|
|
Post by Wizard Slayer on Feb 15, 2023 13:56:08 GMT
Currently I'm playing through my collection without cheating: no five-fingered page holding, no going back a paragraph on instant death, no cheating on stats rolls, no rerolls during combat. And, dare I say it, I find I'm getting a lot more out of the books than I did when I was younger. Decisions, luck rolls and combats can have your heart in your mouth at times, and coming through with a good dice roll feels like an achievement for a change. Plus playing with a low-stat character after a few tries makes you explore directions that seem bad since you don't think the character will get through to the end anyway. You discover parts of the book you might otherwise have missed, and sometimes vital things you'd otherwise never have found because you were convinced the other direction is the right one. Playing with a poor character even has moments of fun, like envisaging my Skill 7 detective clattering into boxes when failing to tail Zera in Rings of Kether.
All the same, I've allowed myself a few 'house rules' to make playing through all the books feasible:
1) Stats rolls: Some books are pretty heavily weighted against low stats characters. So after the sixth attempt at a book, I allow myself to roll 4 dice and assign the values as I like between Skill/Stamina/Luck. (Incidentally, I'm up to 42/59 and I have never yet rolled a 12/24/12 character! Or a 7/14/7 for that matter.)
2) When Testing my Luck, I don't deduct a Luck point if the throw is Unlucky. Maybe controversial, but the idea of being unlucky also making you more likely to be unlucky again never sat right with me, plus some books can really punish you on Luck rolls. Of course losing a Luck point after testing lucky makes sense, it's like 'pushing your luck'. Also this doesn't apply when choosing to use Luck in battles, then it's -1 Luck Point either way.
3) Random dice rolls where the outcome is critical to winning get replaced by a Luck test (or Skill, if that seems more appropriate). Why make me rely on real-life luck when there's a perfectly good Luck stat sitting right there??
4) Weapon/armour bonuses are Attack Strength bonuses. I mean c'mon! "Here's the finest magical sword in all of Titan, +8 Skill, and some indestructable chainmail to go with it, +6 Skill, with a free enchanted shield thrown in, +4 Skill. Oops, looks like your Skill 7 character is still going to get killed by that random bandit!" It also means my magical sword doesn't save me when Testing my Skill trying to jump a pit with a twisted ankle (-2 Skill Points).
Finally, in some books special rules get applied to correct things which are plain broken, e.g. replacing One Strike combat in Chasms of Malice with a Skill roll, plus a very particular tweak to Black Vein Prophecy.
Anybody else bend the rules a little and still tell themselves they're not cheating?
|
|
|
|
Post by scouserob on Feb 15, 2023 14:45:25 GMT
For the tougher books it may be worth going into the solution thread and rerolling your attributes if they give you less than a certain percentage of success (on the true path).
So for Deathtrap Dungeon, for example you'd pretty much always reroll if your Skill is less than 11.
I like to play by the rules and don't apply the above attribute reroll when exploring a new book because, like you say, it can be fun blundering around and discovering the obviously dodgy parts of the decision trees with such doomed characters.
Once I'm completely familiar with a book I tend to apply the above rule, at least subconsciously.
(Why waste time, say, dying on the beach of Fire Island for the umpteenth time?)
It still took me about 30 attempts to complete Caverns of the Snow Witch!
I've not re-done any of the ridiculously tough books yet so who knows, I may become a little more flexible with the rules when I get to them.
(Excepting Blood of the Zombies, which I've only competed on the much easier Tin Man Games phone app.)
|
|
CharlesX
Baron
Posts: 2,207 
Member is Online
|
Post by CharlesX on Feb 15, 2023 15:46:17 GMT
scouserob From what I've heard even the Tin Man App of Blood Of The Zombies is barely easier than Crypt Of The Sorceror on maximum stats? Anyway I personally disregard Skill caps half the time for particular things like the Kris Knife, but in books like City Of Thieves or Eye Of The Dragon where skill bonuses are as common as rain (because Livingstone even more than Jackson doesn't give a hoot about playability, or didn't for quite a period of time). I prefer very much to stick by rules as written, which means I just don't play let alone enjoy stuff lke Crypt Of The Sorceror or Spellbreaker. Perhaps Jon Green could do an edited rewrite of Spellbreaker with the difficulty heavily easier, like he did for Curse Of The Mummy?
|
|
|
|
Post by scouserob on Feb 15, 2023 16:13:30 GMT
scouserob From what I've heard even the Tin Man App of Blood Of The Zombies is barely easier than Crypt Of The Sorcerer on maximum stats? Looking back through the achievement page of the app, I've completed it on Medium Mode which is 2D6+40 Stamina (Rather than 2D6+20). I think there must be a lot of extra Stamina replenishment opportunities along with those useful bookmarks as I don't remember finding it too difficult once I'd mapped out the correct path. (i.e. I didn't have to manage my stamina much and whatever rolls I got in fights were generally OK. It wasn't like I was reloading bookmarks if I only cleared a low to middling amount of zombies on my first fight rounds.) I only remember struggling and having to reload a bookmark a lot of times against that pain in the backside: Zombie Kong. I recommend trying the app if you enjoyed playing the book apart from the impossible difficulty. I'm resigned to the fact that I'll never complete Blood of the Zombies proper.   |
|
|
|
Post by a moderator on Feb 15, 2023 16:14:41 GMT
Perhaps Jon Green could do an edited rewrite of Spellbreaker with the difficulty heavily easier, like he did for Curse Of The Mummy?
He's already done one edit, theoretically to make it easier, though it did nothing to help with a lot of the harshest aspects of the book. About the only good thing to come out of that rewrite was that an incorrect section number got fixed. |
|
CharlesX
Baron
Posts: 2,207
Member is Online
|
Post by CharlesX on Feb 15, 2023 16:39:51 GMT
Perhaps Jon Green could do an edited rewrite of Spellbreaker with the difficulty heavily easier, like he did for Curse Of The Mummy?
He's already done one edit, theoretically to make it easier, though it did nothing to help with a lot of the harshest aspects of the book. About the only good thing to come out of that rewrite was that an incorrect section number got fixed. The fundamental one was the battle with the militiamen, which could at least have been altered from needing 10 attack rounds to needing 8 straight attack rounds (which would have been neater from a narrative perspective, as well). Possibly increasing their Skill as well, and\or adding the option of calling for the Mad Beggar at any point. That would have changed the book from one that was downright ridiculous to one that was just tough. As you say, other aspects could be more than tweaked, as well, but the Edit ultimately changed disappointingly little in terms of gameplay difficulty. |
|
|
|
Post by Wizard Slayer on Feb 15, 2023 16:57:23 GMT
For the tougher books it may be worth going into the solution thread and rerolling your attributes if they give you less than a certain percentage of success (on the true path). See, I personally don't like rerolls in any context because then for me it feels like why roll at all, I may as well pick the numbers I want (like when I was a kid and just played everything 12/24/12). There's one occasion so far where I've done just that - Seas of Blood, 12/24/12 and 12/18, so I could finally complete it on the 19th attempt. That really was a slog! Incidentally I got genuinely lucky with Island of the Lizard king, completing it at the second attempt with a 12/17/11. |
|
|
|
Post by scouserob on Feb 15, 2023 17:29:19 GMT
For the tougher books it may be worth going into the solution thread and rerolling your attributes if they give you less than a certain percentage of success (on the true path). See, I personally don't like rerolls in any context because then for me it feels like why roll at all, I may as well pick the numbers I want (like when I was a kid and just played everything 12/24/12). There's one occasion so far where I've done just that - Seas of Blood, 12/24/12 and 12/18, so I could finally complete it on the 19th attempt. That really was a slog! Incidentally I got genuinely lucky with Island of the Lizard king, completing it at the second attempt with a 12/17/11. These attribute rerolls are just moving the percentages a bit so your range of winning percentages are at least, say, 5% or 10%. I wouldn't call keeping such relative long shots in there picking the numbers you want. Obviously very much against the rules but that is my way of keeping it interesting. Perhaps putting a limit at the higher end to cap the maximum percentage at, say 70%, would be just as worthwhile for enjoying the books we know inside out. (Though I enjoy the adventuring/stories as well as the risk so maybe not.) I think I had a similar experience with Island of the Lizard King, though perhaps 4 or 5 attempts. 😀 Of the books I have replayed (since childhood) it has the widest range of potentially winning paths, without many instant deaths or foreknowledge from previous playthroughs required. I wouldn't be surprised if most people won it the first time they rolled a Skill 11+ adventurer. Good grief, I just looked at Champskees' probabilities for Sea of Blood. It looks like you need high Crew Strike, Crew Strength and Skill to have a decent chance. I don't blame you for fixing them eventually rather than waiting for that rare combination. |
|
|
|
Post by a moderator on Feb 15, 2023 17:51:33 GMT
He's already done one edit, theoretically to make it easier, though it did nothing to help with a lot of the harshest aspects of the book. About the only good thing to come out of that rewrite was that an incorrect section number got fixed. The fundamental one was the battle with the militiamen, which could at least have been altered from needing 10 attack rounds to needing 8 straight attack rounds (which would have been neater from a narrative perspective, as well). Possibly increasing their Skill as well, and\or adding the option of calling for the Mad Beggar at any point. That would have changed the book from one that was downright ridiculous to one that was just tough. As you say, other aspects could be more than tweaked, as well, but the Edit ultimately changed disappointingly little in terms of gameplay difficulty. The stupid thing there was that the edits included an option to surrender to the militiamen - but only if you were leaving via the 'wrong' gate. Something to fix that effective 1 in 6 shot at getting an essential item is another priority. Yes, there's a similarly bad roll in Masks of Mayhem, but 'somebody else did it first' is never a good reason to punish your honest readers. |
|
|
|
Post by terrysalt on Feb 15, 2023 19:37:03 GMT
The only house rule I've used is the progressive stats idea I used in my playthrough of the series. The idea being that you start with minimum stats and should you fail, you increase whatever stat you were testing at the time. Still very much against the rules as written but it guarantees that I will eventually manage to win if I try enough times.
|
|
|
|
Post by hallucination on Feb 15, 2023 21:43:18 GMT
i have two modes: if i am playing then (generally) i play strictly by the rules. (of course, what counts as 'strict' is difficult to pin down in some of the books with more ambiguous aspects; i interpret ambiguities favourably to me.) otherwise, if i am just reading through a gamebook, then i assume i win all fights and that the dice are on my side with whatever rolls are required; but if i don't have the key for a magical lock with a particular number printed on it, i can progress no further!
i say "generally" above because there are the usual exceptions: the Kris knife as an Attack Strength modifier in House of Hell, etc. etc.
also, i have, at least once, re-allocated dice during character creation so far in this year's Frenzy.
sometimes i use guides, sometimes i don't; sometimes i use prior maps or notes i've made, sometimes i don't.
some of these ideas for house rules, such as terrysalt's above, sound very tempting and who knows, maybe I will give those kinds of modes of play a shot at some point...
|
|
|
|
Post by misomiso on Feb 15, 2023 21:57:48 GMT
I have a standard adventurer I use to try to get through all books:
Skill: 10
Stamina: 20
Luck: 11
I like having the higher luck.
|
|
kieran
Baron
Posts: 2,463
Favourite Gamebook Series: Fighting Fantasy
|
Post by kieran on Feb 15, 2023 22:26:39 GMT
3) Random dice rolls where the outcome is critical to winning get replaced by a Luck test (or Skill, if that seems more appropriate). Why make me rely on real-life luck when there's a perfectly good Luck stat sitting right there?? This though would make the Clay Golem in Crypt of the Sorcerer even more frustrating. |
|
|
|
Post by Wizard Slayer on Feb 16, 2023 10:38:35 GMT
3) Random dice rolls where the outcome is critical to winning get replaced by a Luck test (or Skill, if that seems more appropriate). Why make me rely on real-life luck when there's a perfectly good Luck stat sitting right there?? This though would make the Clay Golem in Crypt of the Sorcerer even more frustrating. Actually those kinds of combat related dice-rolls I keep in - in a weird way the added danger makes it more fun, or at least exhilarating. At least I get the option of using Luck throws to deal double-damage and improve my chances. |
|
|
|
Post by Wizard Slayer on Feb 16, 2023 14:59:48 GMT
Good grief, I just looked at Champskees' probabilities for Sea of Blood. It looks like you need high Crew Strike, Crew Strength and Skill to have a decent chance. I don't blame you for fixing them eventually rather than waiting for that rare combination. Yeah, it's terrible, and because of the extra stats you need seven high dice instead of the usual four. It would have been a much better book (not that it's a bad one!) if there had been alternative paths where one favoured a strong individual and the other a strong crew. I didn't feel great about it, but after 18 attempts it had got to the point where I was only going to play through the same path over and over until I eventually threw seven high dice so I might as well cut out the intervening failures. Fun fact: every one of my eighteen failures was different! [My mistake - one of them was repeated.] |
|
|
|
Post by Law on Feb 17, 2023 14:51:40 GMT
Oh dear... What haven't I tried House Rule-wise. From quick-saving at certain passages to eating five meals in one sitting when reduced to one stamina after a particularly close battle.
Yeah, for my part I don't stick to the letter of the law to the absolute but I certainly don't want to be like Ian and just skip every fight with high stats as an automatic Insta-Win.
1.) Statistics were so badly misunderstood by a peer of mine in primary school, that he thought Attack Strength rolls for both parties were cumulative and it was a race to see who could get their numbers higher until one side died! And eleven was about as low as anyone would go for their Skill score. I don't mind starting with seven or eight though as I usually put together a small XP table that would hopefully allow said combative abilities to grow dependant on how many enemies I fight and how little damage I take. I also roll modifiers for wounds / exhaustion so that it isn't death by a thousand 2 STAMINA cuts. Sk: 0-6 foes could do 1d3 dmg, Sk: 7-9, 1d6. Sk: 10-12, 2+1d6. One has to beware fighting giants or other mega fauna like mammoths with my house rules though because I will double their damage output. This is why we have weight catchments gentlemen.
2.) Luck should be far more valuable in turn, so I let Luck Tests double your own damage output instead of merely adding 2, with the same caveat that you have to commit to a Lucky strike before knowing your damage roll. After surviving a life-or-death struggle I will roll 1d3 to restore a measure of fortune to your total so you don't hoard your Luck and might decide to actively use it once or twice every fight. As for (I don't deduct a Luck point if the throw is Unlucky) I believe there is a charm in one of the books that gives you this exact ability and another somewhere in the series for the reverse!
3.) Couldn't agree more, this is why Joe Dever's 'Lone Wolf' usually gave you three or so gates to escape insta-death scenarios with differing disciplines and only then gave you the ultimatum of a 1d10, with equipment or abilities sometimes ensuring you'd never get the worst possible outcome. I've even played certain FF books with the Lone Wolf combat ratio tables and regenerating one Stamina point per paragraph when not wounded in said same passage or engaged in combat.
4.) Very naughty of me in some books but shields are OP. That's sort of why they were used for so much of our history. If I'm wielding one and an enemy succeeds in their Attack Strength they still have to get passed my shield by rolling a five or a six. Hell, maybe it should just be a six. If it's a BFG swinging a tree trunk at you though, I think the best you can hope for is some slight damage mitigation.
"Oak and iron, guard me well
Or else I'm dead and doomed to Hell"
|
|
|
|
Post by terrysalt on Feb 17, 2023 19:46:11 GMT
1.) Statistics were so badly misunderstood by a peer of mine in primary school, that he thought Attack Strength rolls for both parties were cumulative and it was a race to see who could get their numbers higher until one side died! I made a similar mistake as a kid. I thought that each attack round was a permanent addition to your skill. I quickly realised that having a skill in the mid 30s after a single fight was totally ridiculous and decided to "house rule" that you didn't get to keep the skill increases from one round to the next to keep it fairer.  |
|
