Been so long since I saw one of these that I don't have the usual OP text let alone a link to the last one.
Talk about your homebrew or whatever.
>Challenge mode
Answer any design questions that don't have at least two answers already
>>46473067
Old Thread:
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
>Design and Layout
http://erebaltor.se/rickard/typography/
https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B4qCWY8UnLrcVVVNWG5qUTUySjg&usp=sharing
http://davesmapper.com
[DRAGON FOREST]
>>46473130
Also, two new nifty links.
http://www.gatekeepergaming.com/article-6-how-to-get-minis-made/
https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/838422/mass-production-custom-made-miniatures
>>46473136
I don't remember if the little boxes around abilities were there in the last build, but I like them.
Looking for opinions on this subsection of my mechanics:
After making an attack roll (usual d20 style) you get one extra hit per point you exceeded your opponent's defenses by, up to a maximum of your number of attacks per round. This replaces D&D style iterative attacks.
Example A: My attacks do 1d6 damage, and I roll 14 against my opponent's 11 armor. I have 2 attacks, so I roll 2d6.
Example B: My attacks do 1d6 damage, and I roll a 13 against my opponent's 12 armor. I have 4 attacks, but because I only beat their armor by 1, I just roll 1d6.
>>46473130
You're a boss.
>>46473177
The idea is fine, but I'd grant an extra attack every 2 points instead. This is assuming regular d20+mod mechanics, something else might make the original better..
>>46473177
>>46473255
Yeah, I could see it working better with something with less granularity than a d20, since there's a bit more figuring to do. d10 might work better assuming he's not designing this to be compatible with D&D/PF stuff.
>>46473177
>>46473255
>>46473272
To me, this sounds like ideal dice pool mechanics. But there'd be drawbacks to a diepool system, unless using a fate/fudge die pool variant.
>>46473255
>>46473272
Thanks for the feedback. I'll keep the option of per 2 points in mind. I'm trying to hit a very specific power curve, so everything I can tweak without making the system more complex is handy. Being able to have a large number of iterative attacks turns out to be handy, so I wanted to check that this makes sense. (Rolling 8 iterative attacks one by one would suck.)
I'm not trying to be compatible with D&D, just make a system that feels as D&D-ish as possible. Otherwise I wouldn't use d20.
>>46473177
Seems basically pointless. You're taking a random number generator and changing into..... a slightly different random number generator. That's not really game design, as it doesn't involve any kind of decision making by the player.
RNG can be used to hack out a rudimentary framework for a narrative, but I don't see why the pseudo-narrative created by your algorithm is any more useful or interesting than the normal d20 method.
>>46473177
Well, it sounds like a system that would go from 1 to max attacks pretty easy. If you roll below defense does nothing happen or what?
>>46473373
Nothing happens.
And yeah, it goes to max attacks quickly, which is what >>46473255 addressed
>>46473333
Eyeroll.
>>46473314
>I'll keep the option of per 2 points in mind.
You could tweak this on a weapon-by-weapon or class-by-class basis, if necessary.
>Eyeroll
The feeling is mutual.
>>46473067
I'm doing vehicular combat i n my system.
To hit you roll a 1d100. When a vehicle is moving, attacks suffer a penalty to hit equal to their speed in mph. For example, 30mph would be -30 penalty, 60mph is -60 etc. The converse to this that attacks from vehicles suffer the same penalty.
I had a test session today with targets traveling 30 mph and it worked well. The targets had little other protection but that -30 had an impact over what would have been a landslide fight.
>>46473528
I think that's the first time I've ever seen someone use a d100 in a way that actually gets something out of it.
>>46473528
Does the penalty to hit translate into a bonus to damage multiplied by the vehicle's mass?
Sounds like you're making a vehicular combat simulator. Mad Max inspired?
>>46473583
Really? Nah, c'mon. But it's 1:1 for chance percentage.
>>46473587
That would be neat but no. Vehicle size is just categorized into four basic general groups with damage values according to rough mass that scales along with speed. Wait, so yes, i just didn't draw the pararllel. It's basic though.
I don't do Mad Max, I do the Endtown RPG. It's post apocalyptic as well so there is that strong natural urge to go Mad Max.
>>46473773
> Really? Nah, c'mon. But it's 1:1 for chance percentage.
Yeah, but everyone picks up a d100 and either:
- Uses ridiculously granular modifiers that don't mean anything
- Uses so many ridiculously granular modifiers that they matter again, but it sucks
- Uses 5% or more increments and should've just used a d20 or d10
The fact that mph and d100 are similarly scaled is actually handy and clever. Like, it's still way more granular than you probably need, but you save your players having to (most likely) divide by five. That's totally worth it.
>>46473773
I'm slightly disappointed that you would use such a simulationist yet functional and intuitive resolution mechanic and then go abstract in this other critical area.
Your typical car weighs 1.5 to 2.0 tonnes. The multiplication isn't that hard.
>>46473882
Usually pulling out a d100 is a sign of simulationism (and usually the bad kind) but in this case I think his system is just really handy. I wouldn't find it too out of place if I saw it in a moderately cinematic-focused game, provided we don't take this as an oportunity to start pulling out 2% modifiers.
Are there any other games that use a FATE style zone based map for encounters?
>>46473175
Thanks! It's one of those little touches where I show my JRPG influences.
How's the font? It's not very ornate, but it does the job skillfully, right?
>>46473136
>>46473932
Didn't know you were going for typographic advice. Prepare for extreme nitpicking.
The column spacing is too thin for how ragged your text is. The simplest option would be to justify, but you need to be using good layout software for that to look good (I use Latex because I'm actually that nerdy.) Otherwise increasing the spacing works.
The page margins are slightly too thin (crowding the page border), particularly on the top because your bottom side always has more space (leaving the page unbalanced). If you plan to print this, they're way, way too thin because print is the worst.
Your tables need more spacing under the text, particularly on the parts with black backgrounds. You also don't particularly need vertical rules for these.
Your paragraph indentation is inconsistent. I'd recommend setting the amount of indent smaller, and always indenting.
You don't need the extra full line between paragraphs and bulletted lists, especially where the previous paragraph ends in a colon. (Wait, shit, are you using Latex? I had this bug on my last book for a while. Don't remember the fix.)
Little box things need more padding, especially on the top. (Yeah, it's always more padding.)
I find it strange that there's an entire section where you have bolded things separated with a semicolon, when the rest use colons. Also, and this is incredibly nitpicky, it usually looks better if you don't bold the actual colon.
>>46474064
I love nitpicking! Thanks! ^^
You say the text is ragged? Is this something I need to fix? How might I fix it?l
(Using Adobe InDesign btw. Just not very good at using it.)
>>46474122
Definitely justify your text in InDesign. Look up how to use the tracking tools to adjust spacing and glyph widths and you can shift the text in and out a tiny bit on certain lines to prevent orphaned words - generally speaking, if a paragraph only has one line over a page or column break, you should compress the text just a bit to try and bring it all into one place. If you can't get it to look good maybe try rephrasing it, but that's a drastic measure.
And yeah, standardize your styles as much as possible. Don't hand-format text - if you would bold all items in a list, make a style for those list items. Then if you decide you want them a bit bolder or maybe italicized you can adjust the style instead of having to manually change every item. It may seem easier to just hand-format it but in the long run it's better to always use styles. Especially for your headers. When people throw me a document with hand-formatted headers instead of using header styles I usually quietly bump their bill up if it's paid work.
I'd also recommend using a serif font, but that depends purely on the aesthetic you're going for. Personally I think they'd look better with your style, maybe something like IM Fell English Book for the semi-ragged look you get from its glyphs to match your smears (though it's a fairly heavy font. Garamond is a great mainstay for serifs if you just want to test it. You probably have Minion Pro as well, I'm a fan). Serif fonts are considered better for extended reading, but when it comes to something like game books it's safe to use whatever you think looks best.
>>46474355
I have the file open and I'm justifying text right now. Looks much better! Will work on those orphan words.
Thanks! I don't know how to make styles, but I'll look up some tutorials for that, thanks!
I heard sans-serif fonts are better for reading things on a screen, while serif fonts are better for reading things on paper. I do like the look of Minion Pro in print (looked nice when I was reading The Steel Remains) but I am looking at it on my screen right now and it doesn't look so nice. Any tips?
>>46474451
Suggestions for the other Dark Gifts:
Lycanthropy: Gain the ability to shift into a form with higher natural stats, but can't use equipment, and have to take regular WILL tests to keep the ability discriminate between friend and foe. DM can spend one of your Doom Points to make you spontaneously switch forms.
Chaos Warp: Each of your spells get one free use per Scene. DM can spend one of your Doom Points for a random spell to be cast a random party member.
Eye of Death, Hand of Death: Allows you to look at/touch an enemy and deal heavy damage to it once per Scene. DM can spend one of your Doom Points to resurrect a nearby corpse as a hostile enemy.
Stolen Fire: You can choose to have your melee attacks deal +(Level)d3 Fire damage. DM can spend one of your Doom Points to make a nearby ally suffer (Level)d3 Fire damage when you attempt to use this Dark Gift.
Book of the Dead: You may reanimate one dead body every 5 turns. DM can spend one of your Doom Points to force you to take a MAG v WILL test. If you fail, the reanimated body is hostile.
>>46473528
Wouldn't shooters in two vehicles that are travelling at a constant speed gradually increase their accuracy if no speed changes occur + relatively even terrain? Plus at lower speeds there's no way that there would be that much of a hit penalty.
>>46473913
Do explain.
>>46473067
Thinking about attempting to design a game around actions. I've only ever played D&D and some D&D knockoffs but basically a very loose intro i have designed is for every so much of a stat over 10 you gain an action. During your turn you can use as many of your actions to "do" what you want so lets say you have 3 stregth actions you can launch a combo attack or you can use 2 actions and save 1 strength action to block when somebody attacks you.
Game will be based around very low AC and very low health so you will need to use actions to survive but a well planned attack can end enemys very quickly. It also encourages strategy as you would want to know the limits of your oponent by trying to wait at the begining to find out how many actions they have before going all out.
Do you guys think this is possible? What suggestions do you have?
>>46479351
Please ignore my retarded spelling I just woke up and don't have coffee yet.
>>46479351
Turn order would be very important, whoever's first would be able to unload everything immediately, either outright killing someone or cripple them. You could have out of turn actions, but then there's 'what happens when you run out of those?'. You can't just say 'it's fine, the PCs are allowed to kill quickly', since there's the chance that large boss monsters might go first, and start killing PCs one by one.
One method to avoid this would be to have simultaneous reveal, action limits, and assign initiative to actions. The limit would ensure fairness and no one-sided 'pour everything into one character' situations, action initiative would resolve all actions in a certain order, and simultaneous reveal of chosen actions makes every round exciting.
That said, there are systems like the AGE system which also use actions and have turn order, but they rarely let you 'use as many of your actions on your turn'.
>>46479351
My first thought is that it reminds me a bit of Arimaa. My next is that you could develop fantasy Arimaa variants with modular boards and potentially end up with a cool game about driving monsters from the field of battle.
>>46479629
I was thinking that combat goes in "rounds" so there would be a universal refresh on abilities so even if the boss goes first and unloads the pcs would have all their defensive actions and it would give them a lot of information on the boss. There would only be 3 times when you can use an action. 1 on your turn 2 when you are being attacked or 3 when somebody within reach of your possible action is attacked. That was more of what i was thinking. That way if the boss just straight charges he is at a huge dissadvantage just like irl because fighting a cluster of men they can cover each other and attack much more rapidly together than when you're fightinging them sepperated.
In my head I think there would be a way to balance this but you might be right my actions might need initiative.
>>46479819
Never heard of it. Is this something I should research to get more info on this on?
>>46479853
It's an abstract strategy game that was designed to defy computer analysis. Recently the best players started losing to the best computers, so it failed in that respect. But it's still a cool game.
The jist is that on your turn you get three actions. You can move one piece three times or three pieces ones or anything in between. Your objective is to drive your opponent's piece into the pits in the center of the board.
One game you might want to actually research more is the Infinity miniatures game. I understand that uses a sophisticated action system, and it might be more relevant to a tabletop RPG than Arimaa.
>>46480076
Thanks anon. If I ever make a solid system out of this I will post results.
>>46479837
If the boss straight charges and the PCs use up all their actions just to survive, then each round would repeat the same way. The way you worded it seems to be that you have something like 3 Strength actions, 2 Constitution actions, 3 Speed actions, etc. though, which might be enough of a limiting factor for turn order to not be overwhelmingly advantageous.
>>46473773
>Endtown RPG
>Having any mechanics more complex than "Roll a D6, on a 2+, bad shit happens to you"
Seriously though, glad to see the project is still going.
How difficult is it to rejigger roll20 or some other online system to accommodate a new system? I'm having trouble finding playtesters.
>>46485554
depends on how much you're changing from any of the established systems. Roll20 is open to homebrews, but the more you deviate the more difficult it will be to get something working. Up to essentially scripting it entirely yourself.
>>46479351
>>46479819
>>46480076
What this sounds like, is Sumo wrestling the tabletop. What that means, is Traditional Fighting game:DnD::Super Smash Bros:This idea.
It doesn't have to be Smash bros related either, but instead of damaging your opponents with HP, you "knock them out of the fight" in a more literal sense. There's a lot of potential for a lot of different themes here.
Productive bump
I'm currently working on two main projects. The first is a representation of mechanics I particularly like, melded together in the best way possible. d20 based with its own fluff specifically made for the system. It was built to have many different modules that could replicate different kinds of vidya (Like a normal "DnD" module, a Pokemon module, a Monster Hunter module, Megaman, Legend of Zelda, etc etc.). Some interesting features include: d20+mod with a focus on degrees of success rather than binary success, separate combat and non-combat stats (so far), Archetype character creation (middle ground between class and class-less), HP and wound health system, "recipe" based casting, Tag based weapons/weapon creation, and more fun things.
Related to the first, the second project was started because I knew one of my favorite vidya wasn't going to be able to be replicated with the above rules. Ace Combat (which is well known on /tg/), is far more different mechanically than the above mentioned examples. I also saw many people who wanted 3d movement systems, who weren't finding much luck. So, I wanted to create one myself that could be easily reskinned if necessary. This game features basic mechanics fairly similar to X-wing miniatures (well regarded and popular format, the similarities were a fortunate accident), but with minimal to ideally zero need for game pieces to be packed with the system (i.e. no need for cards, miniatures, angles, etc). I also am focusing on the much easier to obtain/make grid based maps (to reflect the debriefing scene/war room feel post-mission) as opposed to hex or gridless maps.Planes will have some levels of customization (as seen in Infinity or Legacy). I could probably have gotten a lot more progress on this than I actually have, but one of the main things I'm missing is more in the realms of tedious work than not.
Cont'd
I haven't gotten much serious work on these recently, but I think I'm starting to feel the creative buzz again. If anyone is interested in specific info I'd be glad to share, and it might just help me get back into the swing of things. Otherwise, I might just periodically dump mechanics questions relating to something I've done.
>>46485554
>>46487405
Roll20 is ultimately just a dice-roller and a chat room, with the capacity to make shared text files.
If you're just using the raw tools, you can run anything with it. We've even used it for mordheim.
If you want to go whole hog with it though, you can learn macros, figure out how to make custom character sheets, etc, but that requires you to learn their macro stuff.
Bump
Currently doing some changes to stats to take into account of the new morale system in Hellsgate.
Also added a Suppressing Fire action. Its a ranged attack that takes 2 AP and is made at -1 AS. Instead of dealing damage, it gives the targeted model Suppressed and the model making the action can't make any other actions afterwards.
Does this sound like a good addition?
>>46476675
Basically in fate, movement is heavily abstracted, instead of a tactical grid you break things up into zones which are basically room sized you can move up to one zone on your turn in addition to whatever else you do or more if you dedicate your action and roll dice to doing so. I'm trying to figure out movement in my game and this is the only approach that I've found that can't have the problem where you fall five feet short of getting where you want to get and I'd like to see other interpretations of this concept, if they exist.
>>46489560
>Related to the first, the second project was started because I knew one of my favorite vidya wasn't going to be able to be replicated with the above rules. Ace Combat (which is well known on /tg/), is far more different mechanically than the above mentioned examples. I also saw many people who wanted 3d movement systems, who weren't finding much luck. So, I wanted to create one myself that could be easily reskinned if necessary. This game features basic mechanics fairly similar to X-wing miniatures (well regarded and popular format, the similarities were a fortunate accident), but with minimal to ideally zero need for game pieces to be packed with the system (i.e. no need for cards, miniatures, angles, etc). I also am focusing on the much easier to obtain/make grid based maps (to reflect the debriefing scene/war room feel post-mission) as opposed to hex or gridless maps.Planes will have some levels of customization (as seen in Infinity or Legacy). I could probably have gotten a lot more progress on this than I actually have, but one of the main things I'm missing is more in the realms of tedious work than not.
Check Your 6 is a game you might want to investigate. All about air combat.
It definitely nails the genre, though. If I have anything to say about it, it'll blow up and supplant X-wing entirely.Not bloody likely, but a guy can dream.
I'd certainly be interested in hearing more about your system. Walk us through a simple mission?
>>46473136
I'm afraid I don't have time to study it in depth, but I will give my first impressions.
The first thing I read after the table of contents should really hook me into the game. Especially because this is a fantasy heartbreaker, you should make some kind of pitch why I should play this instead of D&D. Give me a taste of the mood your game creates, the setting, etc.
Instead, you have a frankly vague and unhelpful essay on what a GM is, and a large block of text explaining why it might be difficult to play an RPG in a bar...
I think you need to figure out your audience--are you going to go to all the work of trying to explain TTRPGs to a total noob, or are you going to assume your players have at least played some D&D or Shadowrun and get on with it?
The Doom system seems like the seed of something interesting, but I have a hard time seeing how it will change play substantially. Perhaps the doom counter should be more persistent, and increase with the character's power... perhaps it goes down under special circumstances, such as self sacrifice or after a near death experience?
>>46473396
>eyeroll
He's rite u kno
The fact that you're still thinking in terms of hacking "the usual d20" mechanics says it all. And your mechanic just makes a version of D&D combat that's even *more* swingy and random. AKA rocket launcher tag.
And, aside from being simple and popular, the core D20 mechanic is pretty mediocre. The one good thing that I can see you've done is eliminate armor class, which is interesting--presumably armor soaks damage?
Question for the thread:
Instead of telling us what you're working on, tell us why you're working on it. What do you aim to accomplish? What is your project designed to do?
>>46491838
Fortunately my what and why are both contained here >>46489560
Finally updated the new morale system and the stats of model. Also have the Suppressing Fire action discussed in >>46491161
>>46491838
I just got tired of seeing miniature games with a few ideas I liked, but then others I didn't, so hoping to try and combat that with my own system.
>>46491541
>>46491541
I get that a lot. So that will definitely be something for me to work on. :)
I'm afraid I've been mostly preoccupied with getting the mechanics hammered out. I fill in fluffy bits as they occur to me, but my first priority is the actual components of the game.
The doom point mechanic will likely go through a lot of changes as I playtest and develop the game.
Thanks!
>>46491838
I'm interested in not only playing D&D, but really engaging and having a dialogue with the game and its fanbase.
My game takes the reward mechanisms of D&D, XP and treasure, and inverts them. Instead of starting out from 0 XP and becoming more powerful as they accumulate more XP (usually through killing monsters) characters in my game start out with doom points and get more powerful as they get rid of doom points (the GM spends the player's doom points to send monsters after them.)
Items in the game have no gold value, only weight (gold is worthless in my default setting). Players do not buy adventuring gear at character creation, but are instead free to take as many items of any type as they are willing and able to carry on horseback. Players have no need to buy or quest for powerful equipment as they can start out with powerful weapons and armor through the use of skills and dark gifts. Instead, players have Need and Sadness values that accumulate through the course of the game that they will have to ablate through the use of rations and small comforts. I want to replace the imperative to seize treasure with the satisfaction of easing a burden.
I chose 4E D&D for my chassis as it provides the strongest contrast for my stated goals.
>>46492175
>I'm afraid I've been mostly preoccupied with getting the mechanics hammered out. I fill in fluffy bits as they occur to me, but my first priority is the actual components of the game.
:-/
For an RPG, the "fluffy bits" are the actual game. They're the part that the players have to make decisions about. How are they going to interact with that world and the people in it? What kinds of things will they do with their time?
The "mechanics" of an RPG are only there to provide tools to provide the illusion of a complex system where none exists and help advance the narrative. That's not the game, can never be the game.
The game is, "how do we survive and prosper in a hostile world?"
>>46491161
Wouldn't no action at all be pretty powerful depending on who goes first? Allowing some form of retaliation might be good, though this only applies if it's a "I move all my units, then you move yours" thing. If players take turns then it might be less of a problem.
>>46492313
The game does use alternating activations.
Suppressed blocks moving actions, making free strikes, and gives a -1 AS. Models can make a 1 AP action that shakes it off if they pass a morale test. I may lower it to 1 AP, since most of the time, it's a 2 AP to remove 1 AP trade, but other key points are later in the battle, when morale starts to go down, or locking a model down so one of yours can escape (if you took a model with the Steal Initiative kit, use the action to suppress a model in combat, then use an Initiative token to activate one of you models next, and move the model out of combat without fear of free strike).
>>46491185
All right, let me look back through my notes to see what's more solid and not. A lot of the mechanics are based on Ace Combat Legacy+ because I a) own the game, and b) they seem to be the most easily translatable mechanics base (one benefit from a DFM system, though its much much improved in Legacy compared to Assault Horizon. Legacy also has Infinity style customization, which is a draw for me personally). .
So, lets assume the basic squadron of 4 planes, each controlled by a player. AWACS (the GM) briefs them on the mission, and they prepare their planes for deployment (change available modifications, determine special weapon, etc). Once ready for deployment, The players are placed out on the field and the mission proper begins.
After the index at the beginning of the pdf. are the current rules for movement and attacking, though they aren't fully complete. Its small enough to post but too large to effectively write out here. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-x7vMbcJeXps8ZaeTa2ovoXK2yoB7ICqcEmNKP1dlww/edit?usp=sharing
You will basically follow missions, ideally like those found in Ace Combat games, led by the GM, and then return to base to continue some base level RP, get some story from AWACS (because characters form a bond with them too). Ace Combat lends itself heavily to combat only, there won't be a lot of RP support in the rules (just like current offerings. I'll still likely have a blurb about crafting stories for the GM, because that is an integral part of the whole Ace Combat experience).
The basic idea for these rules is to translate Ace Combat gameplay as best as possible into a grid-like board game. In addition, Altitude is measured by a d12 (or 2d6) because that can often be important, but isn't really represented in X-wing at all.
Check Your 6 sounds interesting. I'll definitely try to check it out to see what's different.
>>46492310
I must dissent.
For an RPG the actual game is the emergent narrative that arises from play. 'Story' is the charred fragments players drag from the wreckage of the GM's plot.
Mechanics are simultaneously a scaffolding and a constraint, a guide and a diversion, a generative and destructive element. The randomness of dice serve to tear down player expectations and open up unforeseen possibilities...
I should work on mechanics first and justify them later. (Or better yet, copy and paste our discourse here and just use that as my game's introduction.)
>>46492310
You need both. Mechanics are the bones and Aesthetics are the flesh. One with out the other does not a body make.
>>46492305
> I'm interested in not only playing D&D, but really engaging and having a dialogue with the game and its fanbase.
What is this dialogue supposed to be about? What are you trying to say?
I'm an OSR guy at heart. I've probably analyzed and picked apart D&D from a design and historical place about as much as anyone can. I'm the sort of nerd that enjoys reading about the design decisions made between editions and the politics that shaped the company over time. I also write a whole lot about the OSR in various communities.
My first thought when looking at your pitch is "what is this dialogue supposed to be about?" followed immediately by "Is this something I'm interested in dialoguing about?"
I don't have a problem with nar-heavy games or the like. When I'm not OSRing, I'm playing Apocalypse World or Burning Wheel.. so it isn't a question of "should games have themes?"
For me, early D&D is a great game with a tight focus and that focus is pretty clear from the design - it's a game about overcoming challenges through creative problem solving in order to get wealthy and rise to power.
>>46492633
>>46492632
>>46492310
You definitely need both, and the two have to work in unison. Your fluff tells people what the world is supposed to be like - the mechanics demonstrate that it is so. If you play a game where the fluff is dark and gritty, life is cheap, but the mechanics say it's nearly impossible to be killed, then the two don't work together.
If you play a game that's supposed to be bright and cheerful and wizards are friendly honorable types, but your mechanics for magic involve the potential for catastrophic failures, mutations, corruption, and blood sacrifice, the two are at odds.
If you want a superheroic world but your mechanics let players regularly fail on routine and mundane activities, then you are out of synch. The two must support each other, or one part of your game is lying.
>>46492587
Can't really get a sense of what playing would be like, but it feels ace combat-y.
>>46492890
*phew*
That's at least good enough for now. I'm sure it will be much easier to intuit with the final product.
>>46491838
For the system I asked about in >>46473177 -
My main system is on hold while I wait for my brain to come up with a couple missing pieces of insight. In the meantime I decided to take this up as a design challenge:
- Make an introductory/beginner RPG
- That feels as much like a D&D edition as possible
- With precise game balance and a good CR system
- And hiding the actual ways the balance is achieved
One of the big questions I've uncovered from this is that "feels like D&D" and "precise game balance" means I need to quantify the most D&D-like power curve. A survey showed that people are roughly split between thinking D&D has a linear power curve, and an absurdly exponential one. I'm currently investigating the compromise solution of a quadratic power curve.
The most straightforward way to get a quadratic curve is to multiply two linearly increasing numbers together. I'm looking at pairs of accuracy, damage, and attacks per round for that right now.
>>46492787
>What is this dialogue supposed to be about? What are you trying to say?
Edition wars, really. That's the first thing that comes to mind when you asked that.
I like D&D. I play oldschool D&D usually (Moldvay Basic is my favorite) but I have a bit of a soft spot for 4E.
I dislike the animosity, the tribalism, and the extreme views that surround discussion of D&D and all of its different versions. And I dislike the tendency among those who identify as "geeks" and "fans" to not only attach themselves too strongly to products and fleeting sensations but to define their identity through these attachments. This causes them to interpret any criticism or attack on their favorite products and sensations as a criticism or attack on their selves, and they interpret discontinuations of their favorite product lines as a kind of loss of self.
So, I'm approaching this divisiveness first by approaching and contemplating the concept of "kill them all and take their stuff" that has formed the framework of D&D since the very beginning. And I'm looking at the notion of 4E as a "wargame", "boardgame", "MMO", "not really D&D", the authenticity of 4E, the combat-focus of 4E, and thinking about 4E's redemption.
>>46493138
So how does:
> takes the reward mechanisms of D&D, XP and treasure, and inverts them.
> Doom points as reward system
> Gold having no value
> Players can have whatever instantly
> "Need" and "Sadness" as mechanics
> "satisfaction of easing a burden"
Interact with or communicate "edition wars" as a dialogue you want to have through the game?
This isn't a criticism, I'm honestly trying to follow what you're saying. Especially in light of your response about tribalism and a sense of self. How do you foresee your mechanics impacting or interacting with the goals you are stating?
>>46492632
I only partially agree.
The most important part of a game is the interactions that it enables with your friends, and the one tool that RPGs have that gives them an edge over board games like Dixit and Skull is the story.
But we're writing RPG systems, not scene acting prompts. Regardless of what's the most important part of the experience, the tools we have the most control over are the mechanics. So it's important to make those as good as possible, because that's what we can do.
Or, if that's all too high-falutin' for you:
Every mechanic you add to your game makes it worse by default, because you're adding something people need to be thinking about instead of interacting with their friends. That doesn't mean that it's never worth adding them, but you need to know what you're buying with all of those mechanics. Otherwise your system won't be better than Risus.
For example, Fate's mechanics add guard rails that drag you onto a pulp adventure where you win because of all the bad things that keep happening to you. Balanced combat mechanics let your GM trust in them and say "I need something tense, and I know the combat mechanics have my back."
(The reason I'm so interested in a D&D-esque thing as a design challenge (>>46492947)
is that D&D has so many mechanics and buys so little with them.)
>>46493214
Maybe he has a more precise reason, but sometimes art is about leaning on people's assumptions and hoping you'll break something.
>>46491838
Usually I have a flash of inspiration that I absolutely must write down, so I jot anything I think of trying to make it playable. I have several projects done this way, or atleast theorized enough about to complete a ruleset. Problem with this though is I have trouble following through until the end, losing interest once enough of the mechanics are fleshed out, get stuck on a particular problem, or just because I have no real way of producing the final product.
>>46473067
Seems like a cool thread. I'm a professional game designer, though not with any table top RPG. I have home brewed plenty of campaigns though, mostly within D&D (first one I got into, and I've found it the most accessible to new players simply because they've heard of it before).
I'll answer some questions if people have any.
>>46493214
That's a good question that I am trying hard to work out.
I try hard to practice mindfulness in my daily life. I'm not very good at it. I was raised in a very angry and unstable home. My step-father actually burned all the D&D books given to me by my father. I was taught anger and contempt growing up. I wasn't taught how to focus and clear my mind. That's something I'm working to learn now that I'm 30. But I'm still not good at it. My mind flits around. It's hard to focus on any one idea long enough to commit something coherent to paper. I suppose I'll need to find a good editor to help me with that.
Anyway, I suppose if there's one thing I want players to get out of this game, it's the idea of mindfulness (at least as it can be applied to Dungeons & Dragons) and the idea of not only letting go but actively discarding harmful attachments.
I like how 4E forces players to work together as a group with each player fulfilling their role, with special attention paid not to the individual character's optimization but the optimization of the entire party. But I want to shift the game away from the goal of killing monsters and taking their stuff. But I don't want to get rid of 4E's combat. There's a certain amount of contradiction... of internal tension, that I want to keep in there. To give players something to reflect upon, I suppose.
>>46493388
When you say professional I'm assuming a proper job? How did you get to that point, where you're no longer just writing down ideas but actually have the capability to produce something? Any tips for the others who aspire to make a livin out of game design?
>>46493388
I assume that's video game design then? Or something else?
Not sure if this is the thread for this, but I'm working on adapting mechs into the ORE system.
Could use some pointers, tips, or opinions.
>>46493388
Table top RPGs usually are a mixture of storytelling and either miniatures wargames or dice games. What other types of board games do think have the most potential?
Personally, I'm tempted to write something based on flicking games like Catacombs (it's practically asking for it), but what I'd really like to see is someone somehow making RPG mechanics based on games like Dixit.
>>46493388
Just dropped by to look for "inspiration" eh?
See anything you like? ;)
>>46493138
Seems a little heavy for a game that's meant to be a fun evening for you and some mates.
>>46493403
Have you ever read WHFRP 2e?
It's got one of the best examples I know of a mechanic that reinforces the themes of the game.
Fate Points are pretty common now--basically a point you spend to get out of a jam.
The trick with WHFRP is that you REALLY need those points. They are not a "nice thing to have".
Without them, if you get badly wounded, it's entirely possible you'll die of infection or something shitty and unheroic if your head isn't immediately turned to pudding. You can get new fate points, but doing so usually requires doing something dangerous... meaning eventually, you get to the point where you're an experienced, powerful adventurer who is just about to run out of luck... every little skirmish could be your last.
Do you retire and fade into obscurity (roll up a new character) or do you push on with your mission, knowing that a man who lives by the sword must eventually die by it?
Pretty grim stuff for such a simple rule.
>>46493543
Catacombs: Legacy
Boom. I just made someone a lot of money.
>>46493214
>>46493403
Not either anon, but there's some easy ways to at least somewhat answer those questions based on just what I've read in this thread.
If constructed right, I can definitely see the easing of burdens in regards to anti-xp. It sounds like it would fit perfectly with any sort of post-apoc or similar setting. Tribalism in particular (with Edition Wars as inspiration) paints a picture for me of characters starting out in factions. Not story related factions, but things like Classes, Races, "wealth" divisions, and other differences between character sheets. These are all at odds with each other. No race likes the other, and all classes feel contempt towards each other. Every character is Tier 1 in their own eyes.
However, you don't actually accomplish much on your own (and without the DM to add true adversity. This representing trying to play DnD without a DM at all. You can't really do much of anything in a normal sense). The DM takes your burdens and manifests them into physical creatures or other challenges. Apathy or indifference will not save you, so you must resist these dangers. Even grudgingly, by overcoming these obstacles you learn how to rely on and get along with other people who are different from you (This makes me think, that maybe classes and races should be exclusive, so that every player is unique in some way. Or perhaps that's going too far). By supporting others, characters gradually go from being selfish to self-less (this could even be enticed by the DM encouraging players to act for themselves towards the beginning of a campaign, though every single challenge requires more than what one person can do). You could even continue the inversion schtick by having challenges require multiple people, but for each additional person you get a penalty. However, the total of two people after penalty is always greater than the total of one person alone.
>>46493621
>Seems a little heavy for a game that's meant to be a fun evening for you and some mates.
Well, I was asked why I'm designing the game, so I answered honestly.
I am designing a game that I can enjoy with my particular group of friends. You saw that section in my document about playing in bars? You ever play D&D in a bar with an Australian guy, a French guy, a Korean guy while drinking whiskey and soju? It's good fun.
But I'm also designing this game for myself. Part of it is that I'm designing the kind of game that I want to run and play, and part of it is that I'm using game design as a point of contemplation. Something for my mind to rest on.
Look at this pic related. It's a circle I drew last month. I made a goal of drawing something every day. But I can't always draw something very detailed or elaborate every day; I have other commitments, and my health is failing me. But if I can't draw anything else, I draw a circle. Pic related is not today's circle, but it is one of my favorites. It's become part of my routine.
I find it helps to stick to a routine. Every day I come home from work. I study Japanese on the bus ride home. I get in and I cook dinner (usually lentils and split peas). I take my shower. I draw my circle. I make my tea and read for an hour. Then I work on my game. It helps me.
I'm afraid I haven't read WHFRP 2e. I'll look it up at my FLGS though. Thanks!
So, recently I had a thought for my game. For a while, I've been (half-assedly) working on my RPG (classless point buy, but classes are presented up front).
For a while, I've been using a 2d10 roll under system as the core mechanic, but it hasn't been quite satisfying to me because degrees of success is kind of fiddly to calculate and contests are weird (requiring you to both calculate how well you succeeded and then compare).
So, I thought of doing a dice pool system (disclaimer: I don't have any direct experience with dice pool systems), which would make degrees of success much easier (just count your number of successes and subtract your number of failures - easy) and contests wouldn't be quite as fiddly (just compare successes - easy).
My big worry with dice pools, though, is that it could lead to bloat or, if curbed too much, could lead to a lack of granularity (EG Stats only get one or two dice, skills only get one or two dice, etc).
So with that in mind, I came up with a different method that I haven't seen discussed before. My idea is basically have your attributes (Strength, Finesse, etc) be a number you have to roll less than or equal to and your skills to be how many dice you get to roll.
This way, you can make your character better in multiple ways and bloat isn't as much of a concern, because one determines how easily you can do a task and the other determines how well you can do a task.
Any thoughts or concerns from this take on dice pools?
>>46493763
cont'd
Looking at more of the already mentioned mechanics, perhaps characters can provide their own small comforts, but Sadness grows quickly to fill the void left by their baggage (anti-xp). Only other characters have the means to provide sufficient comfort to stave off the Sadness (or you have a trading mechanism, goverend by the DM, where you trade Sadness, but at a reduced cost to the one taking it, thereby eliminating Sadness through conversion). Need could/would probably work similarly, at least on a meta level. The actual mechanic could be fairly different.
Granted, at this point so far I haven't read the source material if it's been presented, but I bothered to write all this in hopes of providing some inspiration without biasing the other Anon's questions too much. They're also thoughts that come straight from interpreting the responses, and so it provides a good example of what people could feel, or expect to feel, if given the responses as a pitch. I actually see some potential for a game like this, filling a similar role as what Spec Ops: The Line does for the modern military fps genre. We'll see where it goes.
>>46493893
Varying both difficulty and number of dice in a pool leads to weird numbers in a hurry.
You're heavily favoring a specific balance of attribute/skill depending on how the numbers work out, and character power goes up with the square of how much (attribute+skill) you have available.
That might all be acceptable to you - and more power to you if you know what you're getting and like the results. However, if you start tracking number of failures for any reason, instead of just number of successes, then you're on a one-way trip to crazy mechanics town.
(Also - have you considered dropping attributes entirely in favor of skills only? Usually having two things to add together actually buys you very little.)
>>46493763
>>46493925
Thank you kindly! Your posts have given me a lot to think about. ^^
I love the idea of the trading mechanic. That would be a great way of engaging players outside of combat.
>>46473136
A good friend of mine recommended that I read the Zhuangzi for inspiration. I'll start reading that after I finish Dune (can you believe I haven't read that until now?)
http://ctext.org/zhuangzi
>>46493882
Good luck anon. Unfortunately 2e is long out of print (3e is still sold, but it's very different).
I mentioned it as an example of a mechanic that carries a theme without the players having to think about it. On the surface it's just a mulligan point for when you get a bad roll... it only becomes poignant when you realize your experienced warrior is more vulnerable than you were in the first session, and you're playing him like a man who knows his luck has run out.
>>46493882
It's a beautiful circle.
Saved it for later enjoyment.
Thank you sharing.
>>46494077
I've played 3e.
I've also played the 40K games Deathwatch and Rogue Trader. Are those at all similar to 2e?
Sorry, got wrapped up in work.
>>46493455
Um. For board games, it's not too hard to pitch ideas, you just have to actually make a prototype and have it not look like shit. Make a box, with art, pieces with art. Make sure you use high-ish quality materials. It needs to look -almost- sellable. If it's not there, companies will toss it out right away (you usually publish through a major company because who wants to be in charge of actual manufacturing?)
For electronic games, it's kinda the same thing. Programming and basic 3D modeling skills. You basically have to SHOW that your ideas will work, without having to depend on anyone else. Devs, artists, and audio engineers are just polish. They're necessary for a finished product, but someone should be able to see the fun in your idea without any of it.
>>46493513
Yeah, I work with digital games.
>>46493543
As for board games, if I'm not lying to people, what's the point? Board games will never be able to be as... mechanically intensive as computer games. They just can't handle the math. Your board game needs to embrace the human element. I really like stuff like Resistance and Diplomacy for these reasons.
>>46493593
Haven't actually read any of the thread, but I do hard borrow things from tg or v some times. Not often but you guys have helped my home brews for sure.
>>46494160
>As for board games, if I'm not lying to people, what's the point?
My own collection has become increasingly focused on bluffing games for the same reasons you've mentioned. Condotierre, Skull, and Sheriff of Naughtingham are games I recommend, if you're looking for more of those.
But there are other games that do a good job of making your friends into components - Dixit and Mysterium are journies into your friends' minds. And Ugg-Tect is a game about bad communication.
>>46493707
I actually have a prototype for a spaceship dogfighting game that's even zanier than Catacombs.
Turning that into a space opera legacy game would be pretty funny. But it's really, really zany.
>>46493964
>However, if you start tracking number of failures for any reason, instead of just number of successes, then you're on a one-way trip to crazy mechanics town.
Ah, I see. I was planning on successes modifying your degrees of success (EG if you get 4 successes and 2 failures it's treated as if you just straight up got 2 successes).
So I thought, in order to prevent craziness, I could cap Attributes at 8 and Skills at 6 (naturally requiring a lot of investment to get both so high), but now maybe it's not so great an idea.
>(Also - have you considered dropping attributes entirely in favor of skills only? Usually having two things to add together actually buys you very little.)
I have, and it might be a little irrational, but I'd rather not drop attributes if I can help it. If I went skills only, then that would mean things like HP and such would go unmodified by how strong/tough you are and I do like that idea. I also really like the idea of your Attributes affecting damage in combat, and I'd also lose that if I went with skills only.
An alternative solution might be to have Attributes, but instead have them determine the cap of your die pool in any related skill. So for instance, if you had 3 Strength, then skills like Greatsword, Wrestle, and so on would be capped to 3 and then you could use that 3 to add to things like damage and so on. This way, they don't affect probably, but they do affect your maximum potential in skills. Thoughts?
>>46494160
>Board games will never be able to be as... mechanically intensive as computer games.
A game should be as simple as possible, and no simpler. In most cases raw complexity isn't necessary or desirable when creating a set of rules.
Look at Go.
So much complexity that it is actually incredibly difficult to program a computer to play it well, and yet the rules are incredibly simple.
There are a lot of things that computer games work better for than board games ever could, but layering on extra mechanics does not make them intrinsically more interesting.
>>46494253
I'm not familiar with those, I'll check them out. Thanks anon.
>>46494443
You misunderstand. Go is fantastic, but it can be replicated 100% on a computer as so far as the mechanics go. A computer allows you to make an incredibly rich guy with a TON of moving parts a very simple interaction for the user because you can hide all the math underneath. Computer games allow for rich immersive fantasy experiences and so on.
Go is a nearly flawless game, but what makes people stick to the physical components are:
>Tradition
>Tactile Sensation
>Face-to-face competition
It's basically the aspect of "being there with another person, handling the pieces" that make the Go experience better on the board.
Complexity for the sake of complexity is bad. You DO want to make a game as simple as possible, but what that means is making as few demands on the player as possible.
A good example would be a game with incredibly rich AI behavior. You have all this math and logic under the hood, but the end result could be really simple straight forward stuff for the user. That's what I meant before.
>>46494347
> I was planning on successes modifying your degrees of success (EG if you get 4 successes and 2 failures it's treated as if you just straight up got 2 successes).
You should be safe from the parts where dice pool mechanics take a trip to crazytown.
You should run the numbers though and figure out what the optimal skill/attribute spread is and see if that's what you want your system to encourage.
> that would mean things like HP and such would go unmodified by how strong/tough you are and I do like that idea
To play devil's advocate a little bit more - why not just have Toughness and Combat skills?
> instead have them determine the cap of your die pool in any related skill.
It would be cleaner for the attribute to be the cap on the skill itself.
But what the right choice is comes quickly crashing into what you want out of your system.
>>46494160
So basically man up, make that prototype, and take it to a publisher then, got it. I assume this is viable even if you live nowhere near the publisher, like several countries away maybe?
>>46494792
For physical games? I've always met in person, but there are publishers almost everywhere. For digital games you have a lot more freedom.
But yeah. Play tested prototypes are King
>>46494792
In the US at least, the usual procedure is to call up a publisher and agree to meet at a convention. People in the more remote states generally have to fly to the convention to do it.
Not sure where you live, but I assume it's the same in Europe, just with flying across countries instead of states.
>>46494717
>It would be cleaner for the attribute to be the cap on the skill itself.
That's actually what I meant, sorry for being unclear.
I think, in the end, having attributes serve as the cap for your skill level and modifying things like HP is the most elegant solution. It allows for growth in multiple ways, it distinguishes raw talent/potential from how skilled you are, and the probability is simpler to calculate. In addition to that, it allows for more intuitive rolling, because most people who're coming from roll over systems like D&D will be able to see a bunch of tens and immediately think "Oooh, I did awesome!" instead of going "Oooh, I - wait, high rolls are bad, fuck".
Thank you very much for your kind help, Anon. I wish you the best of luck in your own endeavors.
>>46494898
>>46494905
I live in South East Asia, so while conventions are an option I'd probably look for alternatives first, going without knowing it'll be a successful or not would be a pretty big gamble. I think Cool Minis or Not has a HQ in Singapore, though I'm not sure if I agree with their business practices.
I'll have to work that out on my own, but thanks for the answers anons.
>>46495098
Conventions are also a great way to get PR, and everybody can always use PR. A different publisher than the target might want to pick it up.
>>46495122
True, but the cost of flying over still makes it too much of a gamble, though I do want to visit a convention in the US atleast once. If you wanted to demo your prototype would you need authorization/booking/reservations for a spot somewhere with the organizers in some way?
>>46494539
I don't know that I agree.
You can abstract away or hide an incredible amount of math and book-keeping with simple rules about how players manipulate physical components.
>A good example would be a game with incredibly rich AI behavior.
Can you give me an example of a game like that? I can't think of any. I ran through my Steam library and in every case where complex AI played a significant role, it was so bad that it actively hurt immersion.
Computers are great for book-keeping.
They're great for audio-visual.
They're great for real-time and for large player counts.
Lots of things.
But there are lots of games that don't need those things, or that derive more benefit from face-to-face play with physical components.
>>46495333
Nah, you just pick the kind of convention with open play spaces and do your best to find somewhere to meet.
Would be a good idea to spend some of your con time finding backup spots and becoming familiar with the play area, though.
