Sup /tg/ Looking for some help, I've been working on and

Sounds like a solid mechanic.

Opposed checks could be the same roll low system but you subtract your skill from the roll. Lowest wins.

The Warhammer RPGs use a d100 roll-under-skill system much like what you're suggesting. I believe their opposed tests work the same as above, without the subtraction element.

Perhaps you could also incorporate dice reductions, where a more skilled player rolls a smaller dice than d10, like a d8, d6, or even d4, leading to more predictable rolled values.

>>49889289
I really like that idea, lowering the dice size. I may look into testing that out and seeing how it works.

With opposed rolls I was gonna do something where the the person have to roll against someone would win the check if they passed that roll but I felt that would have made stealthing or persuading etc a bit harder to get away with since there isn't a DC to meet

>>49888484
For roll under I'm fond of blackjack style degrees of success.

Rolling as high as possible without going over your target number, highest roll wins

Alright first off homebrew games are bad. Just flat-out bad. You do not have the knowledge or experience to make a roleplaying game.

Got it?

Okay.

Now, your first mistake is choosing a retarded mechanic such as d10 roll-under. Literally the only good roll-under game is GURPS and that's because it keeps things fairly simple in terms of basic checks. But even GURPS is a pretty shitty game if you actually start using the rules, so I doubt you want to work off of that.

> I had originally taken a lot of inspiration from Cyberpunk 2020

Yeah this is retarded. If you're trying to make a system just like one that already exists, why not fucking houserule that system and quit whining about it? The world does not need any more RPGs. We have plenty. We're full.

> mainly what are opposed checks.

Compared margin of success, dumbass. If you don't know what that means then you are absolutely fucked for designing a functioning RPG at all, let alone a good one. But honestly, d10 roll-under is shit. d10 as a mechanic is shit: it has all the downside of high randomness, lack of bell curve, and small range of numbers. Advancement will feel worthless if you hit the level cap so fucking fast. Or you slow it down to the point where people barely level up at all.

Your best option is to abandon this core mechanic. It provides no benefit in your case. Actually, your best option is to abandon this shitty project entirely, but if you are anything like the homebrewers I have met over the years, you are going to continue making your game until it is "complete" then insist on running it for your players no matter how much they say no.

>>49889450
I bet you're a blast at parties

>>49889518
Not an argument, nor a response. If you're OP and you're booty-blasted that I just BTFO'd your homebrew, go put some baby powder on it. If you're someone else, shut up, this advice is directed at OP and is none of your fucking business.

>>49889538
I am op, and just cuz you had one bad experience with a homebrew system doesn't mean they're all bad, gotta start somewhere after all. And I member said anything anything about publishing it, just a thing to do to pass time between classes. My party has no objection to playing anyway, we all try stupid shit with our games cuz that's part of the fun, something you apparently never learned.

>>49889538
Why do you even care anyway, it's not like you're playing. I wouldn't want a shitlord like you in my group anyway

>>49889350
>>49889450

If he's playing with his friends, who may not play a lot of other roleplaying games, what does it matter? He can have fun however he likes, and if they have a complain they'll probably let him know. That's called feedback.
A good way to get knowledge or experience to make a roleplaying game is to *gasp!* try making a roleplaying game.

>>49889350
I've steered away from success based (4+ on a d6, 7+ on a d10, etc) mechanics for this reason. Either everything is an opposed test, which eats up play time, or you set TN's to hit/notice/whatever, and I didn't get around to playtesting enough for that to be reliable in difficulty or fairness.
I'm sticking with additive dice pools to reach a TN for simplicity's sake.

>>49889383
I like this.

>>49889450
>. Literally the only good roll-under game is GURPS
What is dark heresy.

>>49889831
I was thinking to sticking to a TN based thing for the sake of simplicity. Not much to duck up there unless you suck at math

>>49889888
I was thinking that too lol, DH is one of the better games I've played and it does roll under pretty well.

>>49889888
>What is dark heresy.

A shitty game.

>>49889831
>If he's playing with his friends, who may not play a lot of other roleplaying games, what does it matter?

Just because you don't know you're eating shit, doesn't mean you're not eating shit.

> He can have fun however he likes, and if they have a complain they'll probably let him know.

No they won't, because most of these fuckwits don't ask for feedback, they just say "yeah this week I'm gonna be DMing muh game, and I've decided it's going to be quality shit so we're going to play it.

>>49889645
>>49889666

> double responding out of sheer asshurt

Yeah you're right, you wouldn't want a "shitlord' like me in your group because I'd raise all the uncomfortable truths you're conveniently trying to ignore. That's okay, though, feel free to live in your delusion like 90% of homebrewers. They make poorly-designed, crappy games that barely function, then call anyone who calls them out on it a spoilsport. Get fucked.

> My party has no objection to playing anyway, we all try stupid shit with our games cuz that's part of the fun, something you apparently never learned.

Oh shit, sick burn bro! And you are correct that most people "try stupid shit" with their games, and I did learn that. But I also learned that most of those games are shitty and that you shouldn't waste time on them when (1) you can't design for shit as you have already proven with this thread, and (2) there are already games out there that do everything your game does, plus more, in a better way.

Tell me, what does your shitty homebrew have to offer that I can't find in another RPG just off the top of my head>

And nigga I've read HUNDREDS of homebrew systems, in a dozen different places. In real life, on here, on fucking Reddit even, on fucking RPGGeek and six other forurms. I have found two that had any merit and even then they were heavily flawed. So you can shut the fuck up, because you don't know the first iota of what you're talking about, or who you are talking to.

>>49890152
Obviously I'm talking to a greasy basement dwelling neckbeard who suffers from such a bad case of small dick that the only thing only thing that makes him feel better is going into threads about things he disagrees with and causing a shitstorm. You probably would have been better off as an old cum again on your moms bed.

Not every game has to offer something, not ever game needs flawless and not every game needs to cater to every person. I can hop into a thread and ask for feedback, so if you're not willing to offer anything realistic and constructive without being assblasted that someone else is having fun in a way different than your own, than you can carry on this shitstorm solo.

>>49889450
I'm also not terribly impressed by OP's ideas (or lack thereof), but who does have the knowledge and experience to make a role playing game?

>>49890152
>>49889450


nigga at least it ain't D&D

>>49890152
Nice of you to offer positive suggestions instead of hijacking someone's thread to attention whore

>>49890343
I'm not terribly impressed with my own ideas either but nothing starts perfect. Doubt all your household name RPGs started off well balanced and polished up.

>>49889538
Jesus Christ what a fucking baby.

>>49890474
Nigga, they didn't even end well balanced and polished.

That doesn't mean your system is any good, though. Do you even have any kind of design philosophy or goals what so ever, or are you just throwing rules together at random?

>>49889450
Who hurt you?

>>49890656

What I'm hearing is that you failed and because of that you don't want anyone else to succeed either, because that justifies your failure somehow. The truest salt of the earth.

>>49888484

I have to know more about your system to really answer this. Ideally, your skill system should use a resolution mechanic that applies to your game overall. Multiple, different resolution mechanics is usually clunky game design unless they are really elegantly designed and play off of each other somehow.

What is your games primary resolution mechanic? Also, resolution mechanic aside, is your skill list still going to be set up the same way as that of DnD? Or is there fundamental setup of skills different too?

>>49890981
I think you think you're talking to someone else. I was asking a serious question.

I'm actually in the midst of trying - the failing comes later.

>>49889450
Aren't you that faggot who shit up the /hbg/ last week?

I think you are.

>>49890656
None at all. As I said, I'm not doing this take make a serious game to cash in on, it's just something I'm working on as a side project for fun/to pass time

>>49891066
Or was that the /gdg/? Either way, your opinion is crap.

>>49891107
I really recommend you try to learn something about game design in the process. At *least* think about what's shit in the systems you've played, and how to avoid it in your own system.

>>49888484

OK, there are three possibilities. Rip one list off an existing game. Or start with a list and pare down, or start with general categories and fill them out.

Between D&D and World of Darkness you can get a good basic list of skills started. I'm assuming you're doing cyberpunk? You need to say what your game is about if you want a relevant list.

GURPS has the definitive skill list of all time. I'd pare it down, even hardened GURPS players tend to think there are too many skills and they overlap too much. But it's the perfect starting point to pare down from. I'd download GURPS Lite while you're at it, it's an excellent system and might give you ideas even if you don't use it.

If you're starting with categories, look at broad categories of how players interact with the story. Here's the categories I'd start with:

Crafts (skill results in some tangible object, or repairs/modifies an existing object)

Influence (skill results in another character, usually an NPC, changing his attitudes and/or behavior).

Adventuring (skill results in a player bypassing environment content: hiking, swimming, jumping, climbing, wilderness survival, searching, removing traps, etc).

Combat (skill directly opposes an enemy NPC in a tactical situation: sneaking, alertness, feints, weapon skills if your system makes combat a skill check, acrobatics)

Professional (skill use yields income)

Knowledge / Sage (skill results in a player bypassing plot content: forensics, sciences, etc).

You can make other categories, but you can see how this lets you easily figure out what skills you need and what systems to create. It also gives DMs and players an easy way to extrapolate how new skills might work in their campaigns if they need to create them, or how to use an existing skill in an unorthodox manner (using your Bartending skill to impress an NPC, or earning money as a Sage, or using Acrobatics to slip through a trap or rough terrain.)

Another Homebrew anon here:

My system uses the following mechanic:

exploding 2d10 +skill modifier vs. target number:
for each multiple of 4 that you beat the TN by you are more successful.

My question:
How high should my modifiers get?
Recommendation for normal dice systems if about half the die size, but the explosion aspect increases my die scale, should I adjust for that? I was looking at modifiers ranging from 1 to 15

>>49891205
Yeah I was planning to. Have a couple other games I wanted to read/run to see how other people have done it.

I also test in a trial and error way, run for a session or 2 and ask for party feedback, what worked, what was garbage, etc

>>49891215
I'm gong for a mix of sci-fi fantasy, like a high tech ore space flight sort of setting with magic. I was planning on including any magic related skills as well as tech and repair skills.

I could take a look at gurps and see what I can take from it for skills tho, wouldn't be a bad idea.

>>49890343
Competent game designers who have published peer-reviewed games that are considered excellent.

>>49890434
So the purpose of this thread was to suck OP's dick and talk about how brilliant his idea was and offer "constructive criticism"?

No. His idea sucks and has no merit.

>>49890409
Actually, even D&D is better than OP's shitty idea for a mechanic. At least D&D can handle opposed rolls!

>>49890276
> this projecting
> this ad hominem

I can't tell if I'm replying to OP here or not, but the fact you are so asshurt about your game being shit shows a problem with you, not me. I do have a bit of a neckbeard but I plan to shave tomorrow.

> Not every game has to offer something, not ever game needs flawless and not every game needs to cater to every person.

Except your game offers nothing, is in itself a flaw, and caters to no one, except for your ego of course.

>>49891192
>>49891066
> criticism in a critique thread means you are shitting up the general

Just goes to show how full of themselves homebrew fags are. They can't even stand the idea that their game is worthless and offers nothing, without going full retard and shouting out small penis insults. I am LMAOing at this entire thread. Grow a thicker skin, OP. Your game is shit. That's not trolling, that's not baiting, that's just the honest truth. If you want to create something good, think of a niche that hasn't been explored yet, or a new way to improve on an existing niche, and work from there. Right now you are flailing around in the dark with no design goals and farting around with core mechanics you don't even understand.

>>49891557
>You must be good to make a game
>You must have already made a game to be good

>>49891311
Depends really, do they dice explode on nat 10s?

What I've seen in other games, your max possible roll (explosions not counting) is only a little higher than your highest TN

>>49891557

I play in OP's group and even I think this shitty system is better than D&D imo

>>49891721
Exploding dice are a terrible mechanic.

>>49891660
Yep, that's how it works, welcome to life. And no, you must be good to make a good game. And you must make games to become good. OP's game is complete shit. And there is not really any point to getting good when there are so many RPGs already out there. We don't need more. RPGs already exist that can do everything OP's game wants to do, plus more than that, and better than any game OP will design in the next ten years, full stop.

It's like deciding, instead of buying food at the grocery store, to grow all your food in a garden. You'll starve, it'll get eaten by bugs, and unlike home gardening the end result will be complete shit, whereas I am quite proud of the taste of my sweet potatoes I unearthed last week.

>>49891721
>Depends really, do they dice explode on nat 10s?
yes

>>49891767
>Exploding dice are a terrible mechanic.
why?

>>49891739

>I play in OP's group

No you don't.

> even I think this shitty system is better than D&D imo

You can't, because it's not even a system yet. And D&D is only one game. There are thousands out there that can literally do exactly what OP's game wants to do, and more, 100% more quality, and utterly dominate and ovelrap OP's game out of existence. His pathetic core mechanic plus 2020 Cyberpunk skills, is absolutely nothing. It is better than no game, because it is not even a game.

Post your PDF if you think it's better than D&D. Post your notes, post whatever you got. Cause I guarantee you there is a game out there that has actual features and does everything OP's game does in every possible way.

>>49891796

Because they allow the die rolls to extend beyond context. They are also shitty for damage because they result in autistic one-shot kills.

You can use exploding dice but if you are like most homebrewers you will balance them horribly. Also exploding on 2d10 or 2d6 causes weird-ass probability curves. Look at AnyDice you'll see what I mean. Getting a 24 is more likely than getting a 19 because the dice "jump" past that number.

And of course exploding dice skip numbers leading to even weirder probability.

Before using exploding dice, come up with a concrete reason WHY your system is using them and how that mechanic fits in with the design goals. Throwing in random mechanics you saw in other games just makes you a retard.

>>49891852
>Because they allow the die rolls to extend beyond context
That's the point. A level 1 commoner throwing a javelin and slaying Ares is very unlikely, but I don't want it to be impossible and unchanging dice don't allow that du to a small range of results

>They are also shitty for damage because they result in autistic one-shot kills.
What's autistic about very occasionally lucking out a lot?

>You can use exploding dice but if you are like most homebrewers you will balance them horribly
That's why I asked for criticism you dingus.

>Also exploding on 2d10 or 2d6 causes weird-ass probability curves. Look at AnyDice you'll see what I mean. Getting a 24 is more likely than getting a 19 because the dice "jump" past that number.
Each exploding die in my system only adds a further 0-9. basically you subtract 1 for each explosion.

>Before using exploding dice, come up with a concrete reason WHY your system is using them and how that mechanic fits in with the design goals
See above. I want to enable killing a tank with a 9mm if you roll crazy enough, but keep the odds low enough for that to keep suspension of disbelief for a fairly realistic world.

>Throwing in random mechanics you saw in other games just makes you a retard.
I'm not aware of a single RPG with exploding dice. Actually I got the ideo from Dominions (the video game)

>>49891985
I wouldn't bother responding to the m8. They're just looking for someone to feed their autism.

>>49891985
>I want to enable killing a tank with a 9mm if you roll crazy enough, but keep the odds low enough for that to keep suspension of disbelief for a fairly realistic world.

Even Savage Worlds (which is notorious for its exploding dice) has a rule to prevent this from happening. By your autistic rules I could throw a knife at a tank and destroy it. That is physically impossible. Please kill yourself, you are everything that everyone hates about exploding dice.

> Each exploding die in my system only adds a further 0-9. basically you subtract 1 for each explosion.

See, that's better, yet more complex. Hence why using exploding dice is fucking stupid.

> What's autistic about very occasionally lucking out a lot?

Because it happens far more than you think it does. It also makes for retarded shit like killing a tank with a 9mm pistol, which is physically impossible.

> That's why I asked for criticism you dingus.

And I gave it to you: don't use exploding dice, you fucking retard. Goddamn why are homebrewers so thickheaded?

File: Dice.jpg (49KB, 1582x606px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 1582x606px

>>49892189
>By your autistic rules I could throw a knife at a tank and destroy it
Yes
>That is physically impossible
So is magic
>See, that's better, yet more complex
>subtraction
>complex

>Because it happens far more than you think it does
>1:5 000
I doubt 5000 knives will be thrown at tanks

>>49891985
>See above. I want to enable killing a tank with a 9mm if you roll crazy enough, but keep the odds low enough for that to keep suspension of disbelief for a fairly realistic world.

Killing a tank with a 9mm is literally impossible, though. Also, the danger with this is that at some point, odds are it'll be easier to just critfish enemies with rock-throwing peasants than put in the effort of challenging them head on.

But my main issue with this thread is that you seem to want ideas and critique for every little part of your game. If you can't come up with and evaluate the simplest ideas for your system by yourself, I have to agree with the asshole that you have no place designing systems.

>>49892329
>Killing a tank with a 9mm is literally impossible, though
So is casting Magic Missile. It's a world mostly like ours, not completely.

>odds are it'll be easier to just critfish enemies with rock-throwing peasants than put in the effort of challenging them head on.
You would need 5000 peasants for that and 5000 peasants do not cram into rock throwing range

>But my main issue with this thread is that you seem to want ideas and critique for every little part of your game. If you can't come up with and evaluate the simplest ideas for your system by yourself, I have to agree with the asshole that you have no place designing systems.
I literally asked for advice on one soecific, purely mechanical aspect, which is the range in which modifiers should act.
Take note, I'm not OP

File: 1475005088339.png (46KB, 363x364px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 363x364px

>>49889450
Did someone homebrewing an RPG molest you as a kid?

>>49892329
I'm op, I only asked for a critique of my skills system and some for improvement/change, I have a good idea on how the rest of it is gonna work.

>>49892274

1) Show me where you are getting 1 in 5000

2) Magic being impossible does not justify impossible occurences where no magic is involved.

3) If it's more complex than it needs to be for no benefit, then yes, I don't want to play that system you fucking cocksucker. Why not make you multiply all your rolls by 5 and compare it to a DC chart where all the DCs are multiplied by 5. It's still elementary-school-tier math but no one would want to play it because it's fucking pointless. Just like no one wants to play a game where you have to roll 10d6 for every action and add them up. No shit we CAN add them, shiteater, we just don't want to for every single fucking roll, it slows the game the hell down for no good reason.

4) It is impossible to destroy a tank with a thrown knife. Savage Worlds literally has a heavy armor rule where a weapon must have the heavy weapon quality to pierce heavy armor. They literally say this is so you can't kill a tank by just shooting a pistol at it. You are taking a retarded mechanic and making it even more retarded. I could see this working for a certain type of game but I can tell just from how autistic your "arguments" are that you aren't going for that kind of game, you are just makign the "anything should be possible" argument without thinking how it will actually turn out in practice.

>>49892372
>So is casting Magic Missile. It's a world mostly like ours, not completely.

You're a stupid fucking faggot. Stop using this excuse. Magic missile is magic. A 9mm pistol is not magic. Yeah I can see a magic 9mm being able to punch through tank armor. A mundane one? No.

> You would need 5000 peasants for that and 5000 peasants do not cram into rock throwing range

The problem is not that, you moron, it's that the idea of a pebble destroying a tank is absolutely ludicrous. It's not a good setting unless you are going for full pants-on-head retarded. So sick of your "wurld made of magicc" excuse that every fucker pops out. I don't think your game needs to be realistic; it just needs to make fucking sense.

>>49892392
I was never molested as a kid, but one time I saw this guy who thought that anyone who disagreed with him did so because of their own mental issues and threw a temper tantrum when people expressed views that he didn't like.

>>49892432
>I was never molested as a kid, but one time I saw this guy who thought that anyone who disagreed with him did so because of their own mental issues and threw a temper tantrum when people expressed views that he didn't like.

Sounds like you m8

>>49892372
>Take note, I'm not OP
That's fair.

I can't answer your question, however, because I have no idea what kind of TNs you're working with. The general recommendations you cite sound like bunk to me, because it all depends on what you want out of the system.

I'm also homebrewing a system with a 2d10 base, and my permanent modifiers range from 1-30ish (exactly high enough to give you an outside chance of hitting the highest TNs without help) depending on total XP, with much higher numbers possible for certain actions with situational modifiers. But I don't use exploding dice, partial successes are a big part of my system, and we probably have extremely different design goals.

>>49889450
>Literally the only good roll-under game is GURPS
>what is dark heresy?
>what is harnmaster?
>what is call of cthulhu?
>what is das schwarze auge/the dark eye?
answer: all more successful games than you will ever design. fuck off.

>The world does not need any more RPGs. We have plenty. We're full.
Full. On. Retard.

>Compared margin of success, dumbass.
people with a sub-80 IQ really shouldn't call other people retards.

>it has all the downside of high randomness, lack of bell curve
negligible

>small range of numbers
only valid concern

>where people barely level up at all.
>games need a leveling system
>advancement can not happen with or without levels, just rarely but then with substabtially benefits (like +10 or +20% improvements)
kill yourself

>>49890058
a VERY successful game enjoyed by many roleplayers. its designers (by extension WFRP's designers) have accomplished more than you ever will in game design.

>>49890152
stop the baiting, faggot, it's too obvious. and after that, kill yourself.

>>49890152
>And nigga I've read HUNDREDS of homebrew systems
and still nobody cares! amazoing, innit?

>>49891557
>d20 roll over can handle opposed rolls. d10 roll under can't.
make that sub-70 IQ. how do you even type?

>>49891607
obvious troll is obvious

>>49892478
Actually, I just expressed my opinion. OP was the one who could not provide a single redeeming quality to his game.

>>49892509
A game being successful means it is good? By that logic, D&D is the most well-designed game ever.

I wasn't telling OP how to make a successful game, I was telling him how to make a well-designed game. Learn the difference cunt.

> Full. On. Retard.

Full on retard is making a game for an overinflated market where no one has the time to play half the systems they own anyway. But sure, pile on another autistic homebrew. I'm sure it won't be pointless. OP's homebrew exists SOLELY to inflate his own ego. It's not going to be better than any other RPG, so it's not going to provide a better experience for his players. It's not going to get published because it has no merit as a game. And more than likely he'll shove it down his players' throats who will play it for a few sessions to spare his feelings before never touching it again.

I could be wrong, of course, but until OP posts a PDF of his game, I will have to assume what is true in 90% of cases.

> negligible

It's really not, but have fun when your end behavior is stuck at a flat 10% chance. That is the rarest event possible in your game. Or you could switch to d20 which is even worse.

>advancement can not happen with or without levels, just rarely but then with substabtially benefits (like +10 or +20% improvements)

I'm sorry my use of "level-up" as a catch-all phrase for advancement triggered you so hard. No shit you can have non-leveling advancement but even if you increase just a single skill by 1 it will rapidly reach the edges of the dice mechanic's ability. Unless you do fractional advancement like a dumbass. I was reinforcing the point that 1d10 is a shitty mechanic.

>>49892509
>games need a leveling system

Actually, they kinda do. If the characters NEVER improve that takes out a big chunk of motivation to play. Unless your game has a valid reason why people SHOULDN'T improve at a thing after doing it a lot, I think you will need some kind of advancement system.

Or, you can just clean out every feature of an RPG to fit your stupid-ass choice of a mechanic, then add on a ton of kludge bull shit to try to make it function, instead of just using a better core mechanic. Be right back, I'm gonna design a game with a 1d4 core mechanic and remove modifiers entirely so there are only two types of characters, 2s and 3s, and anyone who doesn't like my game, is clearly trolling me.

>>49892634
Not even arguments. d10 roll-under can handle opposed rolls but in a fucking retarded way, all while providing NO benefit. There is no point to a roll-under system.

>>49892583
Clearly. But that's okay, feel free to proceed to making a ton of shitty RPGs. Clearly you don't give a fuck about quality, so just design away. No one will read your goddamn PDF anyway so who cares?

>>49892561
>its designers (by extension WFRP's designers) have accomplished more than you ever will in game design.

What have they accomplished in game design?

>>49892189
>By your autistic rules I could throw a knife at a tank and destroy it.
>our rule system has a 1 in 100.000 chance of something wildly unrealistic happening, it is very bad
man, reading all these homebrews hasn't taught you even Game Design 101. jesus, you're a stupid troll.

>Because it happens far more than you think it does.
it happens exactly as often as he wants it to, on average. that's good enough, faggot.

>>49891543

There's a free or very cheap skill categories PDF that lists them all. Or use GURPS Lite, a free pdf. Or just go to the PDF in the OP of GURPS general and you'll see a list of resources.

Sci fantasy is rough because you need a system that can handle many genres. GURPS / FATE / etc. Or try a sci fantasy rules system like 40kRPG for suggestions. Obviously GURPS has a lot of this out of the box and ready to go.

I'd go with the skill categories approach to building a skill list if I were you. Well, strictly, if I were you i'd just use GURPS. But be that as it may, I'd start with categories and build the list of skills from scratch in each category. It's really easy to get stuck into all the little details and never be able to climb out of them. So trying to stay general and solving many problems at once helps you get a system done and ready to play, instead of ending up as notes in a folder on your hard drive.

>>49892706
Except the chance of a thrown knife destroying a tank in real life is far, far less.

The fact that your game even bothers to provide rules for that, is fucking autistic and retarded.

> it happens exactly as often as he wants it to, on average. that's good enough, faggot.

It's good enough for him, sure. Too bad you can't really play RPGs by yourself.

>>49892642
>A game being successful means it is good?
yes, it means that it is good. D&D isn't my thing but it works GOOD ENOUGH for droves of gamers to keep playing it. it is good in its niche, it's just not my niche.

>I was telling him how to make a well-designed game.
according to your worthless uninformed opinions. i'd rather design a game that appeals to plenty of gamers than a single baiting retard on 4chinz

>Full on retard is making a game for an overinflated market
his prerogative

>OP's homebrew exists SOLELY to inflate his own ego
i know jack-shit about OP's motives and I suspect so do you.

>I will have to assume what is true in 90% of cases.
and nobody cares!

>It's really not, but have fun when your end behavior is stuck at a flat 10% chance.
i have played cp 2020, it's no biggie.

>I'm sorry my use of "level-up" as a catch-all phrase for advancement triggered you so hard
not triggered at all, just pointing out how stupid you are, troll. and enjoying myself doing so.

>rapidly reach the edges of the dice mechanic's ability
>rapidly
that depends on how often you get to raise skills, faggot. you didn't listen. ADHD on top of retardation. i wonder if there's a connection.

>>49892766

Also, ignore the naysayers who hate homebrews or tell you to give up but listen to the legit critiques that identify specific problems and walk you through fixing them. Homebrewing is a worthy effort.

I spent years working on a hard sci fi RPG system, having decided that GURPS was crap and I'd never play it (this was third edition). Working all these problems helped me appreciate game design issues and made me a better GM. Finally I read through gurps 4e and realized that it was a fucking awesome system and that where they'd solved a problem differently from me, they'd picked the smarter approach (mostly). It was humbling but in far retrospect I think I'm still glad I put so much into a system that I ended up throwing out.

>>49892701
>Not even arguments. d10 roll-under can handle opposed rolls but in a fucking retarded way, all while providing NO benefit.
You have never played both CoC and Rolemaster or you'd know there is. Also there is a simple way to handle opposed tests in roll under.

>feel free to proceed to making a ton of shitty RPGs
if I feel like, that's what I will do.

>so just design away.
thanks for your permission, troll. it means a lot.

>What have they accomplished in game design?
they have published a game system that a fairly large number of players play throughout the generations. starting from WFRP and ending with DH 2E, so far. DH was one of the defining games of the 00s, after all.

>Except the chance of a thrown knife destroying a tank in real life is far, far less.
and nobody cares

>It's good enough for him, sure. Too bad you can't really play RPGs by yourself.
>games that have a 1:5000 chance of something wildly unrealistic happening have no chance of getting played
topkek.

>>49892766
>>49892829
I planned in taking a look at gurps at somepoint. It seems the best bet for just skills. Categories I may do once I have some better ideas.

And my approach for sci-fantasy has been to stay mostly sci-fi and throw in magic as more support stuff.

And yeah I'll take any criticism as long as it's helpful. I'll just ignore asshats in this thread cuz gaming is for fun, not to be better than someone

>>49892701
>There is no point to a roll-under system.

Well there is some benefits that can be squeezed out of it. If we want to get a cap on a maximum MoS of action without adding arbitrary rules for each little thing. With say d20 roll under we don't need to waste space and say that you can't have result of more than X on a roll because dice simply can't roll a higher result.

It similar things GURPS does where for actions without MoS counting everything over 16 is mostly wasted points. But considering how much different things you can pile up on an action that shave off some points from your TN it works.

For example swordmaster hitting enemy with normal attacks is mostly a waste. But he can rapid strike enemy in eye and groin on the same turn without suffering any meaningful penalties to the roll because his basic TN is so high.

>>49892887
>games that have a 1:5000 chance of something wildly unrealistic happening have no chance of getting played
And actually it's evenlower as meeting the TN on an attack just deals one damage increment.
So the throwing dagger would deal its 3+Str damage, likely chipping the tracks or scratchings the view window. For a destruction you'll be looking at a 3.68e-9 % chance.

>>49891660
Well, you do. Experience doesn't just come from thin air, dipwad.

>>49893480
How do you gain experience if you aren't allowed to write systems unless you're already good at writing systems?