If AC on average remains less than damage, is it reasonable to roll to hit then deduct AC from damage dealt in a d20 game? Of course, a d20 wouldn't usually be the damage die.

Thread questions I guess. Not necessarily specific to RPGs:

>What's your mechanic for conflict resolutions (fights, arguments, not necessarily combat)?

>What's your mechanic for peaceful interaction (talking, negotiation, etc.)?

>What's your mechanic for determining the exact timing for things to go wrong?

>>46281012
1. I'd usually allow for a a skill check (referred to as proficiency check because [SKILL] is an attribute) of whatever seemed appropriate
2. Usually just roleplay, unless something key like deception is necessary. At that point, its another proficiency check.
3. How do you mean? As in when do negative repercussions occur? Usually immediately, as proficiency checks are used to measure uncertainty or failures. For example, if I want to jump a gap, I roll 1d20 and add the proficiency bonus for acrobatics. Standard fare, but it works.

File: f2b73c977aed4a07de904289f2c01d83.jpg (64 KB, 736x829) Image search: [Google]

64 KB, 736x829

Working on a board game, personally.

Anyone have a copy of this? Shit is stupid expensive.

The possibilties of auto-fails and auto-successes; thoughts?

I don't have any RPG examples, but games like Warmachine and 40k have things like this. A classic examples is in 40k, the Wraithlord has always had a toughness value high enough that there was a minimum strength value required to harm it, as well as how vehicle armor works, it also forces a minimum strength value to harm it. This forces players to to think with a rounded plan and deters extreme builds that couldn't handle them. What are people's ideas on this kind of skewing? Should everything be brought down to a level where there's a chance that something might succeed, no matter what it is, or should players have a realistic limit where somethings just aren't going to work?

I've found personally that, while the idea of that kind of skew leaves a bad taste in my mouth, the opposite is too limiting. When anything can succeed at anything, instead of making extraordinary stand-out, it just makes it mechanically better. If a pistol can damage a tank, then an RPG is just a better pistol, than a specific counter to an element. It also takes away from the feeling of difficulty. Going back to the pistol and RPG example, a tank that can be harmed by a pistol doesn't feel like a big, unstoppable challenge, it feels like a numbers game.

What do people think, should players be encouraged to make the game their own and play how they like, or should there be limits to add weight to the mechanics?

File: OrdinaryWorld_TwitterBanner.png (343 KB, 1500x500) Image search: [Google]

343 KB, 1500x500

I guess it's as good a time as any, but I finally got my shit together and released a beta of Ordinary World. It's a hefty read at a 100+ pages, but I managed a short test today. It worked out pretty well. Above expectations (read: it didn't catch fire) at least. It was pretty solid from my perspective.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/lb8ipqsxq5g2f8l/OrdinaryWorldRPG_BETA_001.pdf?dl=0

Just looking for feedback. Like, serious "I read the whole book and I have some serious feels about this" feedback. You can post here if the thread lasts, or an email to [email protected]

Thanks for the help Anons. It couldn't have gotten this far without yous.

>>46283853
I feel auto fails should be included in a game system.

I'm a longtime D&D player / DM'er, and though I like d20 in general, the lack of such a mechanic is a glaring weakness. A Character with 1 Strength (minimum strength required to be able to move under your own power) can, in theory, beat a Character with 20 Strength (super human level) in an arm wrestling match if the dice are rolled just right, (about 12% chance i believe). This should NEVER be possible at all. In Tunnels & Trolls however, Attribute Checks (Saves) are done by addind the whole Attribute Score to a roll of 2d6, instead of using modifiers and a d20. This means that if you are in an opposed contest, your Attribute needs to be within 10 points or so of your opponent's in order to even have the remotest chance of winning. This is the closest example of an auto pass / fail system that I can think of as far as Attributes go. I have been working on a system for combat that uses the same basic principals.

Thought this was interesting:

http://frictionalgames.blogspot.com.au/2014/04/4-layers-narrative-design-approach.html

It's written with video game design in mind but it's still a good read for tabletop storytelling.

>>46281569
>As in when do negative repercussions occur?
More or less, the idea is that there's a mechanic that's affected by the mechanics in the above two questions, and there's a tipping point where things start going south/detrimental to the player. The question sounded better in my head, honestly, but it would be interesting to see if anyone thought up something for it.

If you could give text adventure games like Corruption of Champions or TiTS actual gameplay on top of the decision making and exploration, what kind of combat would you prefer?

>>46289766
Omitting porn I should clarify.

I've got two major questions for the room regarding a module I'm working on.

>when working with dice pools do you guys prefer one standard array of dice that just get larger in number? Or do you guys prefer fewer dice that start out as small dice, but grow into bigger dice as time goes on?

Also
>when working with skills, do you guys like to have a more structured set up with certain classes getting exclusive access to certain things or would you rather pick from a large list of potential skills/abilities to flesh out your own character?

>>46284892
The game I'm currently working on is potentially going to be highly reliant on this. AC will not be exceptionally flexible, and certain enemies will almost always be hit, but will feature incredible amounts of health or AC.
The reason for this is because two skills featured are AIM and DODGE. The check for hit is 1d20+AIMvs10+DODGE. From here they roll damage die and add appropriate modifier from whichever attribute the weapon uses, minus AC. My only fear is that AC on stronger enemies will fully outclass weapons, and I didn't plan to implement a magic item economy equivalent.

>>46284892
I think another often overlooked and interesting part is the auto-success. It seems almost taboo when it comes to in games. Even games that include auto-fail aspects seem to avoid auto-success.

Personally, I think it should be rare, but I'm not opposed to it. Looking at your examples, its the same as the Strength 1 and 20 characters, the Strength 1 character shouldn't be able to win against the Strength 20 character, but I've seen a lot of games that think the Strength 20 character should have a chance to fail against the Strength 1 character.

I do feel that there should be some extreme cases of 'bad luck', just to keep it interesting, but with reasoning behind it more than "There's always a chance of random deflection or super lucky reflexes, so a roll of '1' is always a failure". I have a system like that, but with a backing, its your weapon malfunctions. It gives a real sense of bad luck and gives instances where weapons that can't malfunction ignore it and so don't have that chance of failure.

>>46286855
Both video games and tabletop benefit a lot from cross-examination, since they both are interactive entertainment. They may do it in different ways, but the ideas are the same.

>>46290325
I think auto-success does appear, though, and at that point the d20 is simply a formality roll, and if that roll happens to be a 1, then the failure occurs. It's largely an automatic success though.

>>46291536

if it's a rare challenge that might be fine, but if this is a game where you roll a d20 every time you swing your sword you're going to be rolling that roll more than 20 times a night. something "incredibly rare" shouldn't be a thing that players expect to happen a couple of times every gaming session.

looking to build a tabletop PnP for players which feels a little like XCom. I want to have a "build phase" where players manage resources, conduct diplomacy and trade, upgrade structures in their keep, and do research, and then a tactical phase with small squads doing combat.

1. any easy place to steal mechanics from for the Build phase?

2. there's a lot of resource links at the top of the thread i can try to get through, but can anyone point me in the direction of a resource for "research trees" (setting will probably be slightly-mystical Italian Renaissance)?

>>46292406
Don't know any places with that kind of mechanic outside of what games like Necromunda did, but really, the hardest part would be determining how resources would be gained and at what rate you want expansion.

>Gets an idea for a game system
>Starts sketching out ideas on paper
>I need to keep track of this shit
>starts writing it down in notepad
>uses pseudo programming syntax for clarity
>devolves into using outright programming
>Because it will make it 'easier to run the numbers en masse'
>Continue
>Get stuck in how to phrase something

>Slow realization.

>mfw I need to go to /v/ instead

>>46283022
http://bookzz.org/book/636161/9eb078
not downloaded it, but here you go. there's also a smaller pdf and a chm version if you want. just click the link for katie salen and they'll show up.

>>46292406
>>46292733
that to me screams worker placement. I'll stick with the x-com comparison since it's easiest. you'd send a meeple out to butter up a country to get a bit more cash from them/improve relations if they fell. you'd place a researcher on a tech tree to research a skill. alternatively you could have a deck of cards in a semi-randomized order so that light plasma rifles would come before precision lasers. you'd have a few face up cards on the table and then you'd place a worker there to research that. to be extra punishing you could have the 2 or 3 or however many face up cards you didn't research get discarded so you can't research them in the future. same could be done with buildings, or you could not wipe them clean and just put some cash on the buildings/techs that weren't picked up that turn so they're more sought after next turn

I am struggling with a morale system for my wargame. I originally had it based on the health of the model, but then I changed how health works. Right now I have a placeholder system that's just Warhammer's system with damage affecting it, but I'm still not happy with it.

I'm working on a sci fi game, but I'm having trouble making up alien races that aren't just animal/human hybrids

>>46295299
What flavor of sci-fi?

>>46294341
>http://bookzz.org/book/636161/9eb078
Not the original requester - but thank you very much just the same. It's greatly appreciated.

File: -1 3 7 12.png (58 KB, 1076x412) Image search: [Google]

58 KB, 1076x412

>>46290325
The system I'm working on uses 3d20 take middle (i.e. roll three dice and discard the high and low roll).

-1 is untrained
3 is average/trained
7 is the unaugmented human maximum
12 is augmented human maximum

Dodge rating is equivalent to 10+reflex, so a character with 3 in their weapon skill has a 2.8% chance of hitting someone with 12 reflex. A character with 12 in their weapon skills has a 100% chance of hitting someone with reflex 3 or under, and a 99.28% chance of hitting someone with reflex 4.

Challenge DCs tend to range from 5 to 30, so there's a decent range of auto-success and autofail potential but I prefer to keep things in the 10-20 range when possible.

>>46295549
It's going to be a sort of middle sci-fi. Lasers and slug throwers, some basic psychic powers, most ships are slow, hyperspace is only through gates.

My current races right now are humans which are a loose confederacy of different factions (Corps, royal houses, free colonies, etc), a race of amphibian skinned people who are average height but stronger because of high gravity on their homeworld. And a race of short four armed and ashy skinned aliens that have no homeworld and are rumored to be genetically engineered, they're good at piloting ships so they act as mercs for other armies.

I'm trying to avoid the generic animal/human hybrid races.

>>46295803
Then think biome instead of animals. Like with the strong amphibians, think of what kind of niche the race would fill, and develop it from there.

For example, say a race that developed on a planet in regions with dense forestation. You could have the race have long limbs, strong claws, and a preference for indirect confrontation, due to developing ambush tactics by dropping on prey and threats from the treetops. This extends beyond things like military tactics, interaction with foreign species could be seen the same, an attitude of avoiding confrontation until they have an advantage, then striking aggressively.

File: Hellsgate v0.27.pdf (1 B, 486x500) Image search: [Google]

1 B, 486x500

Bumping with the latest version of Hellsgate.

File: archaeology.jpg (1 MB, 1654x1384) Image search: [Google]

1 MB, 1654x1384

I'm curious if you guys think this is a sound idea. Only started brainstorming ideas today, but the thread needs a bump so why not.

It's an archaeology themed worker placement game. The main game board would be a world map with locations to explore in Egypt, Mesopotamia, Mesoamerica, and at the very least another location or two that I haven't settled on. each location would have a unique deck of cards associated with them which would be the relics you're trying to collect. To lead an expedition, you have to place a worker at the location and pay a gold. you're not blocked if someone beats you to the location you want, you just have to pay more gold for each worker already there

Once all the workers have been placed, players draw cards from the areas they lead expeditions to. They don't get to look at the cards right away however, they place them face down in the research section of their personal player board. They have to assign a worker to research for 1-3 turns, gaining more potential cash each turn. alternatively it takes just 1 turn in the lab and all items are worth the same amount of gold, but getting different sets gives bonus points at the end

it then moves to the museum section of the player board where it will provide gold every round you have a worker assigned to the museum. One player can send a worker to Paris and run an exhibit at the Louvre for more money, but they can't run their personal museum at the same time.

File: tentative_name_03_06.pdf (1 B, 486x500) Image search: [Google]

1 B, 486x500

I haven't put much work into Sword Fury lately. It's due for a rewrite, but I know I am going to need to cut some stuff. If you could give it a read through and let me know what I should cut, I would greatly appreciate it.

Now some feedback for others...


>>46298784
Work on your text alignment so it looks nicer.
Could use a table of contents and book marks.
It's looking like you're making a lot of good progress!
You've playtested this, right?

>>46301710

How is initiative determined in your game?

That's really~ important in worker placement games.

>>46302048
Yeah, its an eyesore. I'm in such an unstable stage of development that I haven't invested in cleaning up any more than making it legible.

I haven't been able to playtest the latest changes.

The first thing that I was looking at is the Doom points, and what I can suggest is to give a suggested amount of Doom points that a GM should use in a scene, just to give an idea what would be considered fair to the players. Not a hard rule, just a rule of thumb of what you intend the points to be worth.

>>46302944
I know what you mean. Graphic design and layout really is one of those things you want to put off until the end after you've made sure that the rules are complete.

Have you been doing playtesting on roll20?

Also, good point about Doom points. I'll be sure to write in some guidelines for that, thanks!

have some ideas for a procedural developing game world, one that evolves somewhat randomly based on player progression

>travel to a place is given in number of events generated
>events include encounters, discoveries, and other stuff
>discoveries can include finding hidden locations, such as dungeons
>this discovery 'marks' them on a map, players can go back to them just like it was a previously existing location
>the dungeons build themselves as the player explores them, based on a series of mechanics defined upon the dungeon's location definition
>locations can change based on events that happen to them (based on another system where happenings are generated on a certain interval)

I don't really know what to do with these ideas though, I'd like it to be some kind of exploration game, probably heavy in discovery and good old-fashioned crawling. The ability for world locations to change dynamically as play progressed is also something I like. Maybe what I'm envisioning is more of a Heroes of Might and Magic experience, where players raise up forces to combat one another in what's ultimately a vs. game? I'm open to ideas on whatever, just looking for some direction with these concepts.

>>46295016
The health system used to be < half affect morale or something right? What's the new system?

>>46303228
Don't really know much about Roll20, been doing the playtesting in person.

Just make sure the guidelines aren't to hard. Its something the DM should be able to control, so it doesn't limit the narrative possibilities of the system. Just ideas on how to use them, when to really press them, etc., to give people reading the rules an idea of how the system should look and the potency of the Doom points.

>>46295803
Think of an animal, but be vague about it (birds, not falcons). Warp it with something stupid that made it a dominant predator a zillion years ago (don't make it badass - ours was sweat glands). Figure out a way for it to do fine manipulation of tools. Then fuzz over the details so it's not clearly an earth animal. Don't bother making it humany at all. You might end up with sentient finches that can inflate themselves and float around that way. But as long as they can talk and use tools, they're going to be able to handle living in a science fiction world just fine.

Another option is to just take an animal and make it SO human that nobody can tell it's an animal anymore. Like how you get from bunnies to elves. I did an entire setting once out of ape species - "How is this different from a chimp? How can I apply that difference to a human?"

>>46303674
Old system was when you tested, you rolled equal or under your health to pass. Example, if a model had 7 health left, and Morale of 2, you rolled 2D12 and needed to roll at least 7 or less on one of the dice.

The new health system is a standardized system. Each model can take 5 levels of damage, each with a penalty attached, before removal. There's modifiers, like extra absorption or taking more points of damage to reach a new level.

So the current system is Morale is now a number, you roll 2D6 and add your damage level to the roll. Roll over the Morale, and the test is failed.

>>46302048
Need some editing on your horses page, the right column goes "Light Warehorse, Medium Warhorse, Light Warhorse" when it seems like the third entry should be "Heavy Warhorse".

>>46303819
The current morale system is a placeholder right? How would you feel if Morale is a meter that fills up/empties as you do stuff, and when it's filled/empty that's when the model starts panicking? It could introduce some neat additional mechanics like demoralizers, models that work better when panicking, etc. It would also introduce a push-your-luck thing; will you use this low morale model and move forward, and risk them panicking such that it's detrimental to you?

>>46304055
Hmm, interesting idea. I'll have to play around with it. I do want to show waning morale as the battle carries on, so that's why I have the damage tie into it, so a meter system could work.

I also thought about something from Infinity that might work as a universal resolution system that would tie in.

>>46303417
There is something similar already in DnD 4ed.
4ed being the tabletop MMORPG/board game it is, somebody had the idea that you could skip the GM role completely.
As far as I was told, this variant worked as follows:
>1. Setup phase
You create the dungeon. Usually you roll some dice and write down the result for later, but you could also just decide the result (For instance:You decide that this dungeon has exactly this boss at the end because it's a good challenge or because it fits your RP)
>2. Dungeon crawl and looting
>3. Getting back to town, everybody gets his gold and buys his new equipment
>4. Repeat

I'm quite interested in GM-less RPG and seeing this concept developed in a real RPG would be interesting.
You just have to prevent this from becoming an endless dice orgy. Maybe giving the players the possibility to use "Narration points" to decide the result would be interesting.

Example:
The party arrives in a new region. My paladin has 4 Narration points. Now, we start rolling our dices. In theory, I could decide the result of the very early rolls, but unfortunately, I don't have 10+ Narration points. After a couple of rolls, the price reduced and we now know, among other things, that there is a dungeon not that far away. At that point, I say "Screw it, I spend 3 Narration points. We do not roll for the dungeon. It is filled by cultists who follow this disgusting demon my god hates."

Any comments ?

I'd like your opinion on a particular dice mechanic.

I was building a system around characters with a pool of action dice, rather than a pool of action points or move-minor-standard options. I'll use d6s as an example.

Every character gets a base 1d6 (plus relevant stat) for performing actions and, if necessary, reacting to actions performed on them (defenses, saves, that sort of thing).

Additionally, each character gets a number of action dice based on their statistics. These can be added to actions or reactions in order to improve the chances of success while maintaining an element of unpredictability.

When the action dice run out, you can perform no more actions in that round, not even with just the base 1d6. Reactions, on the other hand, are always possible with the base 1d6.

Roll results will be added up and compared to a target number or opposed roll.

Pros, in my view:
>There's a physical representation of your character's ability to act in your hands
>You have the option of shifting your focus (between offense and defense, for example) without having to reference pre-defined 'stances' or other written game content
>There's a little bit of healthy arithmetic involved, but not too much

Cons, in my view:
>Tricky to account for or balance, because the distributions of results will differ wildly based on the player's decisions
>Not sure how to handle situations that don't take place in rounds. Stick with the base 1d6 plus stats and lower the target numbers accordingly?
>Getting swamped by quicker opponents in combat could mean you'll spend your action points before it's even your turn. Doesn't sound fun.

>>46304605
Narration points seems abusable. "I spend X Narration points, this 1 floor 1 room dungeon has the item that we were looking for!" Ideally there should be some form of rules that govern the creation process.

There is an RPG about managing a village that I can't remember the name of that has players draw on a map whenever they encounter a new location. It has cards that let you choose an event that happens in a village. Said RPG could be a good inspiration for a GM-less randomly generated locations thingy.

>>46304840
>Tricky to account for or balance, because the distributions of results will differ wildly based on the player's decisions
Isn't that the point though, to use the player's abilities to overcome a difficult obstacle, and letting the players micromanage the resources they have? One thing you should avoid is give the players too much dice, the dice should be enough to offer multiple options, but few enough that the player almost always feels restricted/there isn't enough dice to go around.

>Not sure how to handle situations that don't take place in rounds. Stick with the base 1d6 plus stats and lower the target numbers accordingly?
Separate non-combat sections into scenes, and refresh the pool whenever you change scenes.

>Getting swamped by quicker opponents in combat could mean you'll spend your action points before it's even your turn. Doesn't sound fun.
Generate a minimum of action dice that is always constant whenever it's the player's turn. Maybe stats can even improve this. These immediately go away when it's no longer their turn.

bumpity bump, will contribute in a second

>>46286855
>Bioshock is a bad example
>Last of Us is a good example
I mean, I know he's talking about storytelling but still, something in my stomach twisted.

File: tfw merely pretending to work.jpg (61 KB, 960x720) Image search: [Google]

61 KB, 960x720

Well after two different builds tested I've gotten to the conclusion that:

a) Chargen sucks
b) There's not nearly enough solidity in stats and traits

I have to completely revamp character creation (which will happen at the same time that I rebuild it into d100), and I've gotta pinpoint exactly what I want to see in terms of progression and overall power level. It's now or never boys, if you don't see me posting again for a while it probably means I fucked it up beyond repair.

Also I've been meaning to reintroduce simplified locational damage and start managing some stuff with Size modifiers (mark my words, I'll give up and make Size a stat in like a week).

As for the starting jobs, I'm looking at them very carefully because they'll either get expanded or deleted.

Also for these past 3 builds I've mostly had notes and shit but this is the one time I'll have to solidify all concepts and write them down. I gotta compile flavor+rules for like 60 traits and the sole though of it makes me die a little inside.

>>46307059
>>46307059
>There is an RPG about managing a village that I can't remember the name of that has players draw on a map whenever they encounter a new location. It has cards that let you choose an event that happens in a village. Said RPG could be a good inspiration for a GM-less randomly generated locations thingy.

Original idea poster here, I'd be very interested to see that game. Do you know the name of it?

My method would be to have certain things given 'Narration Armor' for lack of a better term, so that you can't just spend X points and find it. Something like the item itself has an absurdly high requirement for NP preventing anyone from just magically summoning it with their plot powers.

Alternatively, I'd tie certain rooms/monsters/treasures together, so that "Orloc's Chalice" couldn't be found if it wasn't in "Orloc's Throne Room" or "Fine Dragon's Tooth" couldn't be found unless you killed a Dragon.

I'd also say given that example where the player defines a dungeon using NP, they have to then record that information somewhere/somehow, and then for populating the dungeon it has to be influenced somehow by that label.

My original idea of the system was that it was card-based, and dungeons would be a series of cards separated by door cards. The door card would be a door picture on one side, and on the other would define the size of the room (in cards). Upon 'opening' (flipping face-up) the door card, the next X cards would be drawn from a dungeon deck (where X is the 'size' of the room given on the door card), and that would be what was in the room (monsters/treasure/new paths/etc). (cont in next post)

>>46312419

How you would influence it then is that the dungeon cards would be 'tagged' so to speak with icons on the back, so that before you drew them you saw what kind of card they were (say, a lava monster vs. an ice monster). The door card (and maybe the dungeon as well) would have certain tags associated with it, say "cold/frozen/ice dungeon" is an example of a tag. Then if you're drawing dungeon cards and you see one that doesn't have an "ice dungeon" tag on it, then you have to skip it, moving it to the bottom of the deck, and then keep on drawing. If the next one is an "ice dungeon" card (has the matching tag) then you can flip it up and it will be part of that room.

This is how I figure you avoid breaking suspension of disbelief that could easily happen with totally random setups, such as a lava golem being found inside of an ice cavern.

>>46312492
wanted to clarify that the door cards have tags but would only be visible when you flipped the card face-up, whereas dungeon cards would have the symbol on the back side so you could see it when it was face-down. I like this because it ensures that you do have to have some leap of faith involved in entering a dungeon room, because you have no idea what's in it until you open the door.

>>46303849
Thanks anon!

Will fix that right up! ^_^

Do the horse rules look okay otherwise? Speed, armor, increased size, and increased carrying capacity are some pretty mighty bonuses to be balanced just by cost and increased food consumption.

>>46311987

What is it that sucks about chargen, exactly?

What do you mean when you say stats and traits lack solidity?

Why do you have to compile rules for 60+ traits?

>>46313883
The jobs and starting stats+traits are counterintuitive, I had to sit through a kind of one-on-one interview to actually make the characters, plus some players got some pretty bad spreads with the starting dice. The starter things are all kinds of fucked, a player was hitting every time he attacked while most of the others only hit one in four times and were able to pull off reaction rolls even less.

They lack solidity because some things like Vigor being health+strength and some other mixed stats were really hard to grasp for 3/5 players since they didn't know what stat to use when rolling alongside a certain trait. I want to make something where stats affect rolls differently so for example you want to use your sword to hit hard, you use vigor, if you want to be precise, you use dexterity, if you want to augment it outside of combat, you use Mind, things like that - they're pretty vague at the moment so it's kind of a "yeah you uh use dexterity for accuracy but it scales with vigor while the other two stats do nothing"

Because there's a shitton of knowledge, combat, magick schools, systems, objects and craft traits that have to be precise for characters to have the stats they really want no matter how insignificant, but at the same time I need to make them significant. I need to specify what kinds of checks are affected by that stat so they're not useless when grabbed by themselves but also aren't things that allow you to do everything.

For example, if you look at a plant and you want to know if it's edible, you're currently able to do that with the traits of Alchemy, Herbology, Survivability and Cooking for different reasons. They're all able to do it because alchemy knows ingredients, herbology knows plants, survivability keeps you alive, and cooking recognizes edible stuff from the environment, but alchemy is used for potions, herbology for medicine, survivability is self-explanatory, and cooking for foodstuff. So I really gottta let players know!

>>46314140
Can I get you guys' opinion on a boardgame system I'm thinking of using?

Each player has a hand of actions that they choose > an arbitrary number of each round to use.
Then each 'turn' they choose two actions, any or each of use a card or move, and they do the first action simultaneously and then the second action simultaneously. They do this for five 'turns' when the round ends and they fill up their hands and choose new stuff.

Does that sound like too much? I split it up into two-action segments to be easier to process; does that seem OK? Should each 'turn' have MORE actions?

File: 1336320748723.gif (361 KB, 174x172) Image search: [Google]

361 KB, 174x172

>>46314310
Didn't mean to quote.

>>46307059
... Maybe I wasn't clear enough, but I never said that the system would provide you with the possibility to do what you described. One of the very important elements of your game is to decide the internal ressources economy.
To stay in DnD terms: If the party hits level 20, I wouldn't care about magic items which are interesting at level 5. In the same way, you should just design the system so that when you would have enough points to create powerful objects ex nihilo, you could easily argue that your so important that the Great Church of We-got-epic-artefacts-from-unknown-aeons might give you them to give you a chance to obtain the weapon/secret/spell to fight the BBEG.

>>46312419
You just need to not put "Orloc's Chalice" in the "Treasure Deck", but somewhere else and when you get the card "Orloc's Throne Room", you can read "Loot: Orloc's Chalice".

>>46312492
Just one detail: Don't move to the bottom of the deck, but discard so that the deck can be shuffled when you get through it.

>>46314691
Sounds like there should just be a "Specialty Loot" pile/deck with unique loot.

Anyone remember PACYOA:TE? That multiplayer CYOA thing? I kind of want to make something similar, like a 4chan based collaborative RPG that is fairly simple to keep thrill high and waiting low

Think it's feasible? Would you think about playing something like this?

File: Capture2.jpg (111 KB, 688x531) Image search: [Google]

111 KB, 688x531

>reposting stuff from another thread to try to get more input

I'm writing up a game and I'm hoping for suggestions on some of the finicky aspects. At this moment I'm considering player characters while I create content to fill out the game. The story will go that the players were drafted into the military, they were in a big battle, their side lost the battle, and as part of terms of surrender a number of soldier (including the players) were given as slaves. Many of the slaves were taken up a dead volcano and cast into an enormous pit as sacrifice to a god or some shit. Only a few (a party of characters or so) miraculously survive the terrible fall and must find their way out of the labyrinthian caverns.

In case it's not obvious, this is pathfinder I'm wokring with.

I wanted to bounce an idea off of you guys.

I'm thinking of removing monetary value from items in my game to reinforce the idea that the default setting is a dying world where heaps of gold lay are plentiful and unwanted, and where civilization such as it still exists has no real commerce to speak of.

Instead items simply have weight and scarcity.
Weight is rated in fractions of a 'stone'.
Scarcity is rated as common, uncommon, rare, and mythic.
Rather than getting a budget of gold to spend on equipment at character creation, you are instead allowed to take as many items as you are willing and able to carry on horseback, within the limitations of scarcity.
You can have as many common items of the same type as you like.
You can't have more than one uncommon item of the same type, but you can have as many uncommon items as you like within the same category.
You can't have more than one rare item in each category.
You can't have more than one mythic item period.

What do you think?

>>46314140
If players are getting bad spreads with starting dice, you might consider ditching the dice altogether and just using pointbuy.

Your second point there sounds a bit like the most recent edition of Fate. I highly recommend looking to that for examples if you haven't already.

If there's a shitton of traits that feel insignificant, then consider cutting or consolidating them.

>>46314310
It's hard to say without knowing more about the game, but it should be alright.

>>46316289
Check out how 40kRPG does rarity

>>46315601
It's very much feasible. You just need simple rules, a set number of slots for missions, and a group of 'admins' to monitor and keep track of those playing across a multitude of missions. I think that's the biggest part. Keeping track of progression to prevent cheating.

Working on a d20 game that decides hit success/failures on d20+AIM vs 10+DODGE. The problem comes with scaling AC to damage dies ranging from 1d4 to 2d8 and possibly higher. How do I reasonable implement AC? Originally I was going to make it XdY+STR-AC, but even then, AC getting close to 10 immediately invalidates all lesser weapons.

>>46316814

I have played Deathwatch and Rogue Trader before! But it's been a while, so I don't remember the rules very well. Thanks though, I'll take another look!

File: Usa_counties_large.svg.png (1 MB, 2000x1267) Image search: [Google]

1 MB, 2000x1267

>>46316879
I had an idea to have a risk-style map so that you could see the progression of the characters conquests (It's basically modern america after a Combine-esque invasion), but I think that might get too convoluted quickly

I'd have to make a few mechanics around it, it might be fun though

Well I've been thinking. I might want to make a game of some sort... as I've been following the Apple versus FBI saga which ended with a whimper as the Feds lied that they got access to the phone.

It would be a game for several players competing towards some goal. It would be called "Spooky Scary Terrorists" but wouldn't actually involve terrorists or anything close to that. It should have a mechanic where, when the player speaks out loud or plays a down a card or invokes a mechanic "Because Spooky Scary Terrorists!" they get what they want and no other player can do anything about it. There should be some sort of escalation mechanic so players simply cannot invoke the mantra every round, but rather only when they really want something.

So yeah.

>>46312419
Found it, it's called The Quiet Year. SUSD has a review for it:
http://www.shutupandsitdown.com/blog/post/rpg-review-quiet-year/
It isn't as focused on map drawing as I thought it was, but at the very least it could help give some rules to dungeon generation.

>>46314310
Sounds a little bit like how Twilight Struggle happens. Turns are divided into rounds, players start by playing a card together, then take turns playing cards each round, then when the turn ends they refill their hands and do it again. So I'm sure it's fine. It does depend on what you want to do with it, but simultaneous reveal is always fun.

>>46317570
Come to think of it, this might also work as a computer game. You are given a gun and told to shoot every Spooky Scary Terrorist that pops up on the map.

Of course there are none of those in the game, so every kill is a notch on the counter of necessary sacrifices.

>>46311987
de donde eres anon, veo que tienes tus notas en español asi que me entro curiosidad quiza podamos compartir ideas, soy el anon de Project H

File: 1287707399036.jpg (76 KB, 268x265) Image search: [Google]

76 KB, 268x265

Well lads, yesterday I decided I wanted to make a stripped down RPG system to play with friends. Today I started reading up on other systems to see what I like.

I want a character creation system that emphasizes background and 13th Age-esque powers bought with a Shadowrun-style karma system, not pre-packaged classes.

I want combat to be deadly, but not punishing. The PCs should feel in danger, but most combats should not be grueling.

I want to have a task resolution system similar to FFG SW, with narrative implications beyond success/failure.

I want sick loot without relying on tons of pluses and minuses.

I want to avoid making the DM roll dice.

I want to avoid minis/mats.

I want it to be fast.

It's gonna be shit, but it'll be my shit. Wish me luck.

File: 1457149740322.gif (2 MB, 245x175) Image search: [Google]

2 MB, 245x175

>>46318130

Greeeeat just what the thread and world need.
Another pen & paper system designed to obfuscate how shitty everyone is at narrative & role-playing by tacking on gruel-thin game mechanics.

>>46317288
That sounds close to the /builders/ community on 8chump Especially Iron Bones, which used that exact map. The idea was to claim territory as the BBEG moved in from all sides with an overall superpower theme.

>>46316972
Still needing advice on this, trying to get an opinion before the post is lost to the thread.

>>46319184
Rework your numbers until they work.

Or, cheap solution, add inherent armor penetration to all weapons.

For example the minimum damage is the number of dice rolled. Or the number of 1s rolled.

I play a chess variant with these rules:

1. Chess, except where otherwise specified.
2. You cannot capture normally.
3. Any piece threatened by two enemy pieces is instantly removed.
4. If there's a complicated contradictory threat situation, the player who just moved removes enemy pieces first.
5. No En Passant. It makes no god damned sense in this variant.
6. Check, Checkmate, and Castling use normal, single-threat rules.

I really like the way this works out to having to threaten things from multiple angles to kill them.

How would you adapt that to a something without a grid? Like a miniatures game.

>>46320020
I considered that. I think I'm just going to have armor range 1-10, with some rare exceptions. That way almost everything can hit early game enemies, with some corrode weapons to lower AC for stronger stuff. The most damage you'd ever see on a weapon might end up being 3d6, with a large number of special rules, so health really determines the length of the fight.

Working on a base system for a couple games I want to do. I want the core to be modular so you can staple different stuff on it (I want to do a Mecha game and a 90s Cult TV Series game at least) but for now I'm worried about the base.

Calling it the Six System, because it uses d6s, there are 6 attributes, and attributes and skills both go up to 6.

Attributes are Power, Agility, Endurance (duh), Cleverness (catch-all mental skill), Style (appearance and charisma), and Spirit (mental fortitude). I don't know what the skills will be yet, but I want eighteen, because it's a smallish number and hurr durr divisible by six.

The other thing I'm doing is Plot Armor and Quirks. Plot Armor is, despite the name, anything that moves the story along in an interesting way, though it can be used in combat as a defensive resource. Quirks are your merit/flaw system, but instead of being these passive things ("you are very huge. +1 endurance when being huge") they're active powers spent with Plot Armor ("You are very huge and can leverage your weight in your favor. Spend 1 Plot Armor to get a marginal success" - crap example, but that kind of thing)

I don't have the combat system fully sorted out yet, this is all I've got. Right now, I'm worried I'm running too close to Storyteller. I want to make some shitty indie games to put on DTRPG so that's a real concern. What do you guys think?

>>46320292
You know they can't copyright any of the system crap right? Even if it was identical save for changed terms there would be nothing they could do.

>>46320346
Still. I just did a bunch of writing for them over a year and a half so it looks a little shady if I'm just running a clone of their system.

>>46320362
Point taken. It sounds sufficiently separated, though if you want to further separate ensure that the mechanics for combat come out differently.

>>46302048
hmm, I hadn't thought of turn order yet. but you're right, it is incredibly important

I like how Manhattan Project gets around it by allowing you to either place one worker or recall all of them. That wouldn't work thematically though, although it's close. I think taking inspiration from Tzolk'in would work better. on your turn you can either start one expedition, or recall as many as you'd like. But I don't like how in Tzolk'in the first player places as many workers as they'd like

Honestly the more I think about this the more it seems like it wouldn't really work. It's incredibly one dimensional since your options when placing a worker are "do I want a Mayan relic, an Egyptian relic, or do I want to make some cash".

I could solve the first player problem the way many other games do and have a location, petitioning the king or the royal society, that gives you the first player marker for the next round, but I feel like it still needs another major type of action to take on your turn.

I could pan out to include exploratory expeditions to places like Antarctica and the Arctic. that'd work for the time period, and they could just give a larger sum of cash instead of cash every turn like relics in the museum give you. Still, I'm kind of doubting this idea. oh well, that's what I get for playing Tikal again. all this thought because there are no archaeology themed worker placement games on BGG

>>46320525
Have a look at the new edition of Archaeology the card game for ideas too.

Rather it placing workers first force others to pay more gold, how about a card drafting mechanic similar to Sushi Go? Place number of workers + 1 cards in locations with workers, then pick cards according to order placed. More workers lets you pick up more cards, but still restricted to the order.

Switch the first player around every turn to give everyone the same benefit, and the game can only end once everyone has had the same number of first player turns.

The cards could introduce a comboing mechanic according to the type of relic collected, which would help add some depth. You'd have to avoid being too similar to Archaeology the card game though. Maybe have something like Arboretum's scoring mechanic, where if you don't have the highest numbered card of a tree, you don't get to score a path for that tree?

Cash can be gained from displaying relics and stuff, and used for sending workers (some locations could be more expensive), or improving facilities.

>>46304055
So thinking about this idea, how does this sound?

Models get a morale stat that starts the game full. As the game goes along, models can lose or regain morale depending as the game goes along. Models also have a Nerve stat, when you have to test for things like removing suppression, fighting terrifying enemies, or attempting to rally, you test by rolling a D6 for each point of Nerve, and if any roll under the current morale, it passes. As you play, things like turns where your side doesn't score objective points but your opponent does, taking damage, things that would drain on morale, eats away at the morale stat. So as the battle goes on, if things aren't going well, morale goes down and it gets easier to bottle.

So let's say the average Morale would be 8 or 9, well disciplined troops have Nerve 2. Early tests are pretty much in the bag, but as things go south (models take damage, allies die, the enemy gains a stranglehold on the field), it gets harder and harder to keep their cool and models become more likely to break.

>>46322720
Sounds perfect, that you're rolling a D6 and for example the starting morale is 9 is also pretty representative of how early in the battle morale is still high and can easily steel themselves from panicking.

File: WoG-B17-2.jpg (235 KB, 800x600) Image search: [Google]

235 KB, 800x600

>>46320185

Sounds legitimately awful.


Firing arcs are a vaguely similar mechanic adopted in some wargames. Mostly naval, air, and space combat games.

>>46302048

So I'm looking at revising my class roster. I feel like I really need to buckle down and focus on the core of what each class is supposed to do mechanically. Flavor stuff can come later.

I basically have four 'controller/defenders', 'leaders', and 'strikers'. I want each class to emphasize some aspect of gameplay first and foremost. Flavor ought to take a back seat while I make sure everything plays smoothly. Some classes I have already may need to get cut or consolidated.

What do you think? Does this revised roster below look good? Anything you would drop, or add?

>1. Melee Zone Controller
Inspired by spiked chain/guisarme+spiked armor trip builds in 3.5, and footwork lure + dragging flail builds in 4E

>2. Melee Single-Target Lockdown
Grapplers, basically

>3. Ranged Zone Control
I want a class that places Go stones on the battlefield...

>4. Ranged Single-Target Lockdown
Hmmm... Still working on this.

>5. Melee Multi-Attack Striker
I'm considering an 'Automaton' class with a 'Wind Up' skill; allies can spend minor actions to wind you up giving you additional attacks on your next turn
>6. Ranged Multi-Attack Striker
I just want a 'Touhou' class that turns the battlefield into a 'bullet hell', but there's a lot of overlap between that and the ranged zone control class. How to differentiate?
>7. Healing Leader
A class that helps allies to restore hit points better
>8. Action Economy Leader
A class that grants allies additional attacks
>9. Attack/Defense Buff Leader
A class that improves allies armor and weapons
>10. Mobility Leader
A class that moves allies around the battlefield
>11. Uber-Charger Striker
A smite-and-cleave style charging striker
>12. Elemental Striker
A class that encompasses the 'permafrost' and 'radiant mafia' combos from 4E D&D

>>46323983
Missing: Melee pusher. Could be zone control (attack of opportunity -> hit them far enough to ruin their plans) or a striker (make sure they have some ability to make parts of the battlefield hurt to be shoved into). When you get to flavor, you'll be really glad you have a melee pusher on the roster.

> 3... I want a class that places Go stones on the battlefield.
<3.

> 3. Ranged Zone-Control
> 6. Ranged Multi-Attack Striker
Your idea of merging them as a bullet hell controller is more interesting than either of the individual concepts. If you still want Go stones and don't mind this extremely specific flavor: they place prisms on the map that block movement and multiply their attacks. Prisms block line of effect (so right behind one is actually the safest place to be) but all lines between prisms are hit by attacks.

> 4. Ranged single-target Lockdown
If your concern is flavor, freezing attacks and pinning arrows are classic ways to do ranged lockdown.

> 2. Melee Single-target Lockdown
> 4. Ranged single-target Lockdown
> 7. Healing Leader
> 10. Mobility Leader
Be careful with these. Tabletop RPG combat is always on the brink of becoming too slow. You need to make sure that every player action moves the combat closer to its conclusion in some way. 4E might have been better if they dropped strikers entirely and gave everyone else striker-level damage.

It's not insurmountable, just an important thing to be cautious with.

>>46322993
Yeah. Actual tests are pretty rare in the ruleset right now. You need to make one when you activate near a model with the Terrifying rule, when a friendly model is removed within 4", when removing suppression, and when rallying from fleeing. Most of these don't applying until later in the game anyway, when models start taking real damage.

I think the goal will be that the most morale a model can lose in a turn would be about 3, with 1 or 2 being more likely.

>>46324424
Thanks!
>Missing: Melee pusher. Could be zone control (attack of opportunity -> hit them far enough to ruin their plans) or a striker (make sure they have some ability to make parts of the battlefield hurt to be shoved into). When you get to flavor, you'll be really glad you have a melee pusher on the roster.
I might actually incorporate the melee pusher idea into the Pankrator class with lots of shoves and throws.

>Your idea of merging them as a bullet hell controller is more interesting than either of the individual concepts. If you still want Go stones and don't mind this extremely specific flavor: they place prisms on the map that block movement and multiply their attacks. Prisms block line of effect (so right behind one is actually the safest place to be) but all lines between prisms are hit by attacks.
I like the prism idea.
I'm thinking the class should have a bunch of spells that use the stones in different ways. Your prism idea could be one of them, but the class could also have a spell that turns the stones into bombs and detonates them and another spell that turns the stones into tiny summoned creatures that can move around and flank.

>If your concern is flavor, freezing attacks and pinning arrows are classic ways to do ranged lockdown.
Makes sense. Just got to have some kind of weird gimmick to put the class on equal footing with the other classes.
I do still want to work my Puppeteer class into the finished game. Maybe I should just change the classes roll a bit? Make it play a lot like 4E's Seeker class except that it has a companion.

>4E might have been better if they dropped strikers entirely and gave everyone else striker-level damage.
That's a good idea!
I had thought of folding the controller class into all of the other roles, but folding the striker class into the other roles makes more sense.
I think I'll just merge defender and controller with a melee/range split, and give every class striker features.

>>46324724
> I might actually incorporate the melee pusher idea into the Pankrator class with lots of shoves and throws.
Make sure your system covers "Big guy who hits things with big thing and knocks them about." It's just a core part of so many people's idea of fantasy that it'd be a misstep to skip.

> Merging 4E stuff together
4E's leader class doesn't actually fill a fundamental role. Things like the Marshall's "you hit this now!" abilities are completely neutral - having a second copy of the guy who does the hitting does exactly the same thing. Because it's neutral, you can safely include it or not for entirely aesthetic reasons. The leader classes also dispense healing surges, but you could add one healing surge to everyone's base HP instead and restore the game's math - the entire mechanic actually exists so that something can look aesthetically like a healing class (while burning resources so combat length is limited), because that's a part of a lot of the common fantasy.

You already noted that controller / defender are close to the same thing.

So if you really go for it, you end up not needing roles at all, and instead have a checklist that all characters must obey:
- Must contribute to doing damage, so fights end
- Must contribute to partitioning enemies, so fights are interesting
- Must contribute to defending wounded allies, so it's safe to make the math mean enough to look lethal

Of course, you can weight those differently, and all of a sudden we've built roles again ;-). But rounded characters are another way to do it. There are a lot of ways to handle each of the above.

File: ProjectHv0.5english.pdf (1 B, 486x500) Image search: [Google]

1 B, 486x500

Well this is like fifth revision with a lot of new changes, it has only basic stuff and doesn't has the test characters since i have yet to update them to this revision but i want some feedback on the resolution dice mechanic since its new ( i was using 1d6 (6=0) + stat ) and any red flags you can see with everything as it is right now.
Also all my drafts are on spanish this document is new using g traductor and revised, if there is something unclear let me know.

>>46325072
That makes things easier on me (tighter framework for structuring class skill rosters), and easier on groups putting together balanced parties.

Ok, so how does this roster look:

>Sentinel
Melee zone controller specialized in the use of reach weapons to drag or trip. Can buff ally defense.
>Pankrator
Grapple-based melee lockdown, unarmed strikes, and throwing
>Berserker
Wields mighty weapons and absorbs pain. Can buff allies and terrify enemies with war cries.
>Animist
Ranged multi-attacking and ranged zone control using 'stones' tactically placed on the battlefield. Spells can turn the stones into linked prisms, exploding bombs, concealing trees, flanking spirits, etc.
>Puppeteer
Ranged lockdown assisted by a summoned construct.
>Angel
Flying smite-and-cleave ubercharger with healing spells.
>Automaton
Allies can spend minor actions to 'wind up' the automaton, buffing the automaton defensively and enabling melee multi-attacks
>Demiurge
Buffs allies weapons and armor and summons massive weapons to crush enemies
>Psychopomp
Trades life for life; collects souls of dead enemies and sings dirges to heal allies
>Oracle
Clairvoyant powers manipulate initiative and bypass concealment
>Hellion
Grants offensive buffs to allies while flanking enemies
>Veteran
Well-rounded hero with a balanced skill set.

>>46325521
i'll check after a nap, its already 3 am

File: Stock Preview.png (21 KB, 722x638) Image search: [Google]

21 KB, 722x638

Been working on some sprites and wanted to share. I will hopefully be used for a game on /tg/ sometime soon.

Whole thing doesn't use dice, and damage is determined by player input and gear equipped. The center humanoid that is in the black cloak with all the different sprites is the sort of character everyone starts off with, and when they acquire skills they can choose an archetype to build into. Otherwise, they're the martial artist class. Punches focus on damage and debuffs, while kicks are crowd control and mobility. Other 'classes' will behave similarly with a split intent between the variety of skills.

Magic is not going to be accessible to the players either. At least right away they won't have the ability to start as a caster.

>>46325521
Interesting. So a roll of '2' is impossible.
It's a 2d6 dice mechanic but the actual range of results before other modifiers is 3-15.
I'm wondering if the sync level 1 will be enough to hit your target numbers. If not, then the mechanic is rather pointless.

>>46324631
Less Nerve tests is probably fine, as long as there's plenty of possible demoralizers every turn. If demoralizing and panicking becomes too easy/frequent during playtests though, you could probably cap it to 3.

I'll give this a bump.

My own homebrew progress has hit an unexpected speedbump: I have become addicted to Mahjong.

I guess homebrewing a rules adaptation for using playing cards instead of tiles kind of counts.

One math question that will help me to flesh some rules:

Is this
METHOD 1:
Roll 1d100
On a 25 or less you must pick choice 1, on 26 or more you pick choice 2

METHOD 2:
Roll a D2 and a 1d100
If you get 1 on the d2 and 25 or less on the 1d100 you pick choice 1
If you get 2 on the d2 and 26 or more on the 1d100 you pick choice 2
On other cases you reroll the 2 dices until you pick a choice.

>>46331654
anydice worked now and said that, yes the result is the same

>>46331839
>>46331654
and now I discovered this test was useless because I was thinking about another thign

>>46325570
looks pretty neat

>>46331654
method 2 seems rather bothersome and time-consuming

you could get the same thing in method 1 by rolling a d4 and having 1 for 1 and 2-3-4 for 2

>>46331654
Method 1 is needlessly granular for what it does.

Method 2 is just a needlessly complicated version of method 1.

>>46331654
This is literally the same thing as 1d4.

If you want a 25% chance, why aren't you using 1d4?

I need to choose a CR system. I've narrowed it down to three options. They all have radically different implications for the rest of the game's math, so I need to pin it down now.

Which of these is best?

> Linear
If the total level of the party is the same as the total level of the monsters, it's an even fight. So four level 5 characters could fight four level 5 monsters, or ten level 2 monsters, or one level 20 monster.

Some monsters have a "min level" where it's not safe to trust the CR rules. Some level 10 monsters are an even match for ten level 1 characters, but a level 10 monster with min level 3 would just eat them all. There's also a "max level" where the monster is just not a threat anymore.

Advantages: Easy to explain, easy to work with.
Disadvantages: The "min level" thing is janky and will add strange rules for homebrewers. Linear character progression feels like diminishing returns even though it isn't.

> Exponential
A level 5 character is an even match for two level 4 monsters, four level 3 monsters, and so on.

Advantages: Easy to explain, no weird "min level" exceptions.
Disadvantages: Makes encounter planning fiddly. Requires that the monster manual has a larger number of "same idea but higher level" entries due to how steep the curve is.

> Triangular
A level three character is an even match for 6 level one monsters. A level four character is an even match for an extra 4 level one monsters, for a total of 10. A level five character is an even match for an extra 4 level one monsters, for a total of 15.

Advantages: Unlikely to need "min level" or redundant monster band-aids.
Disadvantages: The only reasonable way to explain this is a weird lookup table.

I have an idea for a game that is a bit video gamey.

Backstory: land is horrifically corrupted, edgy as possible, anything good is seen as an unnatural abomination by those in the world. The player characters are champions of darkness, sent to destroy the bastions of light that burn their eyes and cleanse the rot.

Gameplay: preset character roster with each character having an array of skills they can level up as they progress. Some rules with dice randomly generate the dungeon as they play. Simple enemy ai could be done too. They smash and defile their way to victory. Pretty much just combat based and intended for one shots.

>>46339024
Linear seems the more interesting, even with your worries on min level. Just explain that the monster is different that the rest and is strong enough that even though you are supposed to be able to take it down, it has ways to fight back.

Exponential is pretty easy to understand and explain, but would constrain it too much in terms of encounter building I think. With the min and max levels on Linear, you could mix things up, make a level 5 monster suddenly able to handle 5, maybe 10 level 3 characters. Not so with exponential. And I don't understand Triangular at all.

>>46340597
The only real idea I can see is players playing for the dark side rather than light, which you can probably use an existing system and make your own campaign for it rather than creating an entirely new one from scratch.

>>46341557
Thanks for the feedback!

Min level is specifically things like... a level 20 Dragon, intended to be a boss-like threat for a party of level 5s, has a fire breathing attack that can kill however many level 1 characters you care to throw at it.

Let me try explaining triangular the way I would in a book. Tell me if this system makes sense?

When building encounters, look up each character and each monster's level on this chart. In a balanced encounter, the totals for the player's side and for the monster's side will be equal.
Level - Points
1 - 1
2 - 3
3 - 6
4 - 10
5 - 15
6 - 21
7 - 28
8 - 36
9 - 45
10 - 55

>>46341739
Now I see it, it's somewhat like how in wargames players get a set amount of points and spend them on units to deploy. This also allows for the total levels of the monsters to be higher than the characters. Triangular might be the method to go, the chart should be pretty easy to understand once the GM is used to it.

What's a good tool for calculating the probability of one roll exceeding another?

For example, how can I calculate the odds 4d6+1d8 will beat a roll of 3d6?

>>46342337
anydice.com
output (4d6+1d8) - (3d6)
switch view to "normal" and find 0 - this is the likelihood of a tie
switch view to "at most" and find -1 - this is the likelihood that the second number (3d6) is higher
switch view to "at least" and find 1 - this is the likelihood that the first number (4d6 + 1d8) is higher

So, for your example:
Tie: 2.36%
3d6 is higher: 4.67%
4d6+1d8 is higher: 92.97%

>>46342304
I can explain exponential with a chart like that too (or linear, for that matter, but doing so would be stupid). The triangular numbers just have some other nice properties.

It's also possible to make the monster manual list monster's points, so you only need to look up values on the players' side.

>>46342551
Thanks bro, trying to figure out how to scale check difficulty in my game. My ideas turned out to be all wrong!

>>46341739
>>46339024
Would anyone else mind chiming in on these?

I'd like to get a few more opinions from the potential-GM perspective, since it has a pretty big effect on where everything else goes.

So working on the Morale system, I have come up with a few scenarios where Morale would lose points. So far I have at the end of the turn if you took any damage that turn, whenever a friendly model is killed within 4", when you activate within 2" of a Terrifying enemy, at the end of the turn if your opponent scored VP and your side didn't, and a few new spells and skill kits, as well as a new kit to heal Morale. Are there any other instances that people can think of that would work? Right now, you will really only lose 1 or 2 morale a turn, with the most extreme being a model with one of the new kits that ups the morale damage for removing models to 2 rampaging through the line and killing a bunch of models clumped together, which at most would be something like 2 models.

>>46343508
Definitely the linear. Makes it easier to plan encounters. The other ones feel pretty fiddly and harder to work with.

File: dance snek.gif (938 KB, 400x289) Image search: [Google]

938 KB, 400x289

Bamp.

File: tentative_name_3_30.pdf (1 B, 486x500) Image search: [Google]

1 B, 486x500

First chapter of the most recent version of my game!

>>46346592
>Hail Satan!
Cringy as fuck, but I'll keep reading. Not a deal breaker.

It looks like you're trying to reinvent the wheel, using the d20 system as a base. I don't see any particularly creative or interesting additions or changes.

Playing around with existing systems is good practice, so by all means keep going. Just know that, at this stage, it looks like you're creating an inferior derivative of an already inferior system.

Read up on other RPGs. Maybe you'll get inspired to break away from d20's mold and play around with much more enjoyable game concepts and rules.

Have an Idea for a MGS style rpg, and would just like some thoughts on a couple of points.

>Players have generally little health, due to it being a stealth/espionage type game

>Got Cover, Sight/Detection and Movement down - relatively easy, still testing if it feels semi-realistic

>Stealth and Reflex are done, No idea what to do for Willpower (Ability to resist trauma and other mental happenings)

>Classes are a bit weird, 4 focus heavily on Firearms, 2 focus on CQC/Melee, 1 is basically psychic and the last one is a Living weapon kind of deal.

>No idea how to do firearm based combat, CQC I can do just fine

>RP Elements kind of feel forced or like the player needs to have a some knowledge of MGS

>How do I do race-like (ie elf, dwarf, human, etc) bonuses? I was thinking of histories or training that the character would have but that seems a bit too malleable

>Movement will be square based, but how do I draw maps that will have players at either end, in buildings and what not without making it seem to complex?

File: Fledgling Adventurer.png (6 KB, 426x718) Image search: [Google]

6 KB, 426x718

Did some more sprite work, even though it was pretty minimal. Also made the sprites for the fledgling adventurer to have a sort of flow system to them.

File: Fledgling Adventurer Alt Color.png (5 KB, 413x717) Image search: [Google]

5 KB, 413x717

>>46347598
Alternate coloring. This one seems more appropriate for new characters.

File: Adventuring Ninja.png (5 KB, 427x717) Image search: [Google]

5 KB, 427x717

>>46347598
>>46347759
Classic ninjas in gaming edition.

>Bargain for your life!
>When in negative hit points (including after failing the final stabilization roll at the end of your negative hit point track) you may choose to bargain for your life. Religious characters may take this as a literal bargain with their deity of choice, non-religious characters may see it as karma or the universe balancing out or simple luck, but the net result is a -1 to your constitution score and a restoration to 0 hit points. A player may use this option once per level (cumulative) a maximum of once per day. Once in the character's career, a player may choose to take a Flaw in addition to the -1 to constitution, and in return gain a bonus Feat.

Thinking of adding this mechanic to my next game. Reduce PC turnover, preserve party cohesion and stability, protect narrative and dramatic continuity.

File: Mysterious.png (777 B, 112x182) Image search: [Google]

777 B, 112x182

Made a sprite without any real intent or design behind it. Looks like a shady dealer sort of guy, or maybe is an assassin? What do you guys thing?

>>46348471
Obviously, the jacket contains, like, 80 knives for sale

>>46348471
He's an assassin. He's way the hell out of the way, tries to keep quiet, doesn't fuck around with the world anymore, but if the world fucks with him, he can still whip out an endless barrage of death.

I say this because I can't not see "I'm a lead farmer motherfucker"

File: Mysterious.png (2 KB, 502x256) Image search: [Google]

2 KB, 502x256

>>46348488
>>46348521
Might just have it be a sort of effectively random npc that the players can find in secret or hard to reach areas.

Anywho, enjoy your mysterious sprites.

>>46348228
If I were you, I would just let players know they can always attempt a charisma or whatever check to convince the baddies to spare them.

Or just do what FFG SW, where 0 HP is explicitly not death, just unconsciousness, and the enemies are unlikely to outright kill the PCs.

>>46338335
>>46337313
>>46335402
The idea behind this is that I am thinking about designing a hit table.

WIP IDEA:

After hitting the character you must check the location:

Imagine you have 20% chance of hitting the head with an slashing damage.

When the developer (or dm when homebrewing stuff) want to include other body areas, he just compare the chance of hitting this other area, with the chance of hitting the head.

Imagine the chance of hitting the hip is 1/4 of the chance of hitting the head.

So you would have 5% chance of hitting the hip with an slashing damage.

For the sake of simplicity imagine we have just those 2 parts.

After the player hits he will check where he hit the enemy.
He roll a random number between 1 and 2.
If he get 1 he roll a d100 if he get 20 or less he hits the head.
If he get 2 he roll a d100 if he get 5 or less he hits the hip;
If he fail the second roll (d100 one) he must do the entire thing again, until he discover where he hits.

This way, the dm (or rpg developer), wont need to create those tables the rpg usually have, when he wants to make the rpg more detailed.

Also if as some example some race have wings, DM/developer just need to add this body part (wings) to the his list of body parts to be hit, with the % to hit (found by comparing it with the head hit chance).
The DM/developer wont need to recalculate the odds of everything to add just one body part.

>>46348870
Hit location tables aren't a new idea.

They're fine if you're into that sort of thing, but they'll make combat more cumbersome to run.

>>46348870
Sounds incredibly convoluted. Comparing percentage to hit for any body part to the head, then rolling multiple times (rerolling even) to get a single hit can get incredibly dull, never mind subsequent defense or damage rolls. I'd rather take a single d6 roll with 1 - 5 representing different body parts and 6 declare a location, or use a 6x6 grid (which the DM can fill in with hit locations) and roll 2d6, with each d6 representing a row and a column.

>>46349003
>Hit location tables aren't a new idea.
thats obvious, an extreme amount of rpgs have this.

My idea is a way to creating or expanding "tables", without needing to recreate everything from scratch.

>>46349081
But creating a hit location table is about five minutes of work in any text editor. Your method isn't an improvement. You're losing more time in the actual game than you're saving in prep.

So I had things set up like this:

>characters have four stats, minimum rating of 1, maximum rating of five
>any task has a difficulty rating from 1 to 5
>to resolve a task you roll [your skill]d6 vs [difficulty]d6
>ties count as failure

But looking at the math it seems like characters are awfully likely to fail. There would of course be ways to lessen difficulty or increase skill but 1d6v1d6 to 5d6v5d6 would be the most likely scenarios.

Is this normal? Is my math fucked? Where can I read more about this sort of thing?

>>46348870
Your idea is VERY similar to what GURPS for aimed attacks.
BUT:
1-Your idea is not about aimed attacks
2-Non aimed attacks is the default in your idea.
3-You roll to hit and THEN, IF you hit you will be sure as hell hit something, you just need to discover where.
4-Gurps non aimed hit location work under usual rules found on most rpgs, with some table.


Anyway, this is how GURPS aimed hit table would be, when converted to your rules:
>HOW YOUR GURPS HIT TABLE WOULD BE UNDER YOUR RULES:

First discover if you hit, if you do then do this:
Roll an number between 1 and 17 to find the place you will maybe hit.
Then do a d100 (1-100) roll, if you roll equal or less to the number on the body part, you hit this, if you roll higher than the number there, roll a body part (that can be the same) again and check if you hit it. Keep doing it until you hit some place.


1-Torso: 50
2-Heart: 16 from front 0 from behind
3-Lungs: 16 from front 0 from behind
4-Kidney: 0 from front 16 from behind
5-Skull: 1
6-Eye
7-Face:5
8-Neck:5
9-Groin:3
10-Left Leg: 26
11-Right Leg:26
12-Left Arm:26
13-Right Arm:26
14-Left Hand:9
15-Right Rand:9
16:Left Feet:9
17-Right Feet:9

>>46350898
forgot to add something:

Anyway, I tried to do this gurps conversion of your idea 2 times:
First I got torso, doing 2 rolls to find that.
Then I got heart, doing 9 rolls to find that.
Your idea takes to much times to be done.

>>46320185
I am sure a variant similar to that already exist

There is this one
http://www.chessvariants.com/difftaking.dir/allmate.html
but this link variant the piece is captured if its mated (not just checked) by any amount of pieces.
on your one looks like just checking it is on (but must be checked by 2 pieces)

What's a good way to prevent turtling in an RPG with spatial movement?

>>46351616
You mean the players might not want to move much on the play-grid/mat?

In real life, we might call it artillery.
In MMOs, it's a suddenly-appearing bright reticle on the ground that forces the players to move or get rekt.

>>46351616
Grenades.