fiat.

Seriously, to anyone who says the only reason the CS won was because it was protected by Writers Fiat, I challange them to show a way for tolkeen to win without all of the new spells/equipment/TW gear that was printed in the SoT books...that only exist because of writers fiat.

Bear in mind, find a way for them to win when the opening attempt was a nuclear strike.

Without the Swollowing Rift spell, that came into exsitance ONLY to give Tolkeen plot immunity from nuclear strikes, they lose right away.

How Tolkeen could win...
The Vampire Intelligences start pushing the wild vampires north giving the Coalition solid prof of the vampire problem. A big enough push and this becomes a extremely serious problem. Enough of one that the Coalition would start shifting their focus. A strong strike during this shift in stance can have a major effect.
That division that went through Xiticicks territory getting eaten like they would have would also have a big effect.

The Splugorth step up their slaving striking deeper inland hitting a few coalition towns.

The Federation of Magic, Lazlo reinforcing Tolkeen. Most likely The Federation attacking while the Coalition is moving troops to attack Tolkeen. And Lazlo flanking the Coalition. This is one of the problems with the Siege of Tolkeen. Why did none of their allies help?

Daeglan wrote:

Nekira Sudacne wrote:

Galroth wrote:

Akashic Soldier wrote:

Daeglan wrote:No it does not have the best story opportunities. Yes it has story opportunities but whether they are the best ones or not is subjective. And really Killing Tolkeen actually limits a WHOLE bunch of potential good stories. Killing Tolkeen opens one set of stories and kills another set of stories. Leaving the Canon back at 105 leaves both sets of stories as viable. Moving the time line forward makes one set of stories easier and the other set of stories more difficult and more work to run. I would rather Game companies show potential stories. And by showing potential stories i mean showing both sides of a conflict. IE show what would happen if Tolkeen won as well as if Tolkeen lost. That is FAR more useful to a GM as it allows them to more easily pick the option that fits their story. But really game companies should not be picking winners or losers in the game. That is what Novelists do.

*Reevaluates his opinion*
*Flips through two of the SoT books on his desk*

Nope. This war gives me more story hooks; story hooks I can run during the war and story hooks that I can run following the war. Besides, essentially Tolkeen is redundant. Any "Tolkeen" story I can either tell before or during the SoT.

Afterwhich I am left with a lot of potential Tolkeen revenge stories or those involving the refugees impact on Lazlo... or the CS trying to tame the magical city! Heck, on top of that, I can either use the Federation or Magic or Lazlo if I want to run "questionable magic empire" or "peace-loving magic empire" stories.

I do not agree with your assessment of the situation at all.

You don't think there are just as many stories to be told about the CS getting their face smashed in, then picking themselves back up? Or a new tech state with a different out look rising from the ashes?

You could, but those stories wouldn't make any sense with the setting as presented, sinse there's no way a tiny nation like tolkeen could put up the fight it did. honestly, with crap like the TW Iron Juggernauts and all the other gear palladium pulled out of nowhere to give to tolkeen, as well as new spells to make them able to resist artillery/nuclear bombardment, the only reason that tolkeen put up as much fight as it did was writers fiat.

Seriously, to anyone who says the only reason the CS won was because it was protected by Writers Fiat, I challange them to show a way for tolkeen to win without all of the new spells/equipment/TW gear that was printed in the SoT books...that only exist because of writers fiat.

Bear in mind, find a way for them to win when the opening attempt was a nuclear strike.

Without the Swollowing Rift spell, that came into exsitance ONLY to give Tolkeen plot immunity from nuclear strikes, they lose right away.

How Tolkeen could win...
The Vampire Intelligences start pushing the wild vampires north giving the Coalition solid prof of the vampire problem. A big enough push and this becomes a extremely serious problem. Enough of one that the Coalition would start shifting their focus. A strong strike during this shift in stance can have a major effect.
That division that went through Xiticicks territory getting eaten like they would have would also have a big effect.

The Splugorth step up their slaving striking deeper inland hitting a few coalition towns.

The Federation of Magic, Lazlo reinforcing Tolkeen. Most likely The Federation attacking while the Coalition is moving troops to attack Tolkeen. And Lazlo flanking the Coalition. This is one of the problems with the Siege of Tolkeen. Why did none of their allies help?

Thank you for proving my point. The only way for Tolkeen to win is for someone else to win for them, by distracting the CS.

But honestly, it's irrelevent. the power levels of everything is writers fiat.

The CS is as strong/weak as it is because of writers fiat.
Tolkeen is as strong/weak as it is due to writers fiat.
The Federation of Magic is as strong/weak as it is due to writers fiat.
Free Qubec is as strong/weak as it is because of writers fiat.
The Mantisique Imperium is as strong/weak as it is because of writers fiat.
Atlantis is as strong/weak as it is because of writers fiat.

It's all writers fiat.

One winning/losing to another is all writers fiat because kevin alone chooses how strong/weak ANY faction is.

So to say one side has "plot protection" is silly. Unless he wants to claim every nation on earth is exactly equal in power, by that logic, making any faction weaker than another is "plot protection" for the stronger factions. If only he didn't make it so weak, it could beat the others!

On the Tolkeen War...
When the books were first released...
Did any one really believe that Tolkeen was going to win?
Rule one of writing... If you kill the BB you are unemployed.

Damian Magecraft wrote:On the Tolkeen War...
When the books were first released...
Did any one really believe that Tolkeen was going to win?
Rule one of writing... If you kill the BB you are unemployed.

Who the BB is depends on who you ask. There are more than a few posters here that would probably say the CS is the hero, not the villain of this story.

Galroth wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:On the Tolkeen War...
When the books were first released...
Did any one really believe that Tolkeen was going to win?
Rule one of writing... If you kill the BB you are unemployed.

Who the BB is depends on who you ask. There are more than a few posters here that would probably say the CS is the hero, not the villain of this story.

There are a few.
Key word being "few," as in "not many."

Other than the die-hard CS fans, does anybody really believe that the CS are the heroes of the setting?

Ninjabunny wrote:I see them neither as hero nor villain.

This.

Although they are the greatest hope for Americans reclaiming North America, they are also "The State" which is primary source of dehumanization throughout history. So even if they succeeded, at what cost?

Lost Seraph wrote:If there are any heroic Americans around, it's the New Navy. Not the CS hypocrites who wouldn't know freedom if it bit them in the rear, nor the Republicans who still haven't gotten the message that D-bees and magic are here to stay. Executing or placing anyone in prison who disagrees with you sure isn't heroic. Summoning up demons to crush your enemies without any form of control or cursing an entire civilization's food supply isn't heroic either. Tolkeen lost the moral high ground after responding to the Coaliton's plans on genocide, as did the Coalition. I've played both sides of the CS/non-CS games, and the CS troopers eventually ended up coming over to tolerate alternate views and people.

From an idealistic point of view I agree with you. From a practical one I disagree but I think everyone already knows where I stand on this topic.

Short version: An invasive species is an invasive species. Sure, not all of them are like the Xix, but in a world where wishes come true and your neighbor's angry teenage kid can beat someone to death with an SUV because he drank too much, the world will never be a "safe place" for humanity.

Akashic Soldier wrote:

Lost Seraph wrote:If there are any heroic Americans around, it's the New Navy. Not the CS hypocrites who wouldn't know freedom if it bit them in the rear, nor the Republicans who still haven't gotten the message that D-bees and magic are here to stay. Executing or placing anyone in prison who disagrees with you sure isn't heroic. Summoning up demons to crush your enemies without any form of control or cursing an entire civilization's food supply isn't heroic either. Tolkeen lost the moral high ground after responding to the Coaliton's plans on genocide, as did the Coalition. I've played both sides of the CS/non-CS games, and the CS troopers eventually ended up coming over to tolerate alternate views and people.

From an idealistic point of view I agree with you. From a practical one I disagree but I think everyone already knows where I stand on this topic.

Short version: An invasive species is an invasive species. Sure, not all of them are like the Xix, but in a world where wishes come true and your neighbor's angry teenage kid can beat someone to death with an SUV because he drank too much, the world will never be a "safe place" for humanity.

By that logic the world already isn't a safe place for humanity. Kids get drnk, high or just angry and kill other kids and even adults all the time. Exterminating an intelligent, non-supernaturally evil race because of something that might happen is dumb.

Galroth wrote:By that logic the world already isn't a safe place for humanity. Kids get drnk, high or just angry and kill other kids and even adults all the time. Exterminating an intelligent, non-supernaturally evil race because of something that might happen is dumb.

Go read the Vanguard Brawler (are you familiar with it?)
Its in D-Bee's of North America. After you've given it a gander I'll make my point (without reference there is no way I can give you perspective).

I don't have Dbees of North America.

Galroth wrote:I don't have Dbees of North America.

Okay, ummm... *scratches his chin*

What D-Bees are you familiar with? What books do you have with D-Bees in them that standout to you?

Conversion 1 has a lot of Dbees. Still though, if the species as a whole isn't evil, killing them because of something that could happen seems evil. If alcohol is the problem restricting that seems like a better solution than genocide.

Galroth wrote:Conversion 1 has a lot of Dbees. Still though, if the species as a whole isn't evil, killing them because of something that could happen seems evil. If alcohol is the problem restricting that seems like a better solution than genocide.

I totally agree. The problem isn't even alcohol as much as it is their power and how difficult they are to control. Most of these D-Bees come from their own worlds and have to deal with their own problems. On Earth (especially if we recivilize it) we're going to find that their "thinking" and racial dispositions are not REALLY always going to be compatible with "human" society as we know it today. It might not seem like much but in the long term it'd be a real problem. It would be like human's trying to civilize chimpanzees in a lot of way. By which I mean Chimps that were as intelligent as humans. They're still going--

Wait, perfect example. Do you have Lonestar by any chance man?

Haha, nope. This probably deserves its own thread though.

Galroth wrote:Haha, nope. This probably deserves its own thread though.

I agree.

Akashic Soldier wrote:

Subjugator wrote:I've not heard him say so, but I'll bet you the Palladium book of your choice (that's under current publication at the time of bet fulfillment) that he'd back up Nightmask and not you.

I accept.

I have had Kevin say to me that the Coalition does not have some special plot immunity. I'm willing to bet you any book of your choice that it is not untouchable. As you yourself said, Kevin is dedicated to what makes the best story. It just happens (that whether some people agree or not) the best story was for Tolkeen to fall. It gives the most story opportunities. Likewise, Tolkeen wasn't erased from the city. Most of them are in Lazlo now (hence the higher crime rate as per R:UE). There are plenty of people from Tolkeen still alive and within the setting. Its just now they are a stateless nation.

I think I got people mixed up. I agree that the CS does not have plot immunity.

/Sub

Subjugator wrote:I think I got people mixed up. I agree that the CS does not have plot immunity.

/Sub

Oh! my apologies!

Hear is my 2 cents I like the RIFTS "meta plot" for the most part I honestly can't think of any thing that I would change. Now that is not to say that I don't change things about the game as I see fit but the "meta plot" just dose not bother me if they write something latter that bothers me I will just ignore it. The game setting of RIFTS is so huge that you should be able to find plenty of stuff to do and never touch the"meta plot " so in my opinion you should not get so worked up about it.

As for all the PB without metaplot and setting for the time being. Who knows in the future. IF N&SS would me more popular I would not be surprised to see it get some sort of metaplot. For better or worse rifts has metaplot and canon. Which the Kevin and the freelancers are free to do with as they will. At the need of the day no one is forced to use it. It goes back to not liking metaplot which is not imo a good enough reason not to include it in the books. So far I like what they have done and as Damian has said metaplot is inevitable. Eventually someone will want to write a product that has minor or major changes in the canon or metaplot. The only way to avoid that is by offering Kevin lots of money for the rifts ip. Rewritting a new edition with no plot from the ground up.

As for Sot. I don't hate it so much as the CS not getting a scratch. Evil mages = being stupidly overconfindent and a lack of commen sense. Allying with free quebec really. I would have prefered a big battle between the two winner takes all. With the CS battered yet the winner. As for CS plot immunity I'm in the camp that they do. Show me the Cs getting some major damage in later books then I will change my mind. As it is no they are popular and protected by fan popularity.

Meta plot is not inevitable. New World of darkness does not have it.

Sureshot wrote:As for all the PB without metaplot and setting for the time being. Who knows in the future. IF N&SS would me more popular I would not be surprised to see it get some sort of metaplot. For better or worse rifts has metaplot and canon. Which the Kevin and the freelancers are free to do with as they will. At the need of the day no one is forced to use it. It goes back to not liking metaplot which is not imo a good enough reason not to include it in the books. So far I like what they have done and as Damian has said metaplot is inevitable. Eventually someone will want to write a product that has minor or major changes in the canon or metaplot. The only way to avoid that is by offering Kevin lots of money for the rifts ip. Rewritting a new edition with no plot from the ground up.

As for Sot. I don't hate it so much as the CS not getting a scratch. Evil mages = being stupidly overconfindent and a lack of commen sense. Allying with free quebec really. I would have prefered a big battle between the two winner takes all. With the CS battered yet the winner. As for CS plot immunity I'm in the camp that they do. Show me the Cs getting some major damage in later books then I will change my mind. As it is no they are popular and protected by fan popularity.

Yes, no one is saying Palladium can't write metaplot, that dosn't explain how it's a good idea to do so.

There are several reasons why metaplot is useful:

1. It allows for a standardized advancement of the world history. Some don't like this, some do. In the case of games like the Deadlands card game, it worked beautifully and helped the world a LOT.
2. It allows the company to sell more books. While you may not view this as useful, it helps keep the company in business and producing more product for us. I for one am glad that Palladium remains in business (obviously).
3. It provides a springboard for the imaginations of those of us who are better at advancing pre-existing ideas than we are at creating new ones.
4. It prevents places from becoming comparatively stale. New events make new opportunities for adventure.

This isn't to say that they're guaranteed perfect or good for everyone. Those are items where meta-plot advancement helps the game for at least some of us.

/Sub

Why do we need advancement to be standardized?

Why do we need metaplot to sell more books? Seems like they sell a lot of world books just fine. I don't see the need for metaplot in these world book.

Why do you need meta plot as a spring board? You could provide all those spring boards with a few paragraphs talking about potential outcomes. IE if Tolkeen wins results would likely be x y z. If the coalition wins results are likely U T and W.

The GM provides the liveliness. Not metaplot.

Daeglan wrote:Meta plot is not inevitable. New World of darkness does not have it.

Because it was delibretaerly written from the ground up not to have metaplot. When your goal is to release sourcebooks with no metaplot of any kind of course its not going to have any. Rifts on the other hand was written with some metaplot imo from the start some has been developed and some has not. It was not written to be a game with no metaplot. Where old world of darkness at least towards the end seemed nothing but metaplot.

Nekira Sudacne wrote:Yes, no one is saying Palladium can't write metaplot, that dosn't explain how it's a good idea to do so.

So far yourself and those who dislike metaplot have not given any good reasons not include it. Beyond "I dont like it. Therefore everyone else must dislike. And PB cant include any metaplot in any of its rpgs because if it".

Sureshot wrote:

Nekira Sudacne wrote:Yes, no one is saying Palladium can't write metaplot, that dosn't explain how it's a good idea to do so.

So far yourself and those who dislike metaplot have not given any good reasons not include it. Beyond "I dont like it. Therefore everyone else must dislike. And PB cant include any metaplot in any of its rpgs because if it".

It limits the options of GMs. Now they have to worry about players saying but X and Y happened in book Z.

You can give people FAR more options by doing something more like hook line sinker type plots in lots of different directions than you can with metaplot.

Sureshot wrote:

Nekira Sudacne wrote:Yes, no one is saying Palladium can't write metaplot, that dosn't explain how it's a good idea to do so.

So far yourself and those who dislike metaplot have not given any good reasons not include it. Beyond "I dont like it. Therefore everyone else must dislike. And PB cant include any metaplot in any of its rpgs because if it".

Because it invalidates books I already own.

Because it guarantees that my current campaign world will be out of sync with the game world, especially if the time line in the books advances faster than the time line in my campaign.

Because it potentially ruins any plans I have for existing powers in the game world by making those decisions for me after I've already purchased my books and spent time and energy developing my plans.

But most importantly, because a well designed setting is precariously balanced such that player characters can give small but significant nudges to have meaningful effects on the setting. By advancing the time line, players are reduced to mere bystanders as important things happen in spite of them.

--flatline

flatline wrote:Because it invalidates books I already own.

Because it guarantees that my current campaign world will be out of sync with the game world, especially if the time line in the books advances faster than the time line in my campaign.

Because it potentially ruins any plans I have for existing powers in the game world by making those decisions for me after I've already purchased my books and spent time and energy developing my plans.

But most importantly, because a well designed setting is precariously balanced such that player characters can give small but significant nudges to have meaningful effects on the setting. By advancing the time line, players are reduced to mere bystanders as important things happen in spite of them.

--flatline

Don't buy/use those books?

Akashic Soldier wrote:

flatline wrote:Because it invalidates books I already own.

Because it guarantees that my current campaign world will be out of sync with the game world, especially if the time line in the books advances faster than the time line in my campaign.

Because it potentially ruins any plans I have for existing powers in the game world by making those decisions for me after I've already purchased my books and spent time and energy developing my plans.

But most importantly, because a well designed setting is precariously balanced such that player characters can give small but significant nudges to have meaningful effects on the setting. By advancing the time line, players are reduced to mere bystanders as important things happen in spite of them.

--flatline

Don't buy/use those books?

There is good material that can be useful in the books. the Meta plot just adds work. Leave the NPCs, factions, and all that stuff is useful. Especially if it fleshes out a new area of the world. Metaplot just makes using that stuff more difficult and work if your game world advanced in a different direction.

Akashic Soldier wrote:

flatline wrote:Because it invalidates books I already own.

Because it guarantees that my current campaign world will be out of sync with the game world, especially if the time line in the books advances faster than the time line in my campaign.

Because it potentially ruins any plans I have for existing powers in the game world by making those decisions for me after I've already purchased my books and spent time and energy developing my plans.

But most importantly, because a well designed setting is precariously balanced such that player characters can give small but significant nudges to have meaningful effects on the setting. By advancing the time line, players are reduced to mere bystanders as important things happen in spite of them.

--flatline

Don't buy/use those books?

If I know a book is going to agitate me, I don't buy it. Which is fine for me, but I bet the publisher would rather have my money than not have it. And all they would need to do to make the books more appealing to me is NOT ADVANCE THE TIME LINE. They could include all the same material, but instead of telling me what happened, they could tell me all the things that might happen and then let ME AND MY PLAYERS explore the possibilities ourselves by playing the game.

If they want to dictate what happens, write a novel. I pay good money for those, too.

--flatline

flatline wrote:

Akashic Soldier wrote:

flatline wrote:Because it invalidates books I already own.

Because it guarantees that my current campaign world will be out of sync with the game world, especially if the time line in the books advances faster than the time line in my campaign.

Because it potentially ruins any plans I have for existing powers in the game world by making those decisions for me after I've already purchased my books and spent time and energy developing my plans.

But most importantly, because a well designed setting is precariously balanced such that player characters can give small but significant nudges to have meaningful effects on the setting. By advancing the time line, players are reduced to mere bystanders as important things happen in spite of them.

--flatline

Don't buy/use those books?

If I know a book is going to agitate me, I don't buy it. Which is fine for me, but I bet the publisher would rather have my money than not have it. And all they would need to do to make the books more appealing to me is NOT ADVANCE THE TIME LINE. They could include all the same material, but instead of telling me what happened, they could tell me all the things that might happen and then let ME AND MY PLAYERS explore the possibilities ourselves by playing the game.

If they want to dictate what happens, write a novel. I pay good money for those, too.

--flatline

OR, you could do as some GMs I know do, and cherry pick what you do like from meta plot and leave out/ alter what you do not. And one would think if your group enjoys the stories you weave as GM they would go with the flow.

Jay05 wrote:

flatline wrote:

Akashic Soldier wrote:

flatline wrote:Because it invalidates books I already own.

Because it guarantees that my current campaign world will be out of sync with the game world, especially if the time line in the books advances faster than the time line in my campaign.

Because it potentially ruins any plans I have for existing powers in the game world by making those decisions for me after I've already purchased my books and spent time and energy developing my plans.

But most importantly, because a well designed setting is precariously balanced such that player characters can give small but significant nudges to have meaningful effects on the setting. By advancing the time line, players are reduced to mere bystanders as important things happen in spite of them.

--flatline

Don't buy/use those books?

If I know a book is going to agitate me, I don't buy it. Which is fine for me, but I bet the publisher would rather have my money than not have it. And all they would need to do to make the books more appealing to me is NOT ADVANCE THE TIME LINE. They could include all the same material, but instead of telling me what happened, they could tell me all the things that might happen and then let ME AND MY PLAYERS explore the possibilities ourselves by playing the game.

If they want to dictate what happens, write a novel. I pay good money for those, too.

--flatline

OR, you could do as some GMs I know do, and cherry pick what you do like from meta plot and leave out/ alter what you do not. And one would think if your group enjoys the stories you weave as GM they would go with the flow.

What a 'novel' concept huh, think that will catch on?
But you never know the Dreaded PB canon police might blow the door down and confiscate the books.

Jay05 wrote:

flatline wrote:

Akashic Soldier wrote:

flatline wrote:Because it invalidates books I already own.

Because it guarantees that my current campaign world will be out of sync with the game world, especially if the time line in the books advances faster than the time line in my campaign.

Because it potentially ruins any plans I have for existing powers in the game world by making those decisions for me after I've already purchased my books and spent time and energy developing my plans.

But most importantly, because a well designed setting is precariously balanced such that player characters can give small but significant nudges to have meaningful effects on the setting. By advancing the time line, players are reduced to mere bystanders as important things happen in spite of them.

--flatline

Don't buy/use those books?

If I know a book is going to agitate me, I don't buy it. Which is fine for me, but I bet the publisher would rather have my money than not have it. And all they would need to do to make the books more appealing to me is NOT ADVANCE THE TIME LINE. They could include all the same material, but instead of telling me what happened, they could tell me all the things that might happen and then let ME AND MY PLAYERS explore the possibilities ourselves by playing the game.

If they want to dictate what happens, write a novel. I pay good money for those, too.

--flatline

OR, you could do as some GMs I know do, and cherry pick what you do like from meta plot and leave out/ alter what you do not. And one would think if your group enjoys the stories you weave as GM they would go with the flow.

Sure, I can pay $20 for a 200-page book that I'll use maybe 40 pages of, but I'd rather pay $20 for a 200-page book that I'll use 160 pages of.

--flatline

Daeglan wrote:Why do we need advancement to be standardized?

Why do we need metaplot to sell more books? Seems like they sell a lot of world books just fine. I don't see the need for metaplot in these world book.

Why do you need meta plot as a spring board? You could provide all those spring boards with a few paragraphs talking about potential outcomes. IE if Tolkeen wins results would likely be x y z. If the coalition wins results are likely U T and W.

The GM provides the liveliness. Not metaplot.

I didn't say we all need those things, nor did I say we *NEED* them. I said they are useful for those reasons, and they are. That they are not useful TO YOU for those reasons doesn't render them useless to us all.

Metaplot can help the GM provide the liveliness. Not all of us are as wondrous as Daeglan. We have other limitations that prevent it.

/Sub

Daeglan wrote:It limits the options of GMs. Now they have to worry about players saying but X and Y happened in book Z.

You can give people FAR more options by doing something more like hook line sinker type plots in lots of different directions than you can with metaplot.

No it doesn't. "I don't use that. That is their world, this is my world. There are similarities. There are differences. Don't read the books and think you know about my world."

/Sub

flatline wrote:Sure, I can pay $20 for a 200-page book that I'll use maybe 40 pages of, but I'd rather pay $20 for a 200-page book that I'll use 160 pages of.

--flatline

...and that's definitely a good reason for YOU not to like the books, but it doesn't mean that metaplot isn't useful.

It just means it's not useful to you.

/Sub

Subjugator wrote:

flatline wrote:Sure, I can pay $20 for a 200-page book that I'll use maybe 40 pages of, but I'd rather pay $20 for a 200-page book that I'll use 160 pages of.

--flatline

...and that's definitely a good reason for YOU not to like the books, but it doesn't mean that metaplot isn't useful.

It just means it's not useful to you.

/Sub

Exactly

Subjugator wrote:

flatline wrote:Sure, I can pay $20 for a 200-page book that I'll use maybe 40 pages of, but I'd rather pay $20 for a 200-page book that I'll use 160 pages of.

--flatline

...and that's definitely a good reason for YOU not to like the books, but it doesn't mean that metaplot isn't useful.

It just means it's not useful to you.

/Sub

Well since being useful to someone else doesn't matter to me who cares?

Dr. Doom III wrote:Well since being useful to someone else doesn't matter to me who cares?

Someone who understands that their own desires to not dictate the over all quality/usefulness of a product.