>Trying to design a homebrew generic system
>Feels like it'smostlyjust a mishmash of stuff I like from other systems
Anyone else feel like this when you homebrew? Is it an inherently bad thing?
>>46600009
I feel like that any time I do anything creative. The point is to work with it until it takes on an identity of its own, even if it just started as a collection of ideas from other places.
>>46600492
That's what I'm hoping to achieve. I mean, everything has been done anyway, right?
>>46600626
You just have to get it to feel cohesive in its own right, with no pieces that seem out of place.
A bad examples of this might be CthulhuTech, which uses three different systems, including poker dice, to try and run, but it just ends up like three different systems mashed together poorly.
>>46600677
I have no experience with CthulhuTech, but I get your point. That's definitely something I'll keep in mind, especially when playtesting. Thanks!
>>46600009
I've never put together a homebrew generic system, because any time I try, I end up looking around at other game systems for ideas and run across one which is better than what I had in mind.
I suppose your idea isn't necessarily a bad thing, just as well as the mechanics work together. I'd actually recommend just starting with "X system but with Y mechanic" unless it all really needs to be fully pulled apart to work. I'd also recommend taking a look at a large number of systems before working too much; I've seen far too many "It's D&D and GURPS but as a generic!" which turned out terrible.
I don't think your experience is unusual - most people get ideas from other places after all - just make sure it's a decent idea. Or at least a fun one.
>>46601084
As a matter of fact it started out as a "System X with mechanic Y and Z stuff" - idea. Most of the borrowed/stolen ideas come from systems that I have a lot of experience with and enjoy, although somewhat tweaked to fit together better. The goal is to create a system that fits me and the kind of stories/adventures/campaigns I try to make, and not The Perfect System (which far too many people seem to try to make, insert "Competing Stands XKCD").
Thanks, Anons. I feel better about this already.
>>46601513
No problem, I wish you well.
What are you planning and what have you put together so far? It might help to be directed towards something that might interest you, either for stealing ideas or that might fit what you have in mind already.
The good thing about a system with lots of unconnected systems is that it is harder to break.
Beyond a certain level of complexity, it becomes unwieldy.
Basic D&D is an example of this done fairly well... you can see in AD&D that it started to get bloated, and if you start introducing splatbooks with extra kits and spells, it gets unusable.
>>46602856
The other concern is how the sub-systems interact. If I am climbing on the back of a dragon in flight to grab the rider and throw them off, what system am I using? The Thief's climb walls skill? A standard Strength check? A flying non-weapon proficiency? A grapple check? I notice that odd situations like that tend to crop up occasionally, and having a variety of different systems for different situations makes it really hard to determine consistently which to use.
I've actually not played Basic D&D, only AD&D, so that might be why I see it as a possible concern.
I'm working and streamlined GURPS something like 5e where it has depth but doesn't get bloated and I feel like why is something like this needed but I still work on it
>>46603173
I've not played GURPS or D&D5e, so I can't help you too much there. It sounds like it would just be easier to focus one part at a time (make sure the vehicle system works and the skills are as you like them) before moving onto the next.
Even if you are the only one using the system, if it works for you, then it works.
>>46600009
Look at all the retro clones that have made money marketing themselves as unoriginal copies of D&D. Look at Pathfinder, which made money marketing itself as a copy & paste of 3.5 D&D with some houserules.
Don't sweat it.
>>46600009
Take what you like, add your own stuff, but most importantly keep it evolving, never say "It's good enough"
Do what you think benefits the system, take out shit that doesn't.
>>46600009
>homebrew
>generic
DON'T DO IT NIGGA
There's no need to create yet another crunch system that were done numerous times already without fluff to back it up.
Make a system that is aimed directly at adventuring in a certain setting, and integrate the fluff into crunch instead.
>>46601580
OP here.
There is a mix of WaRP and FATE; skills are "traits" that the player decides (diveded between the attributes Body, Mind, and if the setting allows; Powers), and each has a score between perhaps 2 and 4. The score is their "dice pool", and here the White Wolf "success" resolution comes in, where the top half of the die is considered a success, and lower half a failure. Thing is, it's not bound to any specific kind of dice (which is some sort of selling point). Works just as well with a d20 as a d6 - it's all rolled as a d2 anyway.
And there is some other things about vice/virtue, stunts, damage and so on.
>>46603027
>If I am climbing on the back of a dragon in flight to grab the rider and throw them off, what system am I using? The Thief's climb walls skill? A standard Strength check? A flying non-weapon proficiency? A grapple check? I notice that odd situations like that tend to crop up occasionally, and having a variety of different systems for different situations makes it really hard to determine consistently which to use.
The fact you even want to have complex rules for something like that is disgusting.
What does them being on the back of a dragon have anything to do with the action?
It's literally grabbing someone and throwing them off, dragon or not.
>>46600009
Yeah it's a shame. If your homebrew ends up being generic, you might as well use an acomplished system.
Homebrews and their makers have a unique opportunity to make something outstanding and different.
>>46608244
I am actually working on something somewhat similar to this, and have been for about a year or so in my spare time. It started out as a "for fun" sort of thing and now it's a system that one of my gaming groups uses for weekly games.
Started with d10 attributes/abilities and changed the list a bunch, removed some, etc. and special powers are bought at levels 1, 2, and 3 with XP. White Wolf character creation is the shittiest model, though, so instead you get __ XP to build a character with and go from there, none of this 5 melee 5 dex 5 str at level 1 shit. Classless too, so you just come up with a concept and pick powers that fit.
In practice it's worked nicely, I mostly made decisions based on how I thought it would play with that particular group of people and it's been a good fit so far. It's basically just an extreme version of house-ruling D&D or whatever system you're playing in to fit your gaming group.
>>46611207
Sounds nice. That's what I'm doing too, making it primarily for my playgroup. Although, if I manage to make it playable outside of that I'd like to try it for a con sometime (since it's kinda rules- and math-lite)
