/gdg/ Game Design General

File: Misfortune A5 Advantageous.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

Sup again, my /gdg/ fellas.

I thought I was ready, but ended up changing my system into an almost mathless system. You only roll dice and compare it to numbers on the character sheet. That's it.

I changed the +2s and -2:s to advantage and disadvantage dice, and then turned +4s and +10s into boost dice.

Advantage dice: Like in D&D 5th, you add another die and take the highest. Except you take highest 2 of 3d6, but works similarly. Disadvantage, you take lowest 2.

Boost dice: Add another die to the roll, but it only affects the check against weakness (the most important one). All the background checks (despair, ordinary and strain) are not counted.

New fitted into A5 size.

>>50948290
>Could a leveled design be done reasonably in a classless system? Has it been done?
Anima is more or less classless.

>>50948290
Yes it can, and yes it has been done.

My very own system is going to work like that, where with each level up you get (+2 att. points, +3 "power" points, +4 ability points) as another example there is Mutants&Masterminds where you get some BPs that you can expend pretty much anywhere up to your level limits.

>>50948357
You still need to work a bit on your layout.
I would reccomend using a single column on some of your pages as some of your explanations can be a little lengthy, other than that you could use pages with mixed layout and don't forget to use page breaks so your users can find content more easily.

>>50948290
I don't see what would speak against it.
With levels you just pace the advancement differently in this case.

>>50948436
>>50948442
>>50949797
Allright, neat. I was thinking possibly doing something akin to that, because I haven't set a hard experience system for my game yet. System with levels would give the players something to look forward to and give the players a feel for where they are going in the world's power level.

For a game like mine, where starting characters are barely over mundane at beginning, and say, giving one development point per level, maybe two on 5ths, how much should the level cap be.

The characters start with 40 points in their weaknesses, the absolute minimum they can have is 7, thus 12 could be reasonable, with maybe each third level giving a second development point.

>>50948598
Not an expert on layout, just putting things to Indesign and calling it a day for now. For some reason I prefer doing it this way to writing all the stuff to docs or somesuch first.

I gotta see how the layout changes as pictures start popping in. But even before that, I guess, having more space to breathe would be good. How does one even layout?

>>50950129
>>50948598
Hmm, would it be a good idea to get to the idea of making better layout by inserting pseudoimages to the rulebook? I mean, starting with empty boxes, of course.

Maybe later make some designs with pre-existing images and see where it brings me?

File: Misfortune A5 Advantageous Type2.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>50950892
Eh, I tried to do a version with empty boxes where the future art could go. The mind can wander a little, and the text is somewhat easier to read now that it's mostly in one column. Lengthened the game to about 16 pages, but that's fine.

Is this better to your eyes? I used only little over hour or so to the layout, but that's an hour more than what I used before.

Do the places for images look fitting? Like the one on the Conflict page, does it feel natural that there would be some kind of a duel going on in there?

>>50952155
Holy shit only now did I notice that insane blurb of text on the Conflict -page. I was too concerned about the text fitting that I forgot to check kerning. Whoa.

I'm working on the tactical combat section of my RPG and I'm having trouble choosing between three approaches to resource management, specifically with special abilities (stuff you might call 'encounter powers' in D&D 4th Edition).

Approach #1 is that every power is its own unique ability, and they can each be used once per battle. If a character knows the Fireball, Heal, and Entangle spells they can use each spell once per battle for a total of three 'casts'. Approach #2 is that characters have something like a 'mana pool' so if they know three spells, and have three 'casts', they can cast any combination of those spells per battle. Perhaps the more powerful abilities would cost more Mana or some such. Approach #3 is that characters can use each ability once per battle, but they can exhaust/spend a different ability of the same level/cost to use one that's already expended. The catch is that using an already exhausted ability has a penalty, they're less effective after the first use.

I feel like the first approach is strongest for ensuring game balance and encouraging characters to get multiple offensive and defensive abilities. The second one seems the most 'natural' and organic to my setting, and generally more intuitive. The third one seems like it's the most appropriate for narrative-style gaming (I mean, the first time you use something it's great, but after that it's just spamming the power) but it doesn't feel like it succeeds at being either realistic or balanced.

Any advice would be most welcome.

File: Neo-Heroes, Valor, and Mead v1.4.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>50948290
Hello folks, I am currently beating my head against the wall when it comes to traits (Page 5)

They are effectively trying to differentiate characters on a more personal basis and helping them with certain rolls.
While I keep looking at them, I think they need to be changed to be a bit easier or clearer.
I was thinking of a couple options
>Merits - Akin to World of Darkness, give a handful of Merits applying to each of the attributes.
>Fate-like Aspects - Pretty much taking the idea of tropes or simple phrases and giving them life.

Any suggestions would be appreciated. I'll watch the thread for any questions I could answer. Thanks ahead of time.

File: Gizzled Mouse Thief.jpg (41KB, 564x686px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 564x686px

>>50953475
I feel the second one works a bit better for a balance of crunch vs narrative.
What would you consider the average amount of mana for a normal character?

>>50953911
>What would you consider the average amount of mana for a normal character?
About 4-7 at character creation with each 'spell' costing 1 point. Characters would thus also start with 4-7 'spells' since both the mana pool and number of 'spells' known are determined by the same attribute. I say 'spells' because it would also cover combat maneuvers, and a character could have a mixture of martial and magical powers that all drew from the same 'mana pool'. It would be an abstraction of mental awareness and acumen.

In my system characters can generally expect to have a mixture of damage powers, healing powers, and debuff-applying powers. My concern is that if I use a mana system, players will feel encouraged to blow all their mana on their most effective attack power over and over until they win, in order to make the fight go as quickly as possible. Alternatively you have situations where one or more characters spam their healing power over and over again to keep their team healed up and thus dramatically extending the time encounters take to resolve. Not to mention making it really hard to threaten them.

The other problem is that a mana system means picking two similar powers becomes quite redundant. A mage might not want to learn both a Fireball and a Lightning Bolt spell, even if they're slightly more effective in certain situations or against certain enemies. They'd probably get much more mileage out of learning something like a Healing spell that expands their options in a new way. But if you don't use mana then learning two different offensive spells matters more because it means it doubles their magical attacks they can do in a fight.

File: Serious Bearded Man of Lightning.jpg (926KB, 900x1391px) Image search: [Google]

926KB, 900x1391px

>>50953911
>players will feel encouraged to blow all their mana on their most effective attack power over and over until they win, in order to make the fight go as quickly as possible. Alternatively you have situations where one or more characters spam their healing power over and over again to keep their team healed up and thus dramatically extending the time encounters take to resolve

I see your point.
Going off that I would suggest making a hybrid of option 1 and 3.
Every power has 3 or so casts, but if you're getting desperate you can sub in one of your casts for another spell (Maybe have it cost double or something)
This would encourage players to think about what and when they are going to use their powers, because going to fast means you've burned to many resources that are useful, while going to slow means the enemy may hold the advantage and you need to burn abilities to survive rather than to deal with a threat.

Am I on the right track? or did I miss something?

File: 1459486158995.jpg (351KB, 822x1080px) Image search: [Google]

351KB, 822x1080px

>>50954582
I think you're on the right track. My current idea is to use a mana system, like option 2, but with something like the following:

The Rule of Repetition: Enemies adapt to your tactics and learn to see through your maneuvers. Spells become more unstable and difficult to control when cast repeatedly in sequence. In short, one must vary their approach or see their effectiveness drop in battle.
When you use a talent more than once in a given encounter, roll 1d6. If your result is lower than the number of times you've use that talent, you lose a mana point and any damage or healing involved is halved. If the talent had an effect besides damage or healing, roll another 1d6; on a 3 or less that effect doesn't occur.

Example: Juan uses his Fireball talent to scorch a number of enemies, spending one mana. On his next turn he uses it again, spending one mana and rolling a d6 due to the Rule of Repetition. He gets a 5, which is equal to or higher than 2, so his Fireball works normally. Later on in the fight he casts Fireball a third time, and when he rolls a d6 for the Rule of Repetition he gets a 2 (lower than a 3). He loses two mana instead of one, and his Fireball only does half as much as it would normally. If he wanted to cast Fireball again he'd have to roll a 4 or better to avoid draining himself again.

The above is a simplified version of how it would work, it doesn't reflect the mechanics of my system but it's good enough for a rough approximation.

File: Demo.png (435KB, 825x1125px) Image search: [Google]

435KB, 825x1125px

Designing the card layout for my new game. Any suggestions/critique?

The white circles on the top right tab will have coloured symbols for deckbuilding purposes, and the number in the lower tab is the cost to play the card. Otherwise all fields are filled out with their intended function.

>>50955194
Wondering what it would look like if the tab with the deck-building circles was on the left-hand side. It looks good, but the right feels a little cluttered. Is the deckbuilding part of the game, or pre-game? If it part of the game, then it should stay on the right, makes it easier to read as you play.

>>50955521
I had it on the left originally, but for some reason that made the card look weird and unbalanced.

Why this eternal wheel of new ideas while trying to keep polishing the old ones? It's starting to get rather frustrating.

Like now, there is the thread at >>50954289 that sparked my idea (>>50955998 >>50956014), the one about tiered dice and committing them to cause different stances.

So basically the character can at any time commit three dice, the highest die and the two below it (d8 -> d6 & d4) to three things: Action, Attack or Defense.

A basic roll would include the 2(or 3) things: The committed die and stat die. Attack rolls would also have the weapon die, defense rolls would also have the armor die.

Attributes are rated 1-3: 1 has the highest commitable die, 3 has the lowest.

The idea is, as that thread's opening implies, there are no to-hit rolls, meaning you always contest opponent's attack rolls with your defense roll, and if the defense wins, there is no successful attack, and if the attack wins, the character takes the difference amount of damage.

But eugh, I should focus to my own things, the ones I have started. Feel free to comment though.

>>50954972
If your game have secondary, mechanical currency (4e Healing Surges, for example), try using that to represent the exertion of over using the power.

>>50952155
Now this is starting to look neat...

>>50953879
A Merit/Flaw system usually is better when it comes to solid mechanics and fixed stuff, it gives you something solid you know you can always rely on
Aspects are a bit more loose, they tend to be a bit more story-friendly as they imply a larger array of bonuses better fleshing out your character.
Compare a stunt driver merit with a underground racer aspect and you will notice the difference.

>>50955660
I believe you can remove the white lines holding the important keywords box, other than that, have you tried using a different design to have the white circles centered on top?

>>50956622
>have you tried using a different design to have the white circles centered on top
Good idea, I'll play around with that tomorrow.

>>50956455
That's a good idea, thanks. I'm not sure how balanced it would be though, since in my game when you're out of the healing surges equivalent you're knocked out of the fight or even killed. It would be pretty lame to die from using something like Inspiring Shout a second time, rolling a 1, and losing that last healing surge. What would be the in-universe justification for something like that?

I know that I want the resource management system to be intuitive, simple, and balanced, and I know I'm probably going to have to compromise on at least one of those.

>>50957544
He used the last of his strength to keep the allies inspired.
But we know the player won't risk spending his last HS if that meant defeat or death.

File: Conceptual Design.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

I don't know if I should go d20 or 3d6 on my system. I really need some feedback. The document is just bullet points with ideas.

>>50956622
>>50956827
Now that's an idea. The circles would have to go horizontal, though. But it gives a bit more room without cutting into other parts.

File: 0676282b0ce65c3893b3289b0855c9b0.jpg (521KB, 638x1000px) Image search: [Google]

521KB, 638x1000px

I'm going to say what kind of game I want to make, then I'm going to see what people think I should do in terms of the how:

Shapeshifting alien entities known as "Vampires" exist, hiding among humanity and working to manipulate the world for their own ends. These beings feed on human life force, drinking their blood and devouring them. Most people who find out about them become pawns or meals. Some people aren't so lucky.
Sometimes the people killed by these Vampires are instead infected by the same parasite, and become half-vampires themselves in a symbiotic relationship. The symbiote thirsts for the blood of full vampires, and can only be sated by slaying them. The people bonded to these vampiric symbiotes are known as Dhampir, and they fight back against the puppetmasters of the world to drain them of their blood and free the world from their grip.

The idea is to make combat that feels visceral and exciting despite being rolling dice. I'm thinking about reappropriating a system I made for a Naruto inspired game where there was energy floating around the area as narrative points that could be used to power up abilities, but would then be expended to allow other people to gather up that energy. Reworking that so that it's not the ambient chi of an area but instead the blood spraying around would be a neat idea.

When players defeat other Vampires, they'd also gain blood currency, that can be used to upgrade your character like experience points, or to trade with NPCs like it was money.

The general idea is a sort of hectic mishmash of ̶s̶h̶o̶w̶s̶ ̶I̶'̶v̶e̶ ̶n̶e̶v̶e̶r̶ ̶a̶c̶t̶u̶a̶l̶l̶y̶ ̶w̶a̶t̶c̶h̶e̶d̶ ideas I like from various anime and media: Guyver, the Tagers from CthulhuTech, Witchblade (anime and comic), Kill la Kill, Blood+. Just lots of gonzo bullshit.

A lot of the character creation and advancement would center on the actual Dhampir form. The symbiotes themselves would probably have randomized personality traits.

>>50962378
>lol do my work for me

>>50963097
It's more that I'm spitballing and asking for advice. What sort of existing systems to look into and so forth.

>>50962378
Good way to make combat feel involved and visceral is keep everything low durability. You can't take a punch, so you have to hit before they hit you. Its not to say things are a glass cannon, but the idea is everything hits hard. Not RPG related but an idea is like how Warmahordes feels, the infantry mostly take 1 point to kill, while Warjacks take 20-30, but attacks can deal a lot, so the theory is it only takes 4 or 5 good strong attacks to kill a jack, but it feels like a lot more due to the meaty-ness of the numbers.

What are people's thoughts on a core mechanic where you roll d6s based on one trait and look for target numbers based on another?

So say you have a Stealth of 4 and a Dexterity of 3, you'd roll 4d6 and look for any that come up 1, 2, or 3. More hits is better. Things would probably cap out at 5 in 6 chance of a hit.

>>50964137
The main problem with that is I want a more Superhero tone. If players have low health, they'd get splattered easily.

>>50964170
I kinda use a similar system. Went with a modular way of writing it out, so instead of explaining it everytime, I just have a single format and plug in what goes where.

Bump til I get home.

>>50953879
hey man id love to give a critique, rulebooks are my thing:

the project goal shouldnt be in the rulebook.
there shouldn't indents in the paragraphs.
don't describe youre game as generic even if its supposed to be general.
change the font to not arial.
i have no idea what the game is, the supposed setting if there is one. the goal of the document is missing or hard to find.

this may seem harsh, but that isnt my intention. rules editting is a hobby of mine

File: Aegeos Shattered v0.01.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

I'm hoping I can get around to fill out the rest of it tomorrow. At least get some playtest lists up for trying out.

File: psychic-ability[1].jpg (276KB, 1671x1137px) Image search: [Google]

276KB, 1671x1137px

>>50953911
>What would you consider the average amount of mana for a normal character?

You know, the loonies say that we all are born with alot of psychic potential and then it drops after our teen years, supposedly its dedicated to mastering skills we learn to do in adulthood. I mean, like alot. Children would be like 100 psychic units, teens would 80-100, and adults drop to like 15-20, if you want to use a made up unit for measure.

In this theory, people we call psychics have abundant units, like 200 or something, and they don't drop off at adulthood.

What are some good keyword mechanics for a ccg without player health or blocking?

So I recently got done with a 24 hour drive back home and much of that time I was thinking about different mechanics. Just for a dogfighting game I'm working on, I came up with this:

Retool everything to work on 2d6 or d12 instead of d20. I'm already using 2d6/d12 as a simple measure of altitude (displayed like a MTG spin counter). If I go with d12 the game will still require gaming dice, but I get the flat probabilities that would probably be better for the math. With 2d6, its easier to get the required dice and the math might not suffer as much with the probability curve.

Since I'm basing the game off a vidya source, I should be able to easily convert the plane statistics into 1-10 ratings. There will be options to modify your plane physically, and those plane stats will be what you roll against in different contests. Armor, for example, will act as DR, and either be limited to 8 total, or just have missiles deal 20% damage minimum. Mobility might be involved in accuracy, or it might need to represent getting on someone's Six. I'm not sure if it can be both. Speed is obvious and I already have rules written for that. And there's some other stats that the game uses that I don't know if I can/need/want to use like Stability, though I might be able to use that as something related to the mobility problem.

Does any of the above seem particularly objectionable at any level? Part of the goal of this game was to have a dogfighting game that could be played with the fewest resources required, so I'm trying to get as much fidelity out of those simple rules as I can. Even if you're just playing using your altitude dice as both your rolls and your plane's location on a scratch paper grid, it should still be functional.

>>50969050
Go treasure, like Pkmn TCG.

>>50971565
Treasure? I'm unfamiliar. I was referring to things like flying or reach & the like. In the game I'm working on there is no blocking but there is counterattack so maybe something to do with "unless you have not!reach, constructs with not! flying can attack without being counterattacked."

>>50969050
Would need a bit more context on how the game works.

File: Variant sheets.png (55KB, 1122x747px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 1122x747px

I know there is no context for the rules, but what do you think about my variant character sheets? At least I think they're pretty neat. Not too fancy, I admit, especially that FTW one could be more decorative. If I happen to find any way to decorate it in a sensible way, I will.

For context, Night Drifters is basically an Initial D spoof and FTW is a Magical Girls -game.

>>50977871
>No context for rules
>For context

Go me! I meant that the rules haven't been written in a form that you guys have seen.

>>50977871
I actually like 'em. Nice and clean. Almost gives me a DitV vibe.

File: 1396395826566.jpg (281KB, 1675x2375px) Image search: [Google]

281KB, 1675x2375px

I have this idea for a magic/psionic powers mechanic based on zodiac signs.
Your character has X sign so they have certain bonuses and penalties towards other signs and each sign has certain inmunities and exclusive powers
Its very simplistic but I feel something can come out of it

File: Dwarven King.jpg (65KB, 541x768px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 541x768px

>>50967641
This is primarily my "Write rules and shit down so they are there" book.
>I put project goals in there for threads like these, just so people don't have to ask "So what are your goals with this system" blame /r/gamedesign for that
>Indents in the paragraphs are for me mostly, I get annoyed when things aren't organized that way.
>I mainly describe it as generic, because my goal with it is simply "Run anything I want in it" and the term "generic" fit, probably will change it.
>I'm weird, I like Arial and most everyone can read it fairly well, welcome to having shitty eysight.
>As stated above, it's my "collect rules n' shit" book, I'm actually going to be editing a part of it tomorrow.

File: Necroknight.png (1MB, 1700x1800px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1700x1800px

>>50980546
Could work, just remember to balance things the best you can.
Also, look everything over when you have a rough draft done. Players will always find the littlest detail to make themselves overpowered as all hell.

Can anybody throw dice curves at me?
mostly dicepool ones but will take anything

>>50983138
I am deciding on what rolling system to use

>>50984538
http://anydice.com/program/a434

Just check out the summary. If you're going for a roll total-based game (instead of successes or anything like that), the curves are actually about the same, the total and mean averages just shift up when you use larger dice.

If you want successes, there's a handy function here:
http://anydice.com/program/f44
It's a premade function in anydice, it has d10 with successes over 7 and double successes on 10. Fumble (-1) if there's no successes and a 1.

Then here's a similar success-based one, but with d6. 4-6 are successes, 1-3 are not. No fumble:
http://anydice.com/program/a435

And then I made some silly ones. They are "Is your highest die larger than?"

With d20s, the highest die must be 15 or over for a roll to succeed.
With d12s, the highest die must be 10 or over for a roll to succeed.

http://anydice.com/program/a436

>>50963097
>lol I'm retarded

>>50985895
>http://anydice.com/program/f44
>It's a premade function in anydice, it has d10 with successes over 7 and double successes on 10. Fumble (-1) if there's no successes and a 1.
That's something I can use. Thanks!

>>50990633
If you plan to use it, you might want to read up on Exalted 3rd to see how to NOT use it. The system is so broken when the maximum difficulty of a roll is 5 and you can roll up to 20 dice at a time, with little repercussions.

Like, with 5 successes, you can basically tame hurricanes. I know Exalted is supposed to be somewhat INSANE but I just think that's dumb. Like, even a relatively normal roll without charms is easily somewhere about 9 dice, which has almost 50% chance at succeeding in almost ANYTHING.

>>50990975
I plan on the average being 3 or 4 dice, with a target of 2, or an opposed roll against a similar 3 or 4 dice. I already have a hard limit of 7 dice on a roll, for unforeseen situations.

The distinguishing mechanics of my card game is that each player starts with a big guy and a bunch of basic permanents that passively boost their big guy's power. The starting permanents are fragile and provide small boosts compared to ones you can play. There is a limit that starts at 0 and is passively boosted by some permanents. When your big guy attacks, you can only keep a number of power boosting permanents equal to that limit. A player loses if their big guy is destroyed. You can either focus on turning your big guy into a threat or just summoning new threats.

The question is, what is the flavor behind all of this?

>>50992608
Ancient gods duking it out. The permanents you play can be things like place of power, worship sites, or heroes bringing glory and praise to the god's name.

>>50992608
>>50993549
That or something similar. A Romance of the Three Kingdoms with Warlords and their armies would also fit your mechanical concept.

>>50993857
But that doesn't have to make sense of
>When your big guy attacks, you can only keep a number of power boosting permanents equal to that limit.

>>50994063
Of course it can. It all depends on what you choose to represent those permanents. Conquered cities, shrines, whatever. The fluff is pretty easy to reconcile.

On another note, when do you think it's best to use two combat stats like MtG's power/toughness vs one combat stat like Duel Masters' just power?

>>50994705
I think it depends on how you want creatures to contribute. I don't know Duel Masters, but in MtG, creatures aren't your only win condition, and generally, except for a few, you'll need a few to take out your opponent, so having it two separate stats and how damage works in MtG works.

>>50953879
i like this system, with just a couple of buts.
the combat seems confusing at first, maybe reorder the pages a little. you went into advanced combat before i could understand how basic combat worked.
i think i got it near the end anyway, and the responses are neat.
about the traits, it does seem a bit loose. maybe put costs depending on how broad the trait and provide or require a brief description of when a trait would apply.

Fallout 4 did a leveled classless system perfectly. Just needs lots of options.

>>50997820
Ugh, that's why I hate trying to write on my phone. Such a mess.

>>50971367
bumping for responses.

I'm working on the rewrite which I'd normally be sharing anyway, but:
a) We're on page 10, and
b) feedback could help before I finish/post the next version
but mostly a)

File: swordfight.jpg (86KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 960x720px

>>51003668
My gut feel is that dogfighting is not die-roll random unless the hardware is extremely unreliable. I figure that it's more of a simultaneous-decision game, where each player secretly indicates which way they intend to turn, all are revealed at once, and then the specs of the plane come into play for the rest of the combat round. The idea of planes flying at some random altitude, or only being able to climb to a certain altitude because of a random die roll, does not make sense to me.

>>51004051
(with pic of a simultaneous-decision vidya game.)

>>51004051
Plane movement is not subject to dice rolling. The game is "zoomed out" a bit where each grid square roughly represents a half-mile of space (or you can think of it as watching in the war room. Your physical game grid is that same war room grid). The dice come into play once you want to maintain missile/gun reticle lock. The planes won't be drastically leaving their 1/2mile by 1/2mile squares beyond their normal forward movement, so that randomness comes from the mixture of both planes jockeying for position. But as for movement at large, players remain in full control (outside of stalling) of which grid squares they intend to fly towards. That was a poor explanation on my part. Right now the only rolls so far involve weapon accuracy and possibly pre-fire accuracy (maintaining radar lock).

File: Boar Rider Dwarf.jpg (355KB, 2300x1626px) Image search: [Google]

355KB, 2300x1626px

>>50998651
I fixed up traits a bit, made it more akin to Burning Wheel with Vice, Virtue, Value, and Vilify.
I need to rewrite combat a bit to make things clearer, it's one of those moments when I know it perfectly, but it can come off as confusing for anyone else.

I'm working on a cardboard computer type game; does anyone have any general advice on design for this sort of thing? I don't have any specific problems yet, but I'd rather not dash my ship on the rocks so to speak if people know where they are.

>>51007836
>cardboard computer type game
what does this mean in /gdg/ context?

Does it seem unwieldy to have this many of this kind of ability:
Warrior # (+# strength against minions and gods.)
Vandal # (+# strength against non-minion idols.)
Zealot # (+# strength against idols and gods.)
Attacker # (+# strength when attacking.)
Guard # (+# strength when not attacking.)

Also, I have two different "graveyards" and am wondering what the second one should be called. You have the dead zone, which is where destroyed permanents and used spells go, then you have the other zone, which is where discarded cards, permanents subjected to special removal, and overloaded idols go.

>>51008140
It means a boardgame that directs players against a challenge controlled by the game rules. Examples include Kingdom Death Monster and Sentinels of the Multiverse.

It acts a little like there's a GM controlling the action, but it actually is all just following rules. The rules decide what each enemy targets and how they act and so on. They're effectively "programmed", often randomized somewhat by having a deck of cards determining what they do.

>>51008679
Discard pile and no

>>51008790
Nvm call it hell

>>51008725
Oh okay, I had thought of that concept myself but had never associated it with that term.

I can't help much, but I do know from AI programming is simpler AI rules are more likely to lead to seemingly more complex behaviors and are much, much easier to write.

>>51005483
Why do you need a grid?

>>51008833
A grid technically isn't absolutely necessary, but I'm designing with one in mind. The game is designed with the premise that the players are at their character's base, watching the missions unfold over top a war room grid. So while they may place themselves in the role of pilots, the literal people in the room and actual, physical grid/table they're playing on can also be seen as "part of the game". A lot of (read: all) inspiration is taken from the Ace Combat series of games, and their use of a grid for briefing and debriefing is a perfect thematic tool.

Also, I can easily convert the rules to be gridless if I wanted, but designing gridless from the outset may/may not make things easier to then make secondary grid rules. Its also intended to be more tactical than theater of the mind, but that also can be converted from a primary grid system.

These are the current rules so far: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-x7vMbcJeXps8ZaeTa2ovoXK2yoB7ICqcEmNKP1dlww/edit
I've made some additions today, and maybe some of the other rules I've written so far will provide more context.

bampin

>>51009046
Dogfight anon here again with two easy, opinion based questions.

1) I'm thinking now about whether to use 1d12 or 2d6 as my main rolling mechanic. In my opinion, 1d12 works better for the math I want with its flat rates compared to 2d6's curve and lack of 1s, and just looks nicer as the altitude spin counter than 2d6. However, simplicity and ease are design goals, and as far as obtaining dice, 2d6 is far likelier than 1d12. Is it worth sacrificing the aesthetic and better math of the d12 for ease of access of 2d6?

2) In the source inspirational material, the A2A and A2G stats increased damage and Stability was just for stalling. In the current revision, I have Stability acting as both acquiring radar lock and stall recovery while A2A and A2G act as damage modifiers. Would it make more sense to relegate Stability to just stall recovery (its hard to make it represent minimum speed when speed increments translate to ~300mph jumps) and for A2A/A2G be the lock-on stats? That would reduce the importance of Stability. Missiles would also preferably deal flat damage instead of variable, which was my initial and probably preferable idea.


1d12 vs 2d6?
Should A2A/A2G affect damage or lock-on success?

>>50955194
You really need to take those borders in, I think. It's 5.6mm border assuming that's 330dpi (which would make that image a standard poker card size, same as MTG cards) which will really divorce the inner card from the actual card. For reference, the old MTG card borders were about 3.1mm, about 4.3mm from edge to the actual inner frame rather than background. They've apparently shrunk since by about a millimeter to expand the background.

You're using something like a sixth of your horizontal space on stuff totally external to the card information. Add in padding from text to inner border and it's probably like 20%. The visual design is good, conveys a pretty strong identity - hopefully the one you want - but the spacing is pretty whack. If your cards will rarely have a lot of text that could be fine but for something with per-card rules or non-keyword abilities it likely won't hold up.

Gap between title and keyword block could probably be increased a little, too. Being so distinct suggests the keyword block should have equal spacing both above and below. And if the white circles are only for deckbuilding (or occasional synergy effects - not an "every turn" deal) they could probably be made a bit smaller to maximize your artwork.

>>51013566
thinking even more about which dice I should use:

I've also considered d10 and d% as options. With the way the math is currently working, I'm of the opinion that the dice to be larger than the possible stats. Some stats will have an effective limit even lower than the hard coded max of 10. The Evasion roll is a key factor. When you can get good, meaty bonuses to completely avoiding damage like 16.6% and 33.3% on a 1d12 roll, I don't want 100% evasion to be abusively easy to attain. D% would work pretty well in many cases, but I'm partial to the far less granular math I'm currently using.

Looking through some scenarios with Andice, it's really starting to look like 1d12 is going to be the best options. It's even tangentially related to the o'clock positions, which is a useful aspect.

Confirmation or counter-arguments are still welcome.

>>51013566
will 1d6 work?

>>51014184
I originally planned for it to be d6 based, but particularly once ranges came into play, the d6 was just not quite granular enough. Especially when it comes to the current iteration of plane stats, if your aiming stat is 3 and you roll max, it still might be frequently impossible to hit something unless there are a lot of additional bonuses to stack. I'd prefer to keep bonuses down and also to not have them overshadow the dice rolls. By doubling the d6 into d12, I can double the amount of increments without going so far as to make most increments meaningless (like with most d%).

Its not like d6 /can't/ work, but d12/2d6 feels much better. Its not like a d12 system is that bad either. It just means that it requires gaming dice which most /tg/ related people have. However, the "marketability" of Xd6 systems make it that much easier to introduce the game to non-/tg/esque people. For some of my friends, this homebrew could end up being their first introduction to ttrpgs.

>>51014116
I'm a fan of the D12, but ultimately, its about what math you want. Is the flat rate is better, than go with the D10 or D12 over the 2D6. Yeah, they are harder to get a hold of, but unless you are making it require a buttload of them, a few D12's are not hard to get a hold of for most people if they play tabletop RPGs, and D10's are even easier to get nowadays.

>>51014403
I'm unsure largely because I still have to consider future maths. Its also about how the curve vs flat rate interacts with my current math intentions.

Its an argument that crops up with dnd often. Some people say dnd would work better if it were built with a curved probability in mind, and in some cases they're right. However in others, the flat rate is better for the specific math. I was just trying to go for max ease-of-use which would be 2d6. However, I think I end up sacrificing too much by using the curved probability (which drastically affects the weight of stats and bonuses) and only having 11 numerical possibilities. With 1d12 I get all 12 possibilities and an even 8.33% increment increase, which means I can take advantage of multiple divisions like 1/2, 1/3, 1/4, 1/6, etc.

I only expect people need 1d12, or at absolute most 2d12 if players really don't want to roll their altitude spin counter. I know some people can't into remembering numbers for more than a few seconds.

>>51014577
Well, personally, I prefer curve over flat, but that's me. If it doesn't work for what you intend, then don't use it. You also have to consider the amount of spread. DnD is across 20 different results, that's a lot of room and doesn't really need the tight math a bell curve brings. And you bring up a good point of the weight of stats and bonuses, with 2D6, a single +1 weighs a lot.

I haven't looked over your rules yet, but the other part to look at is opposed vs. unopposed rolls. 2D6 works for target numbers, but not so well for opposed rolls, due to that curve. Unless you want a lot of clash without either side having a heavy hand over the other, I'd avoid heavy bell curves for opposed rolls.

>>51014381
If your aiming stat is 3, maybe you load improved missiles, and only use your cannon when you're on the opponent's six? Shouldn't a poor stat force you to change how your play?

>>51016987
yes but, even the best of luck would still make it impossible to land. At least with 2d6 or 1d12 you could have a 3 to aim, roll a 12, and still have that 15 as opposed to a 9 with 1d6. What I don't want to do is: You have an aim stat of 3. You stack better wings for +1, use a better engine for +1, use a different cockpit mod (electronics) for a +1, use QAAM Missiles for +2, then roll 1d6+3+5. Sure, that might work with that specific loadout, but it becomes increasingly impossible to land hits as you deviate from the optimal path. With less powerful modifiers you can still perform worse without being completely castrated. Its all about reducing how drastic the swings can be.

And some of these things depend on other mechanics that still need to fall into place. I still need to determine exactly what is the aiming stat anyway (Stability or A2A/A2G) and whether or not A2A/A2G should make damage variable or have it immutably fixed. Both of those directly influence what influence that 3 to Aim really has. (If anyone wants to chime in on that, that'd be nice too. Health is fixed at 100%, but is really just 10 as it moves in increments of 10%. Missiles are binary "did you beat the Evasion Roll" while Guns deal damage based on how much you beat the Evasion Roll by, so I get to keep that in mind when trying to figure the other parts out).

And of course, now that I've written so much support for the d12 and I reread previous posts like >>51017435 and >>51015284, 2d6 is starting to become a bit more attractive.

If we go off of the idea that Probability Curves work better for Target Numbers, it starts to look better for 2d6. Stalling (if I even choose to keep that as a roll) is rolling under a stat as TN. Firing Missiles involves the attacker rolling to set the TN, which is then contested by the defender's Evasion Roll. Again, its roll vs TN which is advantage 2d6, but its also just a contested roll, so it should be advantage 1d12. However, Guns/Rockets are success by degrees (Attacker rolls to set TN like normal, but deals more damage depending on the difference between the TN and Evasion Roll), so that's advantage flat increments (1d12). Lets also (not?) ignore the fact that I just listed off 3 separate resolution mechanics because at least they make moderate sense. The Stall recovery is the weakest of the three and also the most different, so that could easily just get chopped. Missile and Gun rules are going to stay the same though. Missiles are rather binary in nature while degrees of success work perfectly for multi-projectile weapons like Guns or Rocket Pods. Whatever you roll is the ammo you use, while the difference between Attack and Evasion determines how many of those land. Those are pretty solid and sensible representations in my eyes.

Now as far as Stability vs A2A/A2G, I'm strongly leaning towards making A2A/A2G the accuracy stat and giving all weapons flat damage. That works much better with Health and Armor as DR math. That leaves Stability kind of weak unless Stalling is a more common than expected occurrence. I don't know if I want to, but I could also make Evasion a new derived stat from Mobility+Stability which might play nicer with plane upgrade modifiers. Commentary welcome.

>>51018146
If guns are based off of increments of success, even if flat has an advantage, you might want to look at the curve roll for balance sake. Since it means a more predictable result, you can balance guns around that, while still having that wildcard factor. Missiles are binary, so the only thing you'd have to worry about is the average of hitting; a slightly less chance to hit might balance out the curve.

For example, 7 is the middle of the curve for 2D6. When looking at missiles, you can increase the TN to higher that that (or lower if you go roll under, try to keep it the same through out the rules), it A. shows that missiles are generally a slower moving projectile and one that pilots focus on avoiding, so having a lower chance comes into play with that, and B. covers the fact that if it hits, it hits and does all its damage. While guns going by the same 7 average, can go 7 for a hit for minimum damage, and then goes up for the higher/lower result, while 7 is still the most likely, damage can be balanced from their. Guns would be plinking damage, little bits that hit more reliably but with less force, and the better the shot, the more of these plinks hit the target. While missiles are a big "Fuck you" hammer, more concentrated and less spread out, so harder to catch the other fighter.

>>51018720
Yeah, it all really makes that 1d12 vs 2d6 competition strong. Since the attack TN is based on the Attacker's result, the curve might be better to help manipulate the average. If I need Gun and Missile disparity I can always add more gun damage upgrades. Another interesting thing is that guns effectively ignore Armor, since 10% damage increments are the minimum. Missiles might be anywhere from 2-4 hits to kill, while guns have the theoretical possibility of 1-10. I might not ever need to be able to roll a 1 with a d12 in most appreciable instances, and that 2 minimum of the 2d6 might be able to help my math out anyway.

>>51017435
Ok, let's say the players are observing the grid, a unit has an Aim of 3, and a 12 is rolled on d12. What are the players told about what happened? "Plane down, no idea what happened"? "Your very good die roll caused the enemy pilot to derp right into your line of fire and get shot down"?

>>51022405
the 3 and 12 are irrelevant distinctions to the players. The result of aiming is in all actuality a 15, which means a quick radar lock.

I'm using "Aiming" as synonymous with "Acquiring radar lock". its assumed in any engagement (real or tabletop) you only have a limited window of opportunity to fire, so acquiring a lock asap is desirable. Normally you might not get that lock easily, either through piloting skill or older electronics, but in that instance the stars aligned, the enemy pilot made a tactical mistake, or you were just able to stay plastered to his 6. Its not that the dice control fate, its that they reflect what fate has decided, which is a subtle distinction to make.

I mean, all AWACS really needs to say is "Splash one Bogey" , but the GM/Players can be as colorful as they want through the pilot's eyes.

>>51022660
Cannon are not aimed through radar lock, right? What could possibly obscure a missile radar lock?

>>51022765
Unless you're using WWI-WWII planes, then cannons may also lock, but both require even more precision than missiles. You can fire advanced missiles at targets behind you just by the pilot looking in their general direction. You cannot do the same with cannons.

Missiles and other guidance systems are affected by tons of potential countermeasures.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radar_jamming_and_deception

>>51018146
I think the Defense stat is questionable. The kind of planes that dogfight don't "take less damage" when they are hit. Defenses like chaff or flares are used in combination with evasive action, if successful, the missile travels through the countermeasure, suddenly lacks a target, and you take no damage. If you get hit, your plane is probably done fighting, and it doesn't matter if it was from a missile or a M61 cannon.

>>51023210
In reality that's true.
However, much of the reason I'm making this game is because of the Ace Combat vidya where armor does reduce damage. The Armor stat reflects different plane's ruggedness (just compare an A-10 with a MiG-21), and there's a plan for different armor upgrades (like adding Stealth conversions, lighter armor for increased speed, extra mountpoints, etc, so there's definitely an aspect of realistic fantasy (also considering the games have you kill asteroid destroying AA establishments, destroy missile silos from the inside, and shoot down kamikaze orbital satellites, these aren't comparatively unreasonable. And if you wanted to run a more pure realism campaign, you could just nix some of those rules. They're much easier to remove without breaking things than add in later.

Money is the main resource players have, and plane repairs are one of those sinks (besides even more planes and their modifications). Instead of going to Ace Combat route and giving players 84 Missiles and 16 Unguided bombs, I'll allow players to "return to base" to restock and repair if desired. That can create some interesting scenarios and spontaneous mission objectives like protecting a crippled aircraft until it can leave the combat area, or outlasting waves of attackers as they drain your weapon reserves. A realistic 4-ish missiles per plane is too little while 80+ is unnecessarily large. And again, the GM can always decide they're running realism and adjudicate appropriately.

Last page bump while I read responses.

>>51023551
The armor thing just sounds like the game used a term that kinda fits, but isn't the best choice. Since its supposed to be an Ace Combat game, stick with it, since that's what the game uses. Otherwise, something like Hardiness or Durability would be more accurate names.

>>50997820
I meant to ask in the sense of how it affects the pace of a game. Like a single value system means that any combat between creatures will result in a winner or a trade whereas in MtG creatures can have higher toughness, resulting in combat where neither creature dies.

Does anybody think there is a rule of thumb for movement values for grid based combat?

I'm attempting to make a fantasy skirmish game, with typical attributes (Str, Dex, Int, etc), roughly up to 8vs8 characters and wanted some opinions on how large the map should be in terms of grid size and how much space a single character should be able to move in each turn.

>>51029962
Dual stats allow for more playstyles like stalling or attrition because you can have high defense, low offense monsters. You can also distinguish between legitimately powerful and glass cannon. This gives you a lot more complexity out of the creatures and skews slows the game down as there's more information parse. Now, a single stat creature game could also have multiple playstyles like stall or attrition, but that would have to come from non-creature cards. If there are only creatures, then the creatures themselves would have to provide those differences from something like special powers.

>>51029962
In that sense, the creatures in MtG do slow it down. You can do trades easily in MtG, but most of the time its attackers swing and killing chump blockers. What slows it down is the lack of persistent damage on creatures, and how finite resources are. Early turns its usually either or when it comes to building your field or casting spells, save for some of the crazier broken decks.

>>51031685
I don't think there's such a generic rule of thumb. Average grid sizes and movement speed will depend on a lot of other unmentioned factors like attack ranges, obstacles, and objectives during combat.

>>51031853
I find a quarter to a third of the width of the playing field when devouting to all out moving is a good rule, but yeah, those factors heavily change it. Especially objectives, movement and controlling movement plays a lot more with objectives than just killing each other.

Where do you draw the line on player-created content?

In my game, player characters have four abilities structured similarly to moves in Apocalypse World: roll when the trigger is met, on a success choose two of three positive effects, on a failure choose one of three negative effects to ignore.

Each of the four abilities comes in a separate category that can be freely mixes and matched, and I provide six full examples of each. However, I also provide pretty lengthy advice on how GMs and players can craft their own abilities, like homebrewing a new class.

Is this enough? Should I give more examples?

Bumping with a question: What are people's thoughts on malfunctions and critical failures?

>>51033137
It's probably fine. Just watch for and consider what happens when things go wrong. Whether player created content is built piecemeal like legos or freeform, it's always good to design with "how many ways can someone do this wrong" in mind.

>>51035809
Depends.
Do they serve to make the game more interesting or do they only annoy players and dampen their enjoyment of the game?

>>51035885
Sorry, meant it more as a discussion question. Do you like them, do you not, have your players expressed an opinion on them, what were good examples of well down and examples of poorly implemented ones?

Personally, I have malfunctions as a way to add flavor to the game, but not sure if they add anything. I may drop it if play-testing shows that it doesn't add anything to the experience. I've seen the game Dark Age do it well, but that's because they use them to show the brutality of the system; most of the time that you crit fail or malfunction, someone might die.

Question: die pool success on 5+ or 4+?
Using d6 and the game is pvp based

>>51036657
With 4+ you will have +0.5 successes on average while with 5+ it will be +0.33...see which one fits your system better

>>51035946
I believe they are good as long as properly balanced (everyone having a 5% chance of critical failure is just terrible game design) making it harder to happen the more skilled you are (Shadowrun: roll "1" in half or more of your dice pool) or very low chance standard (1% chance on my game) are much better choices, and not having them at all should be not issue.

>>51033137
If those six examples are good enough to represent all the basic characters you are going to expect on your game then it should be ok...

What do you guys think of a making the "basic book" a package of booklets for ease of use? (the basics, attributes and skills, single "class", gear...and a few more for the GM)

My game is more narratively structured so the core mechanic is simple and easy to change. I'm always working to refine it. Right now I'm torn between the ubiquity of the d6 and the simplicity of d% (via 2d10).

Ooh, I'm relatively new to /tg/ and this general is just what I need. I'd love some feedback as I made a campaign with my friend that I'm quite proud of and wanted to preserve it with a decent quality lets play series.

So far I'm trying to put together Episode 0 (the briefing, prologue)

I've made this intro:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAVJbSropRE

and a pilot epsiode of sorts:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hyRLBGQ5ac

If you guys could tell me what you like/dislike about my content it would be very useful. I'm also happy to discuss my campaign for anyone curious about it, thanks.

>>51040618
That thumbnail reminds me the final edit will have yellow overlay text for the read outs which is far more readable.

>>51039362
Personally I trend towards simplicity. Which you choose also depends on what exactly you need from each option. It's like what the dogfight anon mentioned with his 2d6 and 1d12 problem.

I personally like d% in military or modern technology games because I think it fits well. There's also the question of actually needing that granularity. d% might look good thematically, but do you really need the math to look like 74/111 when it could be simplified 2/3. Or in other words, if you only ever grow in increments of 5, there's no real advantage using d100 over d20.

>>51035809
>>51037420
In relation to these I think auto-fail and crit-fail are useful and desirable if they help support the tone of the game. It's also worth mentioning the difference between auto and crit failing. In dnd 3.5 you had the 5% chance to auto-fail, but crit-failing was optional to include (I don't know if pathfinder made it optional or not). It's much easier to include auto-fail mechanics, especially on higher percentage jumps like the 5% of d20 or 16.6% of d6, or even an effective auto success/fail by modifying a roll by +-20 instead of a true automatic result. Most of 3.5's auto result mechanics were for combat and not skill checks, do where your mechanics are used can also affect how wonky things might become.

>>51040938
I like crit fail over auto fail. That's kinda how the malfunction works. It doesn't fail your roll, but you have to test after the action, and if the test is failed, your weapon jams. I'm lukewarm about auto fails, but I do like the idea of if you fail, there's a chance of failing spectacularly.

>>51042371
Auto-fail (and pseudo auto-fail) generally hurts less than crit-fails. Crit-fails can have some fun stories attached to them, but not everyone wants to break their bow and attack an ally when they otherwise might've just not dealt damage and be done with it. I think a lot of complaints about fail mechanics revolve around the poor use of crit-fails (especially in games like dnd where they're optional).

Malfunction gives me an idea however. Instead of having normal auto-fial or crit-fail mechanics, a failure roll combines crit-failure and auto-success. It supports a fail forward narrative (if you're into that) and turns extreme failure into pyrrhic victories. You finally might be able to climb up the cliff, but your rope breaks, leaving the rest of your allies below. That could be a much or palatable way to implement crit-failure.

I'm having trouble deciding whether or not I should use 1d6 roll-under stat or 1d6+stat over target number. Which do y'all think looks better, and which would feel better to players?

>>51045093
In a vacuum, with that low granularity I would do roll under and forego the addition for maximum simplicity.

>>51045333
What about for 2d6 and 3d6? You can assume stats or bonuses won't get higher than about 4 per d6

>>51045760
What are you trying to do with your game?
What's your goal?

>>51045836
It doesn't have a lot of theming and fluff yet, but it's mainly 1d6 that had the potential to jump up 2d6 and 3d6. As far as I can tell, roll under stat and roll+stat are going to be basically the same mathematically speaking, so I'm just trying to get a feel for how people might perceive both. I know roll under has less math, but a lot of people are familiar with dnd which reinforces the "all the biggest numbers" of roll+stat.

I guess it's more of an aesthetic/psychological question

>>51046706
Personally, I like roll+stat, but that's me.

So, /gdg/, I have a modular generic system that Im still testing in several settings. Thing is, I kibda wanted to make a sex variant of the rules and asked my gf to help me test it.

So, knowing there are no really good rpgs that tackle sex mechanics into the game I decided insstead to focus on what gets you into having sex.

It would work like this: a HP like stat will.dictate horniness, the way to decrease it would happen when situations arouse the character (and hopefuly player). For this the character will first make a small list of attitudes she likes and fetishes she have, as well as attitudes she hate and fetishes she gets disgusted with.

To regain this sort of HP, the character will have to reduce this horniness either by calming down, like with meditation and prayer, or by pleasing herself. If the action of oleasing herself includes a fetish is even more effective.

What would you guys suggest?

>>51050325
Well, since we're way past the realm of magic:

Horniness Points need to start at 0 and increase based on actions. Negative effects (like meditation or disgust), orgasm, and inaction reduce HP. Being horny is not the natural state so it should be something you gain rather than lose. Its also what sex web games do so there's that.

If you want a truer health analog, then (sexual) stamina would better fit the bill. You could then tie orgasm and other states to certain thresholds of HP and Stamina, or just stamina as needed.

I'm thinking a dice pool where kinks and fetishes modify the size hah. You roll at intervals in order to gain HP, and you can do things at different thresholds. It might also be worth considering a blackjack mechanic where you don't want to gain too much HP or else you start becoming desperate, increasing the likelihood of rape, beastiality, necrophilia, or some other less than kosher thing. And I don't mean beastiality and necrophilia as in "me qt foxgirl/vampire waifu", but more like "wild calf/exhumed corpse". It would be a balancing act of being in the right mood at the right time and play into your motivation angle. There might even be a way to put a wager that, if improperly managed, would put you over those limits. Its an idea.

>>51050325
I'm working on a silly sex RPG rather than a sex add-on since I don't feel that a system not built around murder-fucking your way through dungeons can do the concept justice. My needs are obviously different than yours, but maybe you can glean something useful from the way I'm handling things.

Players have a single resource and two tracks represented by appropriately sized dice: Life Force, Stimulation, and Arousal respectively. Life Force is an abstraction of overall well being, sexual energy, and fluids. Damage is taken to the LF pool and many spells and abilities draw from it as well. Stimulation is a measurement of how close a character is to Orgasming, resulting in a loss of precious LF. Arousal is a measurement of how turned on the character is and informs how much LF damage the character takes when Orgasming. Once Arousal hits its maximum any further Arousal Damage is applied to the Stimulation track instead - both tracks are reset to 0 upon Orgasm.

Both Stimulation and Arousal damage are common, with a few Sexual Predators (monsters) and abilities being able to target LF directly like the Thirsty (essentially undead). All this is modified by 4 stats (Bod, Skill, Stamina, Perversion [names WIP]) as well as Kinks, Traits, and Fetish Gear. Kinks are a characters sexual preferences and can be gained and lost as a result of many abilities and spells - typically with an Orgasm as a prerequisite - and they may apply multiple strengths and weaknesses depending on severity. Traits are notable physical endowments that often interact with kinks - For example your Gimp Knight might have Badonk which gives a bonus to anal skills but also makes you a prime target for enemies with Sickness For Thickness.

>>51051987
Finally Fetish Gear is equipment that further modifies attacks and defense - perhaps your Disciple of Sin is about to get her clam hammered by a raiding group of Knob Gobblin's but fortunately she remembered her chastity belt this morning so their peckers will do damage directly to its durability instead of her womb.

Hope this helps, with a laugh if not some good ideas for your system.

>>51051459
That gives me a couple of ideas, I could merge HP and horniness in one stat that actually just have a threshold, taking damage will lower it and getting horny will increase it, you should keep it as close to the original number as possible, but being horny could actually increase your health if needed and hurting yourself decrease it in desperate times (unless masochist fetish is involved).

If HP goes beyond a certain point the player could become desperate and even lose control of their actions, but nothing to harsh, at worst they would earn a new fetish.

so taking this anon idea >>51051987 orgasms actually hurt your character, but will keep you away from losing control and doing silly things.

To make it balanced I could make a mechanic that if you deviate too much from the center you will start taking penalties in skill checks.

Bordering /tg/ content now, what could be some tame fetishes? some things I would never like to include in this games are killing stuff for sexual pleasure or hurting beyond a tame level.
Also, I dunno how lgbt treats gayness, but I was planning on including it as a fetish.

>>51054380
Tame fetishes best fetishes

You've got overall appearance fetishes like MILF and petite, body part fetishes like tits, ass, and thighs, and accessory fetishes like skirts and glasses. There's also "profession" based fetishes like cheerleader and librarian and ethnicity fetishes that deal with nationality or even just hair color.

There's plenty of other types of fetishes, but a lot of those quickly get into deviant territory

pool of d6s mechanic should have variable TN? or for extra difficult thing should i add -1,-2 to the pool?

>>51057743
How are you doing the pool? Roll X+ for success and then count the success, or as a total number?

>>51057929
total number,also deciding in wheter there should be a wild die or that all dice are wild die

>>51054380
Various forms of cumplay (facial, creampie, cum-on tits, butt, etc).
Spanking
Dirty Talk
Specific positions
Specific pieces of lingerie

>>51057983
I'd say TN, if have an easy way of determining it. That way you can focus on modifiers for the pool being restricted to changing the number if dice. If you don't have an easy way of determining TN, then plus or minus to the roll total.

>>51059040
For example average joe has an average ability of 3 at shooting his bow, he wants to kill a dude that is moving around like a retard

normally shooting at that distance is a TN 10, but the retard is moving fast so that is a minor hidrance should i:

Add +2 to the TN making it a 12
Reduce Joe dice pool by one making it a 2D

File: SPACECRAFT DESIGN SHEET (v.3.2).pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

Looking for some input on a spacecraft design sheet as a well as a general rule for my game.

I'm already at or approaching maximum information density on this sheet, I think, so I'm loathe to add any more but there's a single addition I'd love to make to the first page of this sheet: Repair Points.

The premise is that your ability to repair a spacecraft on the fly isn't unlimited. This equates to a number of Repair Points that a ship has available to it, something like 3 + your Construction stat, which is goes from 1 (Junk) to 5 (Unmatched). Each time you roll to make an emergency repair, like when you're under fire in battle and your engines are shot and you need to bring them back online, you consume a Repair Point. Once you've used up all your Repair Points, you've basically reached the "She cannae take anymore cap'n!" point and can't quick fix your ship anymore.

First off, is this a good idea? I've been using a similar system with characters in this homebrew where their ability to receive First Aid is limited by their Body Stat and it works great, so it should work the same here.

Secondly, I'm thinking of representing this as a series of gear symbols underneath the Damage report that you X out as you consume them. But I'm concerned that it might push the amount of info on the first page into unreadable territory. Thoughts?

>>51059413
In that example, it depends on how big of a jump you want. +2 to the TN or -2 to the roll turns the math from 62.49% to a 37.49% chance of success, while dropping a die dumps it down all the way to 16.67%.

I'd say +2, because its not as huge a leap as the dropping a die.

One idea I had is that spell cards(as in cards that aren't permanent cards) have strength/power just like permanents do, and have effects that scale with their power(so you could boost them with effects that increase power). The problem is, I'm not sure if there are enough effects that could scale with power. Obviously removal could scale with it, and also "look at the top X cards of your deck" effects. I could just have a few effects that scale and make it so the rest of the cards just get cost reduction from spell power boosts. If my game had life totals, I could do life gain/loss, but it doesn't, so I can't.

>>51059494

I think you're well within the bunch limit there. I'd say give it a try and if you don't like it the go back to the previous version. That sheet looks great!

File: AceCombatHomebrew.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

New update on Ace Combat homebrew. I've updated the rules with what's been talked about here. I think the next big step is fleshing out those plane and weapon stat blocks and then polishing everything else.

- I think I've finally decided on 2d6. It should work out the best for my goals.
- A2A/A2G are going to be the aiming stats with Mobility as the evasion stat.
- I'll be adding even more stalling rules to both reflect physics and make Stability a bit more useful. I also might need to improve some of these names (or rules) for clarity.

Let me know if there's anything else that doesn't quite make sense.

And here's the Google Doc too:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-x7vMbcJeXps8ZaeTa2ovoXK2yoB7ICqcEmNKP1dlww/edit?usp=sharing

Page 10 resurrect

>>51059494
Does it have to be recorded in it's own slot or could it possibly be derived from something else?

I'm making a very simple game for an Espionage campaign. It's set on a kind of Game of Thrones world, only more technologically advanced (steam and powder age). The system goes like this: You pick a class. You start at level 1, retire after level 6. You get an ability each level, but you must always have at least as many abilities from your class than non-class. (if you're a fighter, you must retire at least with 3 fighter abilities and 3 non-fighter abilities)
fighter; (favored weapon; strenght, +1 armor, double hp; )
thief (stealth; acrobacy; retroactive theft -player can claim to have on itself anything, then roll to see if its true-; deception)
hunter (favored terrain; awareness; called shot; animal shape)
mage (divination; summoning; restoring; enchantment)
tinker (guild skills; enhanced weapon; powerful but unreliable device; versatile but subtle device -players describe what it is)
doctor (medicine; insight; master's diaries - take time to read anywhere to get a bonus on any related roll-; sage - bonus on any roll related to a specific field of study. You can choose it at any moment of the game)
The rolls go as this: You normally get 1d6 if the task is accesible for anybody. With a 5 you succeed, with a 4 you succeed but there are consequences. You get a bonus die if you have a relevant skill; and another one if you take an in-game advantage somehow. Pick the highest result.
Is there any ability that i should be putting that I'm forgotting? Am I covering all the bases? The lack of social abilities (only thief's deception) is because I want all the players to do the social parts themselves.

File: 1467605843754.jpg (91KB, 600x446px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 600x446px

I just want to share this, as I am interested if anyone else went through a similar thing.

I havent been developing my game for about half a year now. The game, a card game, has the basic rules and about 300 cards done. Its in the phase where the rules and some cards need tweaking and lots of playtesting is required. The reason why I have paused working on it actually emerged during playtesting. Not because I got bored of the game or designing it or anything, but as the testing was going on, I began to get annoyed at the art. You see, I put some random art I found online to the cards so theres atleast something visually pleasing to look at, so it isnt just pieces of paper with text on them. But the art began to annoy me. It felt wrong as the art wasnt original, it wasnt something that belonged to me. Ironically the card itself didnt bother me, even if I made them all in Magic Set Editor to save time. This annoyance eventually grew so large that I had to halt the design process.

>>51069669
And began learning how to do draw. I found that it was the simplest and most logical conclusion. If I am bothered by the art not being my own, its time to make my own art. So for the last half a year, I have been learning how to draw. I actually used to draw some over ten years ago but had to stop it due to blodding reason. It has been an interesting process to learn how to wield a pen (well, pen of a drawing tablet) again. I guess the issue is that after I am satisfied enough with my skills with pen, and my standards are extremely high for myself, I have to draw art for about 300 cards and images for the rulebook. But I didn't start this process without knowing about these hardships I guess.

So yeah maybe in a year, or two, or three, I can start to playtest and finetune the rules again. Looking forward to it.

File: TPC-com.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

Hello, everyone! I'd like to present you a homebrewed table-top/forum/text game, looking for a feedback and playtest. This is a small turn-based strategy game with rules as simple as possible to make it interesting and exciting at the same time. I would gladly appreciate any critique and feedback.

File: Rulebook --. Experimental Rules.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

Hello guys and girls, I made a rulebook for a text forum/tabletop-ish wargame thingy.
The rules are modified Warhammer Fantasy ones, with my own stuff here and there.
I feel like for now this is the best I can do with it, so now I'm in dire need of playtesters or just general feedback and advice.
There is also an additional PDF with experimental rules, where I describe how to play this in a tabletop environment as best as I could.
Any suggestions, advise or just plain old shitposting about this would be appreciated.

File: Rulebook (eng).pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

Forgot the main book, lol...

>>51068341
Well it is a derived stat (3 + Construction), but since it's a number that needs to be dynamically tracked it would probably be best served as its own slot on the sheet.

Thankfully since its bounds are fixed (between 4 and 8) I know exactly how much space I need. I may do it as little cog symbols under the Damage Report, with the first 4 hard outlined and the rest grayed out like I've done for the Damage Report itself as well as for the System Damage cells (each System can take damage equal to how many dice you have it in, from 0-5)

File: SPACECRAFT DESIGN SHEET (v.3.3).pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>51071642
>>51068341
>>51062151

Repair points added. My first thought was to go with little gears, but they kind of look more like sunbursts or microbes, so I went with wrenches instead. Looks pretty good to me!

>>51073886
Yeah, that's pretty good. Overall the doc looks quality.

>>51069669
>>51069680
Its not exactly the same thing, but I started one of my homebrews in 2011. It went through tons of revisions and its still nowhere even near playtestability. I only really work on it when I have strong inspiration (like, 3+ solid ideas at once). One of the benefits is that I never really had to be disappointed in making multiple heartbreakers because will all the knowledge I've gained since I started its become a much better idea.

Another problem is that all my info is stuck on a computer that's been broken for almost 2 years now. Everything else I've saved in a cloud, so I suppose I could try to just rewrite it from memory. Fortunately I have some smaller projects I can work on in the mean time, and and I can learn even more from working on them.

>>51071237
>The main rule of Caldaern: Don't be a dick
>Game not recommended for dull people or people with less than 110 IQ
If you're going to joke, at least make it absurd. If not, its probably best to blunt that edge

>>51071195
I like it. I could only skim through, but I liked what I saw.

I'm having trouble figuring out how best to add advancement to my game. Each character has four stats and four powers (which work like moves in PbtA games).

Because I want to keep characters at about the same power level, but give players control over growth, I'm thinking of having two different growth systems:

>advancements, given out by the GM after narrative accomplishments, increase a stat by 1
>XP, earned through good roleplay, used to heal wounds, buy items and modify your powers

Is this enough, though? A lot of games focus on adding wholly new powers or abilities to the character. I wouldn't be opposed to such a thing, but I can't think of a good way to fit it in.

Yo guys has anyone here experience with a own very lax system? I always hated the giant bloat of all the popular systems.
I like the idea of an extremly lax system with not a lot of rules and not a lot of math where its just about roleplaying and more about playing than memorizing all the restrictions the system gives you

>>51078869
Rtd
do an action and roll a d6
1 extreme fail
2 fail
3 shitty success
4 success
5 great success
6 awesome success
change successes and fails to your liking but thats the basic system

>>51079031
I probably should have clarified, im more asking along the lines if it actually works or if its a terrible idea, not how to do it