A thread dedicated to discussion and feedback of games and homebrews made by /tg/ regarding anything from minor elements to entire systems, as well as inviting people to playtest your games online. While the thread's main focus is mechanics, you're always welcome to share tidbits about your setting.
Try to keep discussion as civilized as possible, avoid non-constructive criticism, and try not to drop your entire PDF unless you're asking for specifics, it's near completion or you're asked to.
Useful Links:
>/tg/ and /gdg/ specific
http://1d4chan.org/
https://imgur.com/a/7D6TT
>Project List:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/134UgMoKE9c9RrHL5hqicB5tEfNwbav5kUvzlXFLz1HI/edit?usp=sharing
>Online Play:
https://roll20.net/
https://www.obsidianportal.com/
>RPG Stuff:
http://www.darkshire.net/~jhkim/rpg/freerpgs/fulllist.html
http://www.darkshire.net/~jhkim/rpg/theory/
http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=21479
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FXquCh4NZ74xGS_AmWzyItjuvtvDEwIcyqqOy6rvGE0/edit
https://mega.nz/#!xUsyVKJD!xkH3kJT7sT5zX7WGGgDF_7Ds2hw2hHe94jaFU8cHXr0
http://www.gamesprecipice.com/category/dimensions/
>Dice Rollers
http://anydice.com/
http://www.anwu.org/games/dice_calc.html?N=2&X=6&c=-7
http://topps.diku.dk/torbenm/troll.msp
http://www.fnordistan.com/smallroller.html
>Tools and Resources:
http://www.gozzys.com/
http://donjon.bin.sh/
http://www.seventhsanctum.com/
http://ebon.pyorre.net/
http://www.henry-davis.com/MAPS/carto.html
http://topps.diku.dk/torbenm/maps.msp
http://www-cs-students.stanford.edu/~amitp/game-programming/polygon-map-generation/demo.html
https://mega.nz/#!ZUMAhQ4A!IETzo0d47KrCf-AdYMrld6H6AOh0KRijx2NHpvv0qNg
**NEW** - http://alumnus.caltech.edu/~leif/FRP/index.html
>Design and Layout
http://erebaltor.se/rickard/typography/
https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B4qCWY8UnLrcVVVNWG5qUTUySjg&usp=sharing
http://davesmapper.com
Last thread - >>48181097
http://archive.is/m4F3g
http://archive.is/c5gOj
This threads have just not been doing well lately.
>>48235152
Personally, I don't read or post much anymore because /gdg/ doesn't seem to talk about singular mechanics much. I'd like to have smaller themes than slinging whole pdfs around.
I think the general is more of a brainstorming box, I just remake it because i really enjoy the different ideas not related to anything in particular.
My current goal is to design a hex based modern combat skirmish type game, and was wondering what type of targeting anons use for a hex based map,as in scale LoS etc.
Its the evolution of my current square grid skirmish game that has yet to be completed but is at least playable. The hex version introduces more actions, weapons as well as environment interactions/buffs.
>>48235349
I've been trying, but not a lot of wargame players in here.
>>48235908
pict related oops
>>48235927
>>48235908
Problem with hexes being 2 feet, by your example, is that modern combat covers far ranges, so you'll either create a situation where you need way too many hexes, or scale is way off and everything is too short.
Then let's talk about mechanics!
What games/systems exist where /how/ you level up affect what your level up rewards are? Obviously there are systems where you level up individual skills instead of one all-encompassing number (at least, I know there's vidya like that), and there are games where you do just raise on big number, and get rewards based on that, that you can distribute around how you like, but is there a middle ground?
My thought is that there'd be a some sort of system where, at the end of a session, the party votes on what each character's "big moment" was, and depending on that moment, different level up rewards are available. A character that really shined in combat could get increased weapon skill, or learn a new maneuver, or get better at the maneuver that won them the combat. A character that diplomatically shined could get a new contact, or get better at diplomacy skills. A sneaky character could get even more ballsy at sneaking, allowing them to do more while remaining undetected, etc. That way, progression feels natural, instead of "I killed twenty kobolds, so now I'm better at lockpicking".
The immediate problem I see is that, as campaigns progress, characters that didn't specialize in a given field are going to have a hard time breaking into that field. When your fightan man has been getting rewards for beating the shit out of stuff, when he bumbles his ass to the diplomacy table to try and talk, people aren't going to vote that as the defining moment, they're going to vote for the moment that he fought some dudes, thus pidgeonholing him. I guess maybe the player themselves could decide the moment, but you could game that system really easily.
Thoughts?
>>48235993
I think burning wheel has something like that, or it seemed that way to me from listening to an actual play podcast. Might be worth a look.
>>48234006
Is this only for TTRPGS or are any tabletop games up for discussion?
>>48235980
Yes that picture was more of an example, but first I guess ill need to work on Hex scale and how the weapons reflect that. I'm not striving for utmost realism as I am for appropriate attack LoS, such as a pistol may only be able to shoot at greatest accuracy at 2 hexes or less, sniper rifles will not be able to target unless 3 or more hexes away, but then there are accuracy penalties for engaging at the closest possible range.
I guess more arcadey than simulation for this version of the game if that makes sense.
>>48236224
For LoS, I always advocate abstraction. I use size categories for my own projects (Things of the same or larger size block LoS to things behind it, give cover to everything else otherwise).
>>48236223
Any.
>>48236435
Yes, introducing cover mechanics, and as you state "abstraction" to my system is important. I am also working on a customizable play board where tiles such as cover etc. can be added or removed depending on the players inclination.
First i must work on the battle system, then work on the procedural map creation/ map integration.
>>48235908
Check out how Battletech does it
>>48236576
>>48236576
Well, let me ask this: Considering one of the flaws of deckbuilding games is a lack of meaningful player interaction, in what ways can a deckbuilding game be built to remedy that?
One such idea I had was an auction system. After each player takes a turn, an Auction Turn occurs, where each player secretly chooses a card to buy and openly spends any amount of resources (let's say Coins) to attempt to get a card for its Bid cost (which is lower than its Buy cost) or higher. The upshot is that the player can essentially get a card for less Coins than if he/she had bought it. The consequence is that multiple players could bid on the same card, and thus be forced to try to outbid the other player for said card.
There anything here for designing card games ?
Spending some time working on a class centric DnD 5e ripoff called Desks and Directives, a tabletop in which the players are workers on permanent shift in a megacorp building.
The idea is each class describes the job and roleplay aspects of said job e.g. janitor is the sneaky notrogue because he can pass anywhere unseen.
Later on users can "prestige" into Tier 2 classes such as corporate lawyer, head chef etc.
What do you guys think about this? I'm also really unsure how to deal with the prestige class type of system, whether it should be after 5 levels in a class or ten or suchlike. In short I'm conflicted between sticking to the 5e OGL or diverging from it.
Got a question about dice pool probabilities.
I'm working with some other /tg/anons on a homebrew system based on the video game The World Ends With You, over here >>48139640. Out core mechanic is based on the resolution system in Tenra Bansho Zero, where you take a pool of dice (in our case d10s) based on one of your Stats, and try to roll at or under a target number based on one of your Skills (1-7). Each die that comes up under that TN counts as a success.
Is there an Anydice function which can help me map out the probabilities of success, or any other resources that can help me?
>>48239480
The more you diverge more work you will have to do. But if that's good or bad . . .
reposting this yet again, you guys have been giving me some great ideas so I figured I'd ask for some more feedback. Might dump PDF for more feedback if there is interest.
I'm making an RPG where the characters are part of a village in a post-black-plague fantasy zombie apocalypse with tons of weird undead out there.
I want to make mechanics that focus on the village with characters spending downtime and having Downtime abilities to improve the village.
Population basically functions as hit points for the village and each month there is a roll on the Fortune table to see what happens (Drought, raids, etc)
One thing I am trying to decide is whether to use boring old spell points, or to do an at-will / daily system for spellcasting. Spell points are nice but you have to remember different costs for different spells and you also have to erase and rewrite the number of points almost constantly.
The at-will / daily system would be basically you know X spells, the daily spells are shit like light and magic missile type of spells, as well as some slightly more powerful attack spells (obviously no healing since they can be done at will), and then daily spells can each be cast only once. You cannot double up on a daily spell. So if you cast a Fireball or a Time Stop, that'd be it for the day for that particular spell. Also a lot of the more powerful spells have downsides. Like the only kill spell in the game has a pretty significant chance of also killing the caster, and there is no resurrection.
Basically I am going for low fantasy with lots of resource management and stuff. Any advice? Yes I have read the Quiet Year I've got a 50 page work in progress game but I always appreciate ideas and feedback.
>>48239613
here use this as a base and if you have problems, try looking up on the articles and basic commands...
http://anydice.com/program/8d45
>>48235993
>>Obviously there are systems where you level up individual skills instead of one all-encompassing number
Yes, there are plenty of them
>> the party votes on what each character's "big moment" was, and depending on that moment, different level up rewards are available.
Said systems with individual level up usually leave it to the GM choice what and how PCs can level up, the recommendation is to only allow skills that the player tried to learn or use in game.
>>The immediate problem I see is that, as campaigns progress, characters that didn't specialize in a given field are going to have a hard time breaking into that field.
the last edition of Urban Armies uses the opposite of this rule, you only get to level up your skill when you fail in a significant test, meaning that the better you get the harder it will be for you to level up a skill. Which btw makes lots of sense as we tend to learn more from our failures rather than from our successes
The system I'm working with relies on "soft" levels, where you have to "gather" a few skill/power points in order to reach your next level and unlock new powers/higher skill caps
>>48238634
I don't remember if there are card-games-specif stuff on the resources, but you can ask more specific stuff around here and someone probably will answer sooner or later...
>>48242618
Thanks
Any thoughts on how to make a Savage Worlds esque damage system without using exploding dice?
Made a skeleton for the card game I'm thinking about making. I though about it having a progressive increment of resources, like in hearthstone but instead of it being used to pay for cards like in mtg, it would be the number of actions you could perform kinda like in yugioh. Something like, you can play 2 card on your first turn, 3 on the second, 4 on third and then it would stop incrementing. But I'm not entirely sure yet.
>>48248096
>>like in hearthstone but instead of it being used to pay for cards like in mtg, it would be the number of actions you could perform kinda like in yugioh.
Mechanically there's no difference, increasing "action points" as resource would work exactly like mana in Hearthstone...I would recommend naming it this way if there are other non-card-related actions a player can do with those points. (E.g drawing cards being an action you need to pay for)...
As for the skeleton, it looks pretty default, and you gonna probably need to resize some of those boxes
It though about it having 3 or 4 main card types:
Units, damage dealers no difference from either mtg's creatures or hearthstone's minions
Arts, temporary effects like instants or sorceries in mtg.
Charms, continuous effects like in either artifacts or enchantments in mtg. I don't like the name charm, its not generic enough but its all that I could think of.
Ruler, they would represent the player and should be meaningful, I though before about not allowing them to be affected by cards but I'm not so sure now. They should not feel like commanders or planeswalkers from mtg but more like character cards from vanguard.
>>48249196
>Mechanically there's no difference,
Actually there is, both in hearthstone or magic cards have costs based around how "advantageous" their effect is supposed to be. You can't just play ancient one, em'rakul or any big spell on your first turn (without some sort of convoluted combo).
In the game I propose you could because you can play any 2 cards on your first turn, but the deal is that such cards should never exist or if they did, they would need to be properly taxing in some other way (paying LP, sacrificing units, etc...).
And I just realize that the skeleton do have a cost box . . . Huh, must have been a freudian slip.
>As for the skeleton, it looks pretty default, and you gonna probably need to resize some of those boxes
Yup, it looks really bland and average. I though about diminishing the atk/def and type/subtype boxes, and increasing the image box, or having just art on the whole card, except in the box parts of course.
>>48250182
Well since bricking is one of the worst situations it can happen in a card game I though handling it this way.
The max hand size would be six, and when a player would draw, they have two options:
He can either draw cards until he or she hits max hand size or mulligan a new one. It would have some conditions like you must draw up to max if you have 1 or 0 cards in your hand.
>>48250182
>>And I just realize that the skeleton do have a cost box
I think this made for most of the confusion...
>>Ruler, they would represent the player and should be meaningful
Which kind of game modifiers they would have?What would be the difference between playing with William III or Salazar as my Ruler?
>>48250932
>Which kind of game modifiers they would have?What would be the difference between playing with William III or Salazar as my Ruler?
Kek, while a ruler's effect don't necessarily need to be big, it should change the fundamentals of the game, in a way that can't be easily emulated with the other cards types.
One example I was thinking earlier.
>Your max hand size is 8
>Your max action modifier is -1
>You may choose to skip your Draw Phase. If you do, put any 1 card from your Deck into your Hand.
>Once per turn, you may discard 2 cards. If you do, draw 1 card.
Some cards may be able to achieve some of those effects, but not a single card could have all of them nor would give the player them from the game start.
What kind of apsect ratio and page size do you folks like for your pdfs? I've been thinking of switching to a 16:10 ratio but I'm unsure on what the proper page size should be.
Are there any cards games that have something like a second life total that can't be recovered and is used as a resource for certain abilities?
Like you could have Life and Soul. There could be a cheap and powerful Life gain card that incurs some Soul loss, and certain powerful sources that inflict Soul damage.
>>48237418
you have auction mechanic in spartacus board game
>>48241317
at least give core mechanics its hard to say anything like this
>>48252396
pic somewhat related, though you are talking about a game that has this mechanic at its core.
It's certainly doable for a Life/Soul mechanic, though I'd imagine that the best balance would be, like you said, to create an powerful effect at the cost of Soul. Cards that directly damage Soul would upset any reliability of Soul costs, even ones that dealt the source's controller Soul damage in exchange.
I'm also running on the assumption that starting Soul would be a much smaller amount than Life. On top of that, I'm figuring it's not represented by anything on the board; it's just a number that can be changed.
>>48254029
I'll have to look at that game. It looks long, which has been a bit of a turnoff for me (short attention span means library of >1h games).
If I can poke everyone's brain here, or at least those who have played deckbuilding games (Dominion, Ascension, 'Cerebrus Engine,' Tanto Cuore, Legendary, etc), what do you like about them? What is it you hate? For me, the concept of putting together a strategy over the course of the game is nice, but it kills me that many of the games become 3+ people playing Solitaire.
>>48254236
>3+ people playing Solitaire
That's a big one about deck building games for me. Rarely does it feel like you're interacting with the other players.
>>48254029
>>48254062
Bleh, I should really remeber to keep my name on these things.
even though I keep having trouble exporting fonts
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BypY9idoJAJxd1RNdGlQUU0zcWs
>>48235349
another!
>>48235920
got a wargame way on the backburner. Atlantean-esque elitists led by philosopher kings (customizable by philosophy) are the central human faction.
>>48254236
For me, it's expression through customization. That could be through strategy, theme, or gimmick.
Pretty sure one the magic player names (timmy, johnny,etc) describe this kind of player more or less
>>48254236
>3+ people playing Solitaire
Is there any easy way to avoid this or is it literally the main challenge?
>>48254139
My rough idea is that the game builds up to a point and then soul effects start being used and it changes completely. Not sure how to accomplish that.
>>48254743
I've felt Dominion was on the right track; by having all the available cards known throuought the game, players can build their decks with consideration as to the opponent's strategy. I don't have much experience with the expansions, so I can't say if they actually took advantage of it in that way; the original still played like Solitaire.
>>48254769
Keep in mind that players will gravitate towards cards that can end games, regardless of how much Soul it costs. Therefore, I'm actually going to suggest something contradicting to earlier; make Soul abundant, maybe Soul 40 / Life 20 for a start, but have it be used commonly as a resource. Think of it as Hearthstone's Mana in reverse; Players start with a lot of Soul, but it's finite. If it runs dry, they lose. If they run out of life, they lose. Make plenty of cards that use Soul, and balance the game around that.
>>48254976
>While I'm still on a roll...
Look at different mechanics that can take advantage of it. Small soul costs to flood the board with multiple spells and minions. Big costs for stuff that's hard to get rid of. Effects that lead to wasted Soul (Not actually taking Soul away, but rather making players waste Soul to accomplish something. Taxing comes to mind, though it should be part of its own faction.) Revisiting 'Soul Damage,' a counterspell card could be considered a good way to cause 'Soul damage' by denying the opponent the card without refunding the cost. Just keep in mind that the tradeoff needs to have some sting.
And of course there are going to be cards that do not cost Soul, but the main point of them is that they either exist as very niche answers or are overall weaker cards versus ones that cost Soul.
>>48254976
>>48255050
>Final note, then bed
Actually, I went a bit too low with that Soul. Soul 100 / Life 20 would work better. Of course, whether that remains constant or not is up to you; having Identities (ala Netrunner) that have different starting Soul / Life is also appealing but requires its own tuning.
So here's my first idea:
Lets say we use Duel Masters resource system. For each card you have in your mana zone, soul costs are reduced by 1. So it's a question of how long you wait for those cards to become affordable. Many cards could also be played from the mana zone with an added soul cost. Soul damage cards would exist as a way to punish people who start spending soul too soon.
not 100% sure if i should be asking this here but i was wondering how to stat a lever action pistol like pic related that could allow the use of spread bullets in pathfinder
>>48255109
Also, this would be how you balance cards that grant burst mana, since you're usually incurring a greater soul cost by jumping ahead.
Hi /gdg/, I was hoping you'd help me with this game I'm attempting to come up with.
In a larger scope, I wish to develop a complete RPG system but for now I want to focus on the Combat mechanics. I wanted to make a game that was a sort of "Boss Rush" where a team of 4 players go up against a single powerful enemy. Basically BBEG all the time. Most of my inspiration to do such a thing stems from the fact that no one seems to have developed a Monster Hunter tabletop RPG. I've also drawn influences from Evolve and Dark Souls.
Here are some of the Key points I want this combat system to hit:
>1v4 Asymmetrical Battle System
>For the team of 4, different weapons
>For the 1, increased Health and damage and special attacks
>Hopefully minimal RPG
>For now no character creation. Players will pick from a roster of pre-determined characters.
>Use of miniatures and Grids.
To attain these points I've thought of the following mechanics.
>Players have a Stamina pool. Each action expends stamina. Actions range from attacking, dodging and moving. Larger weapons obviously have higher stamina costs to swing around so swinging larger weapons would mean less options for the player.
>Set amount of stamina will return per game round.
>Movement is based on how much stamina a player will spend while dodging would make a player move a set distance.
>For the 1, localized damage. The 1 will have specific hitzones that take differing amounts of damage and have are harder or easier to hit.
>The 1 will have telegraphed movements when using an ability. For example a charge special ability for the 1 will make the 1 travel a specific distance. It falls on the four to figure out what tell telegraphs what ability.
>Each attack, both for the team of 4 and the 1 have specific ranges. For example a sword will be hitting a straight line in front of the players. An explosion will cover a specific amount of tiles etc.
cont..
>>48255817
Cont…
>Each turn the players queue up their actions spending Stamina points. When everyone has spent their stamina points, or have passed their turns all the actions resolve at the same time. If a player swings a sword in an arc, and the monster ends up in a space where the damage arc resolves, the monster will take a hit and vice versa.
That’s about all I’ve thought up. Please give me any feedback or criticisms and generally what you think of what I’ve thought up.
Been a while so I'm dropping off the asset sheets I've been making for Grid-Lock Combat, a side-scrolling skirmish with a character-action appeal. Would have slapped this into a .pdf but the program used (paint.net) doesn't allow for it (as far as I know)
>>48255847
Sorry about forgetting to remove the tripcode. Here are the race skills, with demonstration sprites showing what visual cues would take place when using each skill in particular.
>>48255847
>>48255857
The armory so then players know which items do what and how to best employ them. I don't have a glossary set up on the page yet but that's next on the docket.
>>48255847
>>48255857
>>48255869
And some of the enemies not shown in the demonstration section. These ones are naturally element-based, so using their parts in a crafting recipe holds a high chance of the result being of the same element.
>>48255882
>>48255869
>>48255857
>>48255847
Looks great!
Edited the skeleton a bit, mostly just resized the stats and type boxes, and added then added it into MSE.
I though about using nanDECK but I though it was too simple.
>>48260507
MSE?
>>48234006
What's the public opinion on wound tables?
>>48260507
Magic Set Editor.
So to review:
-Soul is like life but there are no ways to recover it.
-You lose if it reaches 0.
-Every mana cost comes with a soul cost.
-Each card in your mana zone reduces soul costs by 1 in addition to providing mana.
-Any card can be placed into the mana zone.
-Every card has "recovery cost", which is an amount of extra soul you can pay to play it from the mana zone.
So this system makes "land destruction" much more interesting because the mana zone is like a second hand. Cards that generate burst mana also enable playing more cards rather than playing bigger cards, and burning soul from somebody limits the effectiveness of their mana zone as a second hand.
>>48262117
I don't even believe Mana should exist in this game; that is what Soul is for.
>>48262878
Card games without incremental resources don't work.
what games have this mechanic?
Skills determinate size of dice pool of d6, you take best result and all 6 are +1, sum that to your attribute and compare to DC
what's the most reasonable solution to keeping track of ammunition in my spacey rp?
It might be to just keep track of it normally, but I've been thinking lately that there might a better choice design-wise. Ammunition running out isn't supposed to be a big part or a big problem, so maybe there's no need to keep track of it, just let the players have practically infinite (unless they try to abuse it)? Maybe just keeping track of magazines? Rolling die to determine ammo spent?
On one hand I really feel there might be a good solution to this that isn't "just keep track of the god damn ammunition"
on the other hand, I'm starting to think there isn't
input?
>>48264647
One solution somebody had for tracking ammo in 3.5 was to roll an extra die to determine whether you had the ammoa concept also used for abstract wealth systems. A 1 usually signified you didn't have ammo. You could use that idea with ammo by attaching a die size to magazine size (pistols have d6 ammo, SMGs have d8, LMGs have d10 etc,). if you roll a one you need to reload. Once you've burned through your available mags, you'll have to buy a refill. Statistically it should work well. It shouldn't cause much issue if you are luckier than average according to your post, but there is a chance someone could be particularly unlucky, causing them to burn through more ammo than expected.
Been working on a cardgame for a fucking long time, and we're finally putting shit together to hopefully fund in September. Anyone have any experience kickstarting? Any feedback?
>>48265046
Kickstarter is damn near a total fucking crapshoot. All the success stories don't give the whole story and even if you have everything go right, it can still fail.
Go to conventions.
Talk about the game to people.
Get a fan base going.
THEN launch a kickstarter.
On top of that, take every piece of advice that works for you.
>Don't do anything cringeworthy.
>Don't try to be funny.
>No one cares about you or your team, only the product.
>>48265262
We haven't been able to take it to conventions, but we mention the game to a lot of people, and we're demoing at local stores. The reason the kickstarter is in September is for the exact reason of we've been spending an entire summer trying to get momentum going.
As far the advice:
>Don't do anything cringeworthy
We don't plan on it
>Don't try to be funny
I straight up told our marketing/PR person to take a hike if they try to get cutesy
>No one cares about you
We only plan on briefly talking about ourselves, like less than a minute. The rest is entirely about the product.
Thanks anon!
So, I've been working on a resolution mechanic for wargame melee combat, and I've found something I really like. It's for a pre-ww2 tech level game, nothing alien or supernatural, and the focus really isn't on the infantry, so I decided on something simple, diceless, and brutal to make it go fast.
An infantryman kills another infantryman by moving through him. It's assumed that he speared the other guy on his bayonet or killed him with an entrenching tool and kept running. You can only charge in a straight line, and if you hit a second enemy infantryman in one turn, you stop.
How does this sound as the basis of a melee system? Any obvious problems?
Note that cannons and artillery are present and have areas of effect, so you won't want to bunch up your infantry into pike blocks.
>>48265469
It'll depend on the scale. Biggest glaring issue is it can make combat more appealing than shooting, so it may turn into a rush to get close, but not too close, to the enemy in order to "run them over".
apge 10 bump. After a full scrapping of my previous project, I'm still working on a minimum before I post.
I might just try to rewrite a project stuck on a malfunctioning computer. It'll be easier to get something comment worthy.
>>48268726
>After a full scrapping of my previous project
That's a shame.
I almost have my second game ready for public playtesting. It's exciting. My first one is in a final revision state, then I'm going to have a limited printing so I can demo it at cons before launching a kickstarter for a full printing. Every group I playtested it with loved it so far. This is the game I posted about in a thread about a month ago about a friend ripping it off at a company he works for. I sent them a cease and desist and as far as they claim they won't be pursuing any such project.
This second one is way more ambitious and I haven't seen a game with this gimmick before. If testing works out we'll do a few revision rounds and then take it on tour for like 5-6 months while doing twice monthly public test nights.
Exciting.
Atrributes are ranked 1-5, Skills are ranked 1-10. Attributes cost a little bit more to increase. All rolls are made by 2d10, pick the higher one + relevant attribute and skill. Does this sound like shit?
>>48265262
I can't stress getting something in a tangible presentable state that real people get to mess with before going to kickstarter enough.
I did work with a company that does board game development and publishing and they had a kickstarter project that was funded pretty fast.
They hadn't worked out most everything.
Their marketing people offered all this stuff as stretch goals that the designers never would have wanted to add on.
It was a colossal mess for them to jame all that crap in to one game and it really hurt the game in a lot of ways.
On that end, don't have wild stretch goals you haven't at least already worked out enough to know if they are viable.
>>48271706
We have it mostly put together. All that needs finishing is the rest of the art, and getting actual high-quality print/production done. Graphically the frames, logos, and symbols are done. Designing, and developmentally the first set is entirely completed and we have been doing playtests with groups to tweak balance issues.
We have admittedly subpar printed proxies done and templated, so it's not like we are totally going in blind. Like I said we've been working on this for a fucking long time (I first started designing the game three years ago).
>>48271435
Related to this, can some helpful person tell me if any dice calculators can give you a curve on the "roll x, pick highest" formula? How?
>>48272120
What exactly do you want ?
>>48273240
well, for example, what kind of an curve would 2d10, pick the higher one, give?
>>48273387
http://anydice.com/program/8d7c
Quick question, trying to design a game where 3-6 players control fantasy gangs in a city trying to stop the police/government from creating a device that'll STOP ALL CRIME. Among many issues, I'm not sure how best to do the map. Should I have a bunch of hexes/squares to represent locations/adjacency? Should I have locations represented on a grid? Should I make a graph where each node represents a location?
I'm leaning towards the first with districts so you can guarantee certain nodes will be roughly in a certain area. Thoughts?
>>48251517
Changed the skeleton again, made skeletons for the other card types besides units.
The first one is for ethers (temporary effects) & techs (continuous effects), the second one is for units and the last one is for rulers.
I though about handling combat like this:
The attacker chooses what units he wishes to attack with from those units who can attack, and divide them into 2 groups. A group can consist of 0 up to N, where N is the total number of possible attacking units.
One group will attack the defending player's units and the other will attack the defending player's ruler.
The attacker decides which group will strike first.
If the group is attacking the ruler the defending player can choose what units will block and how. But if the group is attacking the units the attacking player will decide how it will go
>>48255824
Hello again guys. I've managed to finish the basic skeleton of this system.
Can I ask you guys to look through it and offer some criticisms? Thanks.
>>48266226
It's a 28mm game. And I kind of want to encourage melee because it's a trench warfare game
>>48276867
What is the basic resolution mechanic?
>>48263314
None that I know so far, but it's interesting, making attributes contribute with fixed and skills adding the variance is quite nice...you just have to be careful with balancing, otherwise it makes for some great times, for instance, a high agility may auto-evade most area-attacks whereas slower characters need to roll their skill....
>>48274620
That depends a lot on what is most relevant for the game, for instance should this be a "mission-based" game an approach close to pic would be good
Okay, I need some math help. Say you have five options, of which you can pick any unique combination two (order does not matter, ie AB=BA).
Say each of these has three choices of three options apiece (ie choose one of ABC, one of DEF and one of GHI, again order doesn't make them different).
My thinking is the first problem is 10 combinations and the last is 3^3=27, so the total is 270 combinations.
Is this correct?
>>48275790
Sitting duck for a whole queuing phase for surprise seems a bit extreme (supposing players have a bigger pool of SP in late game)...
>>Actions that displace a
combatant may only be added the Combat Queue once per Queuing Phase.
Does this means that you can only move, run or dodge in a given turn? Other than that the only thing I can recommend is to use "instant" resolution as announce first resolve latter can get messy (queuing itself would require an order or it would need to be simultaneous/blind for balance issues)
>>48279912
It seems correct, assuming you can't repeat an option on the first one (e.g: AA) and that in the second step all options are different (each one of those three choices offer three unique options)
>>48275790
Ops...the thing about sitting duck is about surprise turns...
>>48280046
Okay, and say you have one slot with five options, three slots with 22 options and one slot with 4 options?
>5
>22
>22
>22
>4
>>48280292
30800 possibilities, assuming those 22 options are the same the three times, without repetitions and the order doesn't matter....why are you calculating those odds/numbers, just to know the amount of possible characters available at a given system?
>>48280593
Yeah.It's blatantly ripped from Guild Wars 2
What would be some good sci-fantasy classes?
Is there a way to do d% opposed rolls without the entire game bogging down into shit?
>rolls d100, checks for degrees of success
>opponent rolls d100, checks for degrees of success
>compare results
At least with a d20 system you can just assume the other guy rolled a 10 and have static values.
>>48282852
Have the players roll at the same time.
>>48282852
Eclipse Phase has an interesting mechanic, where:
1) The winner of an opposing roll is the one who rolls higher (or crit) while INSIDE their respective skill tests.
2) You have Moxie (Fate points basically) that you can use to inverse your roll (Meaning 73 turns to 37).
This ensures that the one with higher skill wins more often, but it still comes down to the dice.
>>48283113
So basically if two players both succeed, with, say, 40 and 70 in their respective skills, if the player with higher skill rating rolls more than 40 but less that 70, they basically win automatically, unless the other rolls a crit (which is doubles). Same applies if they roll anything that can be inverted to a higher number than 40 but less that 70.
Of course, my view of the Moxie system is lopsided because I have a character who can use that 6 times every play session.
>>48280046
So far I've decided that SP will be set throughout the game. It can only be increased with consumables and for a limited amount of time only.
The Surprise is based off of the D&D 5e where a surprised character cannot participate in the first game turn.
Move, Run, Dodge is limited to one each per turn. But for example you have a weapon that can swing with little SP, you can keep adding Attack to the Combat queue.
The queuing itself would be blind. One side of the conflict will not be able to see the queue of the opponent. I wanted to use cards for this system so it's like you make a "deck" out of your cards and that's your combat queue.
I really really appreciate the feedback. I'll cleanup some wording so it's a bit clearer.
How does knock-back fit into your guys' systems? As in, under what circumstances would a character or characters be forced to change position?
For instance if they were blown back by a low damage wind attack to push them towards a trap or environmental hazard.
>>48285231
Specifically referring to Grid based rpg's and the like.
>>48285231
For games that have attacks that have attack templates like cones and circles, moving characters to outside the range when they get hit can simulate knock back.
Should perception be a physical or a mental attribute?
>>48285231
>>48285260
Knock back is typically the realms of contact actions and is normally for getting melee guys the hell out of your face. You could also use it to clear some of the shorter ranged weapons away or break LoS. It's typically actions like heavy kicks, shoulder charges or full tackles or eating an explosion to the face.
Unrelated but just more a general question. My group was looking me to homebrew up a mechanics heavy JJBA game (I understand the levels of bullshit balancing I'd be dealing with yes) but it requires me taking a break from my current project. Is it a good idea to take a break from a project for a refresh or am I asking to get my ass kicked by side projects and return procrastination? I've been running low on steam and slowing down for a while and it seems like a good and enjoyable change of pace but I'm hesitant.
>>48275790
Hey guys, I'm looking for advice on how to make this wording clearer. A friend of mine who read through it said the wording seemed clunky. Please tell me what you think and please give suggestions on how to fix it.
>Combatant Sheathes/Unsheathes their weapon. If a combatant has an Unsheathe Token when this is added to the Combat Queue, remove the Unsheathe Token. If a combatant does not have an Unsheathe Token when this Action is added to the Combat Queue, gain an Unsheathe Token
Basically there is a pool of cards that you add to your deck(Combat Queue) and if the "Sheath Card" enters your deck it either gives you or removes the Unsheathe Token
Would you say that having an attribute upkeep cost is a good idea?
That meaning that if your attributes can be 1-5, having it as 4 or 5 has an upkeep cost, because keeping your skills sharp causes you to have to sacrifice your exp gains. Something like 4=1xp and 5=2xp, for example every second session. And to make it fair, let's say that players get 10 xp every game session. Meaning in ten play sessions, having two attributes at 4 and one at 5 would net you a total cost of 20/100xp.
>>48286865
Definitely. I have been struggling with my main system for a long time now, and one of the things that helped a lot with it was to make some smaller systems on the side (I made two one-sheeters). Locking yourself to one project chains you to the whims of that project, meaning that when it isn't progressing well, you don't feel well.
Though, I gotta still admit, that doing a mechanics-heavy Jojo game willl NOT be easy by any measure. If you have a solid idea of how, however, then go ahead.
>>48289509
Oh boy. I just realized that the way my current system is going, while it might not require them outright, having some oddities called d14 and d16 might be beneficial in higher-power games.
Is this bad? They are made by some companies, but unless I make my game physical and ship the odd dice with them, wouldn't most people be unable to attain some weirder dice, unless they order them online.
This is because my system currently has a Ryuutama-like system, where attributes are valued as dice rather than raw digits. Meaning the attribute values can be d4, d6, d8, d10 and d12. But to higher power / longer games, possibility to raise them to d14 and d16 could also be possible, if the GM / player happens to own any.
By default all attributes start at d6, and they are malleable to any direction. So theoretically someone can get a stat to maximum at the very beginning by sacrificing three other attributes (There are basically 10 in total), but it is very ill advised, because the upkeep cost of having a stat that high is really punishing at earlier points of the game. As stated in my previous post, you will lose 1/10th of your total exp by having one high skill, not to talk about the fact that unless you specialize your rolls (Rolling STR + STR, for example), you don't actually benefit anything (Rolling 1d4 + 1d12 is only marginally better from rolling 2d8)
>>48289509
>Not be easy by any measure
>Laughing[KingCrimson].png
>Laughing[GoldExperienceRequiem].png
>Laughing[MadeInHeaven].png
>Laughing[ZAWARUDO].png
Trust me, I understand why it's never ever attempted... or even looked at it. Or why even the series can't even keep it's power creep down. But that's part of the fun!It's not even gonna be remotely balanced but if we can make it work!
>>48291554
Well, when there's a will, there's a way. Go ahead, break a leg.
Do you think in an rpg a very meagerly skilled character should have any chance at succeeding in a maximum difficulty task, even with the help of tools etc.?
>>48292658
Depends on the tools. If the tools are partially automated (a somewhat modern / futuristic setting), then I would give a chance of success, maybe on a maximum roll.
If the tools are pretty crude or simplistic, and the know-how of the character is limited, I would say... No. Unless the system has some sort of "super-crit" like that eponymous "Nat 20 = I am god" kind of biz (Even though I'd say something like 000 on d100 would be more appropriate, or 12-12 on 2d12, because they are relatively more rare).
Holy shit, listening to OST of 999 currently, and I just realized, I kind of want to make a game that incorporates digital roots. Fuck me for again getting a new dumb idea to be excited about.
>>48292895
After twiddling with the idea of digital roots, making calculations and looking at the dice, the progression in that game would be rather difficult.
Ideas I twiddled with: Getting the smallest possible digital root is the way to victory (because getting 1 with 2 dice is impossible). The attribute / skill of the player is the maximum the digital root can be for success. The difficulty of the roll is represented as the highest die they can use. They can choose to roll any dice under it, the key being that they roll two dice, but they must be different sizes.
Somewhere along the lines of that, but it just got muddled when I realized that the chances of getting a 1 is basically higher with dices d6, and all the implications... I will just stick with my current system, it's quite good, and there's no reason for something so complicated as digital root to determine success, because that is just really random.
>>48292658
Depends on the task.
Someone who has never picked up a paint brush will never paint a masterwork no matter how lucky they get, someone who has never held a sword might just get lucky and shove it into someone's throat
I would say physical tasks should always be potentially doable unless it's literally impossible, like a DYEL 4 foot manlet jumping a 20 foot chasm, but heavily knowledge based skills like lockpicking, artistry, possibly magic depending on the setting, language, ect should 100% require skill.
>>48292895
>>48293847
Related to this, which do you think would make more sense as a dicesystem, if the minimum skill is 1 and maximum is 15, 2d6 or 2d8?
what do you guys think of this system:
"Attributes + Skills = number of d6, only 6 succeeds
Skills also give bonus points to add after a roll, so you can bump die results up to 6.
For example, with an attribute of 5 (average) and a skill of 4, you roll: [6] [5] [4] [4] [3] [3] [2] [1] [1] sorted.
You have 4 bonus points. You spend 1 on that [5] to make it a [6], and 2 more on a [4] to make it a [6], but your last remaining bonus point isn't enough to bump up the other [4] all the way.
The result of this roll is 3 successes."
Dude in other thread did it >>48291327, i though it was cool
>>48295807
Kinda neat. Actually really neat. Though, it would seem to get dice bloat REALLY fast. Meaning that if you have a higher skill and a higher attribute, you're suddenly rolling 14 dice.
Of course, if you want a highly pooling system, then sure, but it seems it might get slow, especially in combat, where rolls are done quite often.
what are the DCs for 2d6+stuff?
>>48296402
Depends on how much "stuff" there is.
If the average of "stuff" is something like 2, consider 7-8. http://anydice.com/program/12eb
If the average is something like 5, consider 10-12. http://anydice.com/program/cf9
>>48296485
Of course, these are just anchor numbers. Easier actions are less, harder are more, duh.
>>48296485
lets say 2D6+Skills+Attribute , what should be the cap for bot skills and attributes?, 5 on both?
>>48296576
Well, in such a low variability system (2d6), I'd reckon going with modifiers instead of straightforward attribute / skill - to - roll is better, because otherwise attributes and skills would either be very limited, akin to 1-3, or the DC:s would need to be somewhere like 15-16 to be logical. http://anydice.com/program/8db7
1-3 has the problem that it feels like it undermines player agency, by making the progression in the game feel extremely choppy, or at worst, nonexistent. Even though character progression in games actually just ends up to being from 1-3 in many cases.
So either raise the DC:s to higher difficulties and keep them straight - to - roll, or add modifiers instead of putting them straight to the roll.
>>48296722
>>48296576
If you're going with straight-to-roll, I'd suggest 1-5 with DC:s starting from 10-12, going all the way up to 18 or so.
If you're going with modifiers, the stats can be anything, really. I'd probably suggest 1-10, with maximum (10 exclusively) giving either +3 or +4, depending on how strong you want the players to become.
>>48296793
Of course, you can also mix them up, keeping one as a "base stat" and the other as "supplementary stat".
>>48296793
>>48296722
How about Attribute = xd6
Skill = +X
so normal resolution will be
xd6+x>=DC
>>48297001
In that case, the DC:s should vary ~7-25. 25 would be 30% chance for even with 5d6+5, meaning it's an ABSOLUTELY GARGANTUAN task, where as 7 would be 70% with 2d6+1. This means the average would again set to somewhere in the 10-12 area.
Hey /gdg/ I'm in the earliest stages of a new game idea. Do you know any games with good or interesting vehicle construction rules?
So for everyone here interested in CCG/TCG type games, I have a question -
Is it possible to do a incremental but fungible resources well?
Something like, gaining 3 Resource points a turn, with unspent Resources remaining in your resource pool and you can't amass more than 10 points total.
How difficult would it be to balance cards for a setup like that as opposed to an incremental yet permanent resource system like Hearthstone, where you gain 1 per turn but they are infinitely reusable.
Ideally I want to figure out a setup where cards that cost 1 aren't just hand-filling crap, but cards that cost 2 or 3 (or even 4 or 5) aren't a complete waste of time to play because those resources would be better spent on 1 cost swarm tactics.
>>48300304
I know a big thing to balance is going to be tempo. The incremental but permanent system is a lot more stable, so tempo is easier to control and balance. The other system adds another variable to balancing cards. In Hearthstone, for the most part, you know when certain cards can come out, but your proposed system can end up with things ranging from saving up each turn for a quick drop versus taking several turns because you're dropping little bits here and there along the way. I'm not saying Hearthstone's system is superior, just that balance will take a lot more work, similar to how MtG has to take into account mana-drought or ramping when they make cards.
>>48301980
Yeah, the tempo thing was what was bugging me.
In games like Magi Nation or that old Deadlands CCG you started out with a ton of resources and renewed a certain amount each turn, so pretty much any card was a 1st turn drop.
And then there's Epic, where almost every card is free to play, but certain cards cost 1 Gold and you only get 1 per turn and it disappears at the end of the turn if you don't use it.
Bump
By twiddling around with >>48295807 's ideas, I came up with a digital root system that's actually pretty neat.
Digital root = throw 3d10 (0-9), your attributes and skills are modifier points you can use to change the dice up or down (Cannot go under 0, cannot go over 9) Difficulty of the roll is the final digital root it must be.
Rolling 000 is the zero root miracle, when some super weird shit happens. Rolling 999 is hard 9 root, the ultimate failure, and the dice cannot be modified (the chance for 999 is 1/1000, 000 is a little more possible because higher skill characters can shift the dice more)
Does it make sense? I think it could be pretty good in some respects.
Digital root = you roll 5, 2, 8 = 15 = 1+5 = 6.
>>48307131
Final digital root or lower it must be*
I have a few questions
What mechanics/system haves the same probability as a dice pool mechanic
What mechanic/systems have a success count without using a dice pool mechanic
Can someone point me out, is there a nice compedium online of most common dice mechanics and their benefits/flaws?
>>48309549
http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=21479 in the link dump
So a business model question. How would people feel about different scale rulesets that use the same line of models to represent them? The example I'm thinking of is how GW introduced War of the Ring, where it used the LOTRSBG miniatures in a more Warhammer scale game. The idea would be to hook them in with a skirmish level game, and as their collection expands, they can move to the larger game.
WOTR wasn't a success, but that had more to do with issues with the rules and GW trying to sweep LOTR under the rug.
>>48261382
i'm not familiar with that term, care to elaborate?
>>48309105
That doesn't seem logical at all?
The probability curve of dice pools is really hard to replicate, unless you make something of a success mechanic, such as... First I can come up with would be a savage worlds -type system, with ascending dice type. Meaning your skill is defined by whether you roll d4/d6/d8/d10/d12. Then, every dice has 50% chance of success, and the amount of successes from the die comes from lower end of the die, meaning d4 can give 1, 2 successes and 3, 4 are failures; d6 can give 1, 2, 3 successes and 4, 5, 6 as failures; d8 can give 1, 2 ,3 ,4 successes and 5, 6, 7, 8 as failures.
Something like that, maybe use 2dX, or d6+dX or something to count the successes.
That's like the only system that would have the same ballpark of progression as dice pools, but it might be inconvenient in other cases.
You can try though, get some dice and try out.
>>48310774
Not that guy, but a wound table is a mechanic in some RPG's where injuries taken by a character don't just damage an abstract HP number but also get a random roll to see what physical injury the character took which can include some pretty severe results depending on the table (i.e. severed limb, broken bones, etc.)
>>48310816
that sounds pretty interesting and i was looking for something similar to that
but wouldn't it turn into a bookkeeping nightmare very quickly?
So I hate d100 venomously for the most part because it's a flat random number generator with not probabilistic determination for result. It's not really much of a problem with the Basic RPG system at all, but 40k RPG's are nightmares.
So back in the 80's, Gygax made a system called Cyborg Commando. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyborg_Commando
It was kinda terrible, but the system was apparently rather good. So I was thinking of how to fix the biggest problem with the 40k RPG's where you have a soldier 60-70% chance to fail anything basic, so your DoS don't really matter. I was thinking of trying the d10x system.
Anyone got any experience with d10x? For the unenlightened, you roll 1d10*1d10 and compare the results. Average is 30 for the roll, with 50% of the result being under 21.
>>48310842
Wound tables can have some issues depending on how they are implemented but it all comes down to the complexity of the system in the end.
A quick example of a fairly simple wound table I'd seen before is here:
http://trollsmyth.blogspot.com/2008/06/playing-with-death-and-dismemberment.html
and it mostly serves to just make combat waaaay more brutal than hacking at each others HP, but can result in messy character deaths pretty soon.
So it works for a certain style of gameplay, but wouldn't necessarily be universally loved.
>>48310809
DICE+MODS-DIFFICULTY = SUCCESSES?
I think that its better to don't have a static difficulty
So I'm making a TTRPG- although it started in concept as a forum quest- that in setting is essentially a combination of Legends of the Hidden Temple and Mastaba Snoopy.
It's my first homebrew, and I'm honestly not incredible well-versed in TTRPGs. I've played a few but I've never been incredibly deep into them.
I guess I have a couple questions.
How many adjectives/mutations/sort-of-permanent-affects can a game that incorporates them have before it's too much? Should I be shooting for a hundred, or would fifty do?
Similarly, how many creatures should I have in the game natively? Is it considered odd to expect GMs to come up with some on their own, even if creating creatures is fairly easy?
Are mechanically simpler games any good?
Sorry if these are obvious or stupid questions.
>>48311094
Isn't that just a more complex TN system? Unless you mean to implement something like what I thought of, that is basically a TN system where you just cut your TN to two, to the difficulty and the required successes.
>>48309105
For every [5] above the Minimum Amount [30], you get one success. 1d100 [86] 86/5 = 11 successes
For every [5] above Contested Roll you get one success. 1d100 [74] vs 1d100 [49] 74-49 = 25. 25/5 = 5 successes.
For every multiple of TN [3] you get one success. 1d20 [17] 17/3 = 5 successes
Have you ever designed your own miniatures or used a 3d printer? How did you do it, or how would you do so if you wanted to? How does your personal design process for making or converting stuff go?
>>48313430
I'll have to find the videos later, but I know a guy that designed his own miniature line posted some tutorials for using Z-brush to sculpt them onto Youtube.
Hey guys, I'm struggling to write this rule in a way that's clearer. Can any of you suggest a better format?
POISON
Some enemies can poison Agents. The POISON status is recorded on the character sheet and POISON damage accrued at a rate of one point per turn. Damage is not deducted from the Agent's HITPOINTS. Instead, at the end of each of the Agent's turns roll a D6; on a roll of 1 the Agent succumbs to the poison damage, losing a number of HITPOINTS equal to the number of poison damage he has accumulated. The Agent also loses all poison damage points he accumulated. On any other result the Agent retains the Poison damage score and continues play as normal.
>>48316187
Jesus, just let this poor starving thread die already.
How slow does a thread have to be to need to get bumped on a glacial board like /tg/?
>>48316238
>>48316238
>glacial board
>quests allowed on said board
pick one.
>>48316299
back in my day we didn't do any of that quest bullshit
the most we did was have constant battles between 40k and warmahordes posters and the people who argued whether or not dwarf fortress was /tg/ or /v/
that and the edition wars
>>48316330
I shouldn't miss those days...but I do.
>>48316366
same here
boards changed since I was a regular
