New game design thread -- /gdg/

Starting out with: how do you handle "flatfooted" or "unaware" attacks in your game? Should everyone get a to-hit bonus or damage bonus? Just a to-hit bonus? How do you feel about that?

File: Neo-Heroes, Valor, and Mead v1.5.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>51357530
The enemies roll their two encounters first, which can be painful if it's a fairly hard encounter.

>inb4 Repost
Thread died before anything of use could be said, sorry.

Hello there folks, it's HVM-anon again. I've been play testing the latest batch and it's been fairly positive as of right now.

My questions are fairly simple.
Combat is yet again making me question myself. As fellow players, designers, and chucklefucks who lurk these threads do you like . .
>Fast, but lethal combat (One round can fuck you up to the point where you're out of the fight)
>Midway
>Slow, bit safer combat (Likelihood of you going down first round is minimal at best except on Brutal+ Difficulty)

I also added a new system called Virtues, Vices, Values, and Vilification. Which is similar from the Burning Wheel system, but simplified heavily.

Just wondering if that system is functional, or some necessary tweaks are needed.

I'll answer questions as I see them. Thanks folks

>To the anon who suggested re-formatting my book-thing
Polled my players, they like the way it is now. May change later. Book-pamphlet-thing is work in progress.

I'm gonna be running my first homebrew soon, and wanted to get some /tg/ opinions before unleashing it on my players. Mostly inspired by the fairly loose but very graphic and gritty style of Einsteinian Roulette, it'll be a very simple system. I'll only be using d6 and occasional d3. 0 is the average score for any given stat for the average person, and positive or negative scores add direct bonuses or maluses to dice rolls. Stats are as follows:

Strength
Dexterity
Agility
Charisma
Willpower
Intelligence
Wisdom
Perception

Stats represent how finely in control of your various faculties you are, rather than your actual physical prowess: for example, a superstrong, roided up, musclebound rhino of a man could easily have a -3 on strength, meaning that he tends to do stuff like crushing people's hands in a simple handshake, or putting his fist through the door when he intended to knock - no penalty to his actual strength, just less ability to use his strength to get the exact outcome that he wants. So too with all the other stats, particularly charisma and agility. Constitution is not present because it is a purely physical attribute, requiring no control other than willpower.

Combat will be brutal, attrition high. Rolling a crit (6 or above) results in rolling another, unmodified dice to determine exactly how in line with your goals the crit is, making 5s a generally desirable roll. No real hitpoints system, just increasing levels of recorded bodily damage (4 hits limbs, 5 hits center mass, 6 hits head) and maluses handed out accordingly. Rolls will be first to hit (modified by cover and such), then defender dodges, then parries, then if failed, damage is rolled. So anyone with a gun can very possibly kill you.

>>51358073
>>51357530
An undetected character gets to make the first attack and causes a malus to its targets' perception due to the confusion if the ambush is successful enough, which coupled with good camouflage, means that he can stay undetected through to the next round of combat - but everything is very narrative, so it depends. But usually, in a gritty setting with guns, he who shoots first wins, and that's just about a bonus enough I reckon.

>>51357530
Holy shit is this like the old homebrew threads on steroids? Or is this just for discussing game design in general? First I've seen this.

With threads like this and these resources maybe I should get back to that Digimon game I had partially worked out a couple years back.

>>51357554
>"unaware" attacks
I like how hackmaster basic does it, which is simply you can't use a shield, you have none of your dodge bonus, and you use a smaller defense die (essentially a bonus to be hit).

File: Is the sword huge, or is the tonk smol.png (81KB, 469x542px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 469x542px

>>51357530
i think i'm pulling the plug on my game
i really wanted to see it work but i haven't given it any attention at all in months and can't test it for shit, and trying to convince myself that "it's on halt but i'll continue someday" is dumb

maybe i actually come back to it someday, but i'll drop it now

File: 1452457541590.png (49KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 1000x1000px

>>51357530
>how do you handle "flatfooted" or "unaware" attacks in your game?

Surprise Attacks can only be conducted against characters that aren't aware of your presence of intent to hurt them. In combat all combatants are assumed to be aware of all other characters in the fight (unless somebody is completely invisible or similar.)
If you want to Surprise Attack someone, you first make a Stealth vs Perception roll as part of the Attack. If successful, your target doesn't roll for Defense (meaning you hit on anything but 0 Successes)
Called Shots or other moves can be paired with an Surprise Attack, but must be announced before the attack (and thus, before the Stealth roll)

>Shit I'm dealing with
Three months later and I'm still looking for a good system for Area Attacks. Does anybody have any ideas or suggestions for systems that dealt really well with this? It needs to work with your "regular" turn based IGOUGO combat structure, so any clever, but really abstract solutions for games that resolve combat completely differently probably won't work.

>>51357530
I have that dice!

>>51359127
These threads died for a while, but recently have seen a revival of sorts. Usually there's someone to make the thread on Saturday.

And sure, go ahead, the strongest resource of the /gdg/ is not the OP, but all the people here. Bring out your ideas and usually someone will offer answers to questions and give critique, praise or both.

>>51359127
You should get back to it, anon.

>>51340508

Thoughts on this magic system, /gdg/?

File: StarCitizen_2016_04_07_09_00_06_53.jpg (135KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 1920x1080px

Does a game with a board split into a space battle half and a starship floor plan half to create a sort of /tg/ ftl sound like an appealing premise?

Is this already a thing I am not aware of?

>>51359395
There's not much to say. It's spell slots, it will always breed the same problems vancian magic always produces. It's just a shorthand that cuts out the necessity to look up on a chart how many you have. Everything else wholly depends on the balance of the spells.
You'd also need a way to scale the spells themselves, since you can't have spells that do the same thing but with different strength anymore. So, every spell would need to scale with level too, then. There's not much else to say, really.

File: 1414448725135.jpg (370KB, 1786x1097px) Image search: [Google]

370KB, 1786x1097px

>>51359345
>>51359379
Alright, cool. I might as well as about my game since there isn't much other discussion going on now.

How do you feel about heavy asymmetry between players? The main reason I wanted to work on a Digimon game was because, aside from it being fun and me being a manchild, there is no easy way for other systems to replicate the mix between humans and their monster partners. In the show the digimon would fight while the humans would pretty much just be there for moral support which is boring as fuck during combat if some players are monsters and others are humans so I was going to base is on the third season (Tamers) where the humans would boost their partners with cards that had various effects. That way combat would be interesting for both so in the game the digimon would still be the primary combatants while the humans would still have something to do by buffing and debuffing. I'll have make another post about my ideas for the card/"magic" system.

So the question is if sounds fun to have some players act as full out support casters without real combat options and are partnered with other players who are monsters that do the main taking and dealing of damage in combat.

Along with this I didn't want one player as both the human their digimon. That eliminates the problem of asymmetry, but I want a relationship and roleplay between the two which I think is key for making it accurate to the series and more importantly making the out of combat stuff more fun. If the asymmetry is a bad idea would it be better have the players make a human along with a digimon who acts as the partner of another player's human?

>>51360016
One problem here is that being a full support caster that can't really do anything but occasionally hand out a buff is going to be pretty boring for most people. To keep a semblance of balance and to stay true to the show, you'd need to restrict the activation of cards in some way, otherwise the players would just spam the fuck out of them.

The other problem is: If humans are full-on supporters and not just an occasional buff and shout of encouragement, that means they are active participants in combat. And that means they are a huge target. Even if the NPC digimon aren't going to attack player humans, the moment you put them up against another tamer, you can be sure that they'll go after him in some way if the tamer is that important and impactful.

Another thing to consider here is that outside of combat, being a Digimon won't be all that interesting. Running around and doing stuff in the real world is mostly ruled out and even in the Digiworld many Digimon are hampered simply by a lack of hands, an awkward bodytype, size or something else. On top of that, Rookie Levels (which they'll probably be most of the time) are enearingly dumb. Sure, you could toss that out the window, but the whole "Digimon get smarter when they digivolve" thing is an interesting part of the lore.

Also, if you don't have an even number of players, somebody's going to get fucked. Either they are a human with no partner and can't participate at all in combat, or they are a Digimon without a tamer and flat out worse than the others.

If I'd be writing it, I'd really just go with players play tamers and have a partner. The partner is an NPC roleplayed by the GM, but played by the player in combat and similar situations.

>>51360016
I think the crossplay option (everyone controls a human and a monster, but never a pair) would probably pan out the best.

Unless you make some really interesting things for the humans, almost no one would want to play humans after like, two game sessions.

>>51360211
This is a really great reply, thanks.

>restrict the activation of cards
Actually, I had initially planned to expand the role of cards had have them be spammable, but that was more to give the tamer something to do so I'll have to rethink that. I'd probably let them have a set number of cards prepped at a time then have X number of turns as wait time to use a new card with more powerful effects requiring more turns.

I know it's a bit dumb, but I also took it as a conceit of the series that the kids never got attacked. Any of the fuckhuge monsters could vaporize a child and beat the heroes, but they don't and instead focus on the digimon so I'd have that be the same with it being a big GM no-no to attack the tamer. Unfortunately if they fight another tamer the same restriction would have to be on the players to although I would say that one tamer fighting another with their fists should be allowed.

I didn't even consider your third point. Real world stuff does kind of fuck all the digimon out of taking an active role and unless you really flesh out the digiworld it's not like they'll have a particular advantage there either. I think the awkward bodytype can be an advantage though so while patamon has dinky little arms he can fly for example. I'd say that you should be aware of your limitations when you pick a mon. There's going to be a small amount of inherent imbalance for out of combat stuff, but if you really want to have hands or the ability to fly or whatever then pick a digimon that has that. Also I've never heard of the bit where they get smarter as they evolve. They tended to have a bit of a personality shift, but I didn't think there was a intelligence gain. I'd probably throw that out the window, but it could be something fun to roleplay.

1/2

>>51360211
>>51360617
And yeah, I forgot the whole "odd numbers get fucked" aspect was in the game. I guess I needed someone to tell me how shit that was!

I don't really like the idea of half the main cast being DMPCs so I think I'll have the crossplay be the main option. So the player can still have the fun of RPing as a digimon and messing about with their tamer or whatever and then be able to do normal human stuff and interact with people. Not that there would any stopping people from using either option, but I'd definitely put that as GM advice for each option being valid and having its advantages.

This has been a helpful thread so far. I should write up more of this. Thanks you two.

>>51358073
>>51358113
Anyone willing to comment?

>>51361963
Alrighty.

I have to say I like the idea of your stats effecting the narrative instead of directly measuring how good or bad you are. The idea of -3 strength meaning high strength with shitty control is pretty amusing. I assume that a superhero type character would be like 3 strength to represent the ability to have excellent control over his power?

>No real hitpoints system
>Limbs all have hitpoints
Sorry, but that made me laugh. So the more hits removed the worse the outcomes when using those limbs? Also, I don't think head should have 6 hits. The body should be able to take a fair number of hits before giving out and while the head is harder I'd argue it wouldn't be able to take as much punishment. Especially if you consider that a bullet to the body might allow you a trip to the hospital, but a bullet to the head would result in a fresh character sheet.

I really like your low numbers and heavy narrative bent, but you'd better have some damn good indication of what the difference is between having 1 hit on a limb and 2 hits.

I also have to ask why there are so many attritubutes? If you're trying to be lighter on the rules that seems like a lot of stats to fill out. Especially if the range seems to be between -3 and 3. That's not a huge amount of room to fine tune a character, but I might be wrong on that. It just feels that since you're describing a musclebound rhino of a man as being -3 then practically players are going to be between -2 and 2. A lot of players are going to have the exact same stats as a result of that narrow band and will need to describe that stat to differentiate themselves so having 1 str will mean two totally different things between players.

>>51362356
Thanks for commenting, and the compliments! I seem to have given the wrong impression in terms of the combat though! What I meant is that a roll of a 5 to hit would result in the shot hitting center mass, not that center mass had 5 hit points. Let me explain properly with an example scenario:

There is a stealthy enemy near to a character. I secretly roll a perception check for the player. They roll a 4, with a -1 leaving them at 3. 2 would be them detecting absolutely nothing, so with a 3 they notice something they think. I roll a wisdom check. 2 after modifiers. "must have been the wind." I incorporate a few extra noises into my next description of the environment. The hidden enemy knows the player is there and chooses to take a shot with his pistol. Rolls a 4 to hit. This means a limb gets damaged, but which bit of which limb? I roll a d6 because the player's shins are below cover, leaving 6 limb segments that could get hit (upper arm, lower arm, upper leg, left and right) I get a 5 and the NPC hits the player square in the right thigh. I roll a d6 for damage and get a 6. Hoo, boy. Roll another d6 for crit effect and get another 6. Ah well.

"Ok so you're standing admiring the swamp when suddenly, about 40m to your right, a light flashes and you hear a sharp crack, and suddenly there's a hell of a lot of pain in your right leg. You look down and see a hole in your thigh spraying blood. Bright red, arterial blood. And there are an awful lot of white slivers embedded in the ruined flesh. Throw a d6 for me please... hmm ok a 6. And once again? 1. Ok (this guy is obscenely unlucky), despite the fact that your leg has certainly sprayed out more liquid in the past 3 seconds than you've drunk in the last week, you nonchalantly ignore it as if absolutely nothing was wrong. In fact, you're pretty sure that nothing has happened at all. You are now convinced that you are not in fact wounded. What do you do next?

>>51362356
As to the stats, it is entirely my intention that they mean different things for different players. So if the musclebound dude had dumped more points into strength or convinced more 300 year old kung fu masters to teach him their techniques, he could attain better control over his immense strength. So a monk who became a roidbro might lose a point of his strength skill but still beat a non-roidbro +2 str dude into pulp with his overall +1. Rather than having numbers for their physical stats, I'll have their characters' general description, and I'll weave that into the narrative generated by said character's ability to control his physicality. Say you equip a powered exoskeleton: -1 Strength /skill/, but makes you hella strong.

The number of skills is to ensure that despite the narrow range of reasonable skill numbers, it's likely that people will have pretty different character skill levels. Plus, that's the fewest I could think of to cover everything without lumping stuff together that shouldn't be lumped (considering that there are no sub-skills).

My intent for character creation is to give characters all 0s. They can add or subtract at will up to +3/-3, or maybe even +4/-4, just for the hilarity that would ensue with a character that has to roll a 6 /not/ to get a critical failure on his wisdom check. Their total average skill at game start would be 0. Leveling up gives them a single extra point to spend, raising their average to 1 at level 1, 2 at level 2, and so on.

As to exceeding the critical threshold in either direction: the only way to get a modifier on the crit table. Rolling an 11 somehow to hit or deal damage would be a guaranteed 6 on the critical table, even with a roll of a 1. Likewise in the opposite direction: -4 gives you a guaranteed absolute failure.

>>51362810
Ah, okay, I totally misunderstood that. What you have doesn't sound too bad. I do like how there is pretty much no math element to it.

>>51363242
Still not sure I fully understand your stat system, but I think that's fair that it does end up being more about the narrative aspect than the numbers. This seems like more a system for creating an interesting story and guide plot progression and the description of things as they happen so the simplicity makes sense, but be careful you don't run into trouble with the numbers being too small and simple. In your system the difference between +1 and +2 is enormous and while this may work out just fine for what you intend this could make things vague and strange when one thing doesn't break the barrier between the two but something else does.

I don't know how you're handling guns, but just as an example of what I mean let's say that a pistol is +1. What about a submachine gun? Well let's say that's also +1, they're different but both are small arms so that's fair. Assault rifles though, would that be +2? That doesn't seem so much different from a submachine gun so what makes this special to get such a boost? This kind of problem could be present for a shitload of situations and their modifiers so you've gotta think how you'd handle these many grey zones. You could always just give an arbitrary ruling of "All advantages are +1 and all significant advantages are +2" which acts as a decent catch all rule without being specific or something like D&D 5e did by throwing out situational modifiers together and every level of "advantage" just grants you a reroll. Not that you have to do those things, it's just my thoughts on the matter.

>>51363758
It would probably be very rare that a player gets equipment that improves their skills: encumbrance is easily encountered in everyday life, but things that improve control are rare, and usually limited to combat drugs. Doing everything you can to set up well with a rifle using a bipod and everything, preadjusting the sights to the right distance, and so on, would get you a +1 to your hit roll. So basically as you said, I hand out bonuses based on what seems appropriate: if the player has dedicated time and effort into actions that would seriously get them an advantage to performing that action in real life, I would use my discretion and hand them a bonus to their roll. Many weapons would have maluses to hitting outside of their intended range (or even inside their intended minimum range), like an SMG receiving a -1 to hit at medium range, -3 at long range, and -5 at very long range. A few would give bonuses to hit inside their range - a sniper rifle with a good scope, for instance, might get a +1 at medium and long range, and no penalty at very long range, while receiving a -1 at short range. No weapon would get a modifier to its damage roll, instead the narrative related to the damage would change based on the destructive potential of the weapon. If the stealthy dude in my example had been using a .50cal, his supercrit shot would have blown the PCs leg clean off. If he'd been using a potato gun, it would have stung a lot and also got PC's pants all potato-splattered.

Rerolls are an interesting idea though, and I hadn't thought to incorporate them before, but could be a good go-between for the (as you correctly put it) rather large gaps between +1 and +2. I'd probably lean towards "roll two, pick highest" at all times because it makes it easier for me to do secret checks when the player doesn't expect to get a say in how the dice are rolled or which dice is used.

>>51358073
Does wisdom have a real function when you have both perception and willpower as separate stats?

>>51359646
>it will always breed the same problems vancian magic always produces

What problems are those? D&D problems, or issues inherent to "you get X spells per day"?

What are the advantages/disadvantages of health and magic drawing from the same pool? Effectively more spells = less health, less spells = more health sort of thing.

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

1B, 486x500px

Bumping with my project while I'm busy. I'll be back to engage with the thread a bit later. Current PDF and google doc included.

Its an Ace Combat styled homebrew that's actually been getting some work done. I still need to flesh out stat blocks for various things and price them. Hopefully I'll get around to that soon, as that would be a major hurdle cleared.

Feel free to drop comments, and when I get back I'll be commenting on others'.

Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-x7vMbcJeXps8ZaeTa2ovoXK2yoB7ICqcEmNKP1dlww/edit

>>51357530
In dnd-esque terms, a flatfooted or unaware attack should just be a to-hit bonus. You aren't normally going to be dealing any more damage. However, you could use a Power Attack/Sneak Attack kind of feature to take advantage of that increased accuracy to convert to damage.

>>51359127
Its the evolution of the old Homebrew threads. Anything and everything relating to designing custom mechanics.

Fluff and Setting stuff is best handled in the /World Building General/s, whenever they're up.

And yes please, unearth that work you have

>>51359254
Don't worry, I have an unfinished game that I started in 2012. Some things take time.

>>51365689
This is something I've wondered about too because while I like the idea of casting from health I don't know how practical and fun it is as a mechanic.

The only game I can think of that does this is the Microlite games. They're a series of games made to replicate D&D with the mechanics remade to be very simple. In Microlite74, since it's the pdf I have handy, it does away with spell slots and instead Magic-Users cast from health costing 1 + spell level x2. Considering that a magic user's health is str + 1d6 health each level you're not going to get a lot of casts out. Never played it so I don't know how well it works, but at least there's an example of it in practice.

I guess it does make things simpler and adds a risk/reward system. It ensures that you magic system won't allow mages to blow their load because health is an important resource. The mage has to play conservatively with the magic and fight cautiously at the back or he'll lose his ability to cast and increase the chance of dying.

I'd say it would be terrible for high magic games because lots of magic would require a huge health pool as well and that does not really work for magic-users. You'd also better make sure the game doesn't have many easy health boosting options or you'll have players making beefy wizards. For low magic games and dual martial/casters I think it fits well though.

>>51359615
Explain more of your idea. What specifically do you envision happening in each section?

File: 1467951810942.jpg (31KB, 370x368px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 370x368px

>>51367126
Glad to hear someone else has an old unfinished game here. I'm the Digimon guy from earlier continuing from my scattered notes from 2014.

>>51359254
I think it's actually a good thing to have some time away from the game. With some fresh eyes I realize that my game preferences have changed and knowledge of games have improved so while I like some ideas I got down I've also found a way more parts that are fucking horrible and need to be removed. If you're not enjoying it then put it down for now. This is a hobby after all so the point is to have fun. You'll come back in a few weeks, months, or even years and be able to appreciate what you put effort into again.

>>51358073
Dunno if I missed it or not, but is it a roll+mod or dice pool system? It looks like there's a lot of steps to go through, so despite being otherwise fast your combat looks like it could slow down a lot. Playtesting will help you answer whether or not you'll need to streamline.

I can dig the precision lean towards using each of the stats. It makes a lot of sense actually, and allows for any kind of physical character build.

File: 1422887196143.jpg (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

>>51367172
Im thinking of a campaign based skirmish game where you play as the crew of a small starship, coming to the table with both a ship miniature (and perhaps a one man fighter or two), and two to eight 28mm crew miniatures along with floor plan's for each ship similar to the fold out maps common in many rpgs. The table would be divided between the space map and the ship maps, which game play being composed of the dogfighting of the ships with crew members locations and statuses impacting the abilities of the ship (for example who's firing the guns, whos piloting, that sort of thing), the effects on the crew any damage the ship sustains might cause, and the undertaking of possible boarding actions or foot combat on a neutral objective like a derelict space station. Between games your crew would have the opportunity to advance as per most skirmish campaign games, leveling up and recruiting and so on, and augment, repair, or remodel their ship as their level of resources allow.

The goal is to be an infinity/mordheim/xwing abomination

File: Musclewizard.jpg (35KB, 480x246px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 480x246px

How does /tg/ do bosses that aren't just 'X monster that does high damage/has more health'

I've been having trouble balancing them between not having them be meat shield that wittle the part down, meat shields that are just wittled down themselves, or just die easily.

>>51367699
Depends on the system, but usually I just pick a gimmick that the players will have to shape their tactics around in some way. As long as the player feels the need to change their tactics in response to the nature of the foe, it's a good idea. Look to video game encounter design for inspiration. A fresh coat of paint on a wow boss or a dark souls boss can usally translate to table pretty easily.

>>51367111
Fluff and setting is ok in moderation. Context is needed sometimes.

Anyone see a good social system for an RPG? Everything i've seen is just "words as attacks" or so open ended you might as well not have the system.

>>51369315
Fluff justification for rules, fluff straight up is pretty out of place

>>51369416
I personally believe social systems in rpgs have a tendency to gamify the rp so much it becomes unimmersive or are utterly pointless. I think they are best avoided.

Social interaction is the one thing you don't need rules to simulate, so why do it?

>>51369791
True, i'm just on a personal quest to see if it can be done. I've played a few diplo-mancers but they required a lot of hacking to put limits on me because most systems either punish or have no way to handle maxed out social stats.

In concept it's cool, but it's extremely hard to put rules on something that's so complicated.

>>51369416
What do you want out of your social system? Some games allow you to roll relationship dice to boost certain rolls or something simple like having a diplomacy or persuasion skill which are hopefully used to colour rather than determine social interaction.

I agree with >>51369791 in that social systems unnecessarily gamify social interaction if they are used in place of roleplay which is literally half of the TRPG name.

File: 1383982424149.png (315KB, 1300x2356px) Image search: [Google]

315KB, 1300x2356px

>>51370127
Oh wow I missed your post. Yeah the most advanced I've seen is 3.5's "max out your diplomacy skill" strategy. You could also look at GURPS where you could build a character with high social skills, maxed out attractiveness, high social status just from the core book with other crazy possibilities from the extra books more likely than not. World of Darkness also has sexy vampires with persuasion and mind control powers. So I guess it can be done in any of those if you put your mind to it. While I disagree with diplomancers in practice I will agree that it's a fun idea when taken to its logical extreme to build a character that just through mechanical fuckery is socially irresistible.

Pic related

>>51367144
Different anon, but just wanted to say you could easily design a system where high-magic and high-health interact well with the overall scheme of things.It all depends on the multiple system parts acting as a whole.

For example, lets take the DnD abstract HP meaning: Luck, physical health, dodging, stamina, blocking, etc. You have one total HP pool, but its sub-divided into different parts. Each part returns at different intervals to represent different things, like the very last points might be physical health, while the very top is stamina. If stamina returns quickly and often, you can have casters frequently cast spells out of the top of their HP. Getting hit by a weapon might dig all the way through their stamina and into a different pool. The mage can still cast just as often as before, but they're also that much closer to death. Again using DnD terms, lets create 3 divisions of HP. The Bottom division is meat points and represents physical injury. the Middle division might be endurance, long lasting stamina, and the Top division might be quick bursts of energy (compare the middle and top to carbs and lipids in human energy storage). All three are HP, and all casting uses HP, but if the Bottom replenishes after a long rest, the middle recovers after a short rest, and the top returns each round, you can have a pretty interesting system where classes look to have different levels of HP depending on what their role is.

A bit tangential, but concepts are fun.

>>51357530
I'm designing a modular "hunting" board game where units have their unit card with stats, plus two "job" cards that add to their stats.

Now I'm having a bit of trouble balancing things. For example if a unit is martial and takes two martial jobs it'll have 9str/9def/3hp/3mana while a caster unit with two caster jobs will have 3srt/3def/9hp/9mana (before any modifiers from looted equipment).
At first I went from averages and designed the monsters' stats around that but while that works perfectly fine then units are balanced, these examples of full martial and full caster have the problem that the caster almost never hits the monsers' AC and the monsters always surpass the caster's def, while martials have the opposite problem.

Is there a formula to properly balance AC with min-max-avg strenght stats?

>>51367645
I think it could work, but you'll have to look for ways to streamline as much as possible I think.

Imagine playing DnD, but instead of a normal character sheet, you have to manage individual portions of the character's head, limbs, torso, magic power, mental capacity, etc. That could be really exciting, but also has potential to get bogged down. Go ahead and run through a lot of rough drafts and share what you get. I think its worth putting some research dollars into, if you catch my drift.

>>51367699
Multiple "easier" phases or adding in puzzle solving will usually make things more exciting.

>>51370127
I think that any "good" social system is going to look a lot different than most people have tried.

I'm trying to think of what social interaction related things would need, or benefit from, a mechanical (read numerical) representation. In some cases DnD's Diplomacy works well. I don't think you're really intended to orate your character for your character. And by that I mean, you state in general terms what your character means, and the die result represents how well that went across. If you want to make a whole speech, then the roll result can cause too much dissonance for the effort put in. That why I like to describe dice results rather than description before roll.

But when you have an entire system built on those social interactions, I don't think you need a system based on expanding on Diplo. Instead, a simple MMO-style reputation system might be more the direction that would need to be taken.

>>51357530
Attacking an unawares target grants advantage (roll the d20 twice and use highest). Advantage allows an attacker to instead attempt a called shot, which inflicts status effects up to instant death on a really bad save.

>>51370265
That's fuckin awesome.

I came up with a small system that involved using cards for social actions and you crafted a hand of cards based on your stat values/mods, but it ended up being too similar to using spells and had too much RNG when dice were added into the equation.

>>51370284
A simpler way to get towards balance is to have 2 styles of defenses to go along with two styles of attack. A physical attack needs a physical defense, same for magic. That way you can introduce opportunity cost (which pushes towards balance).

There might be another fancy solution, but I prefer the "opportunity cost via opposites" method.

>>51370284
Not really, AC to too encompassing to handle both physical and magical attacks.

Depending on how your magical attack vs physical attacks function>>51370691
has a simple fix, but might cause an issue with casters/fighters being too similar if there isn't a functional difference between physical/magical attacks.

>>51370808
>>51370691
There's also the possibility of adding strenght modifiers to spells. That fixes the mages not dealing damage problem and leaves you with average squishy wizards who can't take a punch.

>>51364731
Basically, perception lets you see things, notice the environment, and so on, while wisdom lets you interpret what you see or "get a bad feeling" when something is not right, even if your perception roll was off. But wisdom is more like common sense than anything, letting you pick up on when stuff is not right or when stuff might not be a good idea, or even when stuff is a good idea. Most of my hidden background rolling would be for wisdom. I'm very on the fence as to whether or not to combine it with perception because in most cases where a wisdom roll is involved, you've rolled perception first, the idea being that the perception roll is how much information you have, and the wisdom roll being how well you interpret it. It's definitely one of the most subtle skills, but also one of the more useful ones, with far-reaching effects, which is why I wasn't too keen to combine it with perception, another of the most useful ones, since the fact that you'll be using both constantly means that combining the two would make that stat an obvious target for dumping a bunch of points into.

>>51367289
roll+mod. For gunplay where there is no chance to dodge (-8 to dodge rolls against guns, so you have to be a true ninja with maxed out agility, who's taken a bunch of combat drugs, and some implants too, to get a chance to not autofail), you need to roll only 3 dice (1 to hit, 1 for where EXACTLY you hit, and 1 for damage) or 4 if you roll a critical for damage. Which I don't feel is toooo many, but as you say, will require playtesting to see if it's streamlined enough.

By the way, armour is generally part of narrative, so a shot that hits your head and rolls a 3 for damage would give you permanent brain damage without a helmet, but bounce off relatively harmlessly with a helmet.

And thanks! Yeah in very freeform stuff, in modern settings especially, players seem to often try to do stuff like going to the gym frequently and then complain when they don't get any stronger over time, so this should fix that. Idea shamelessly stolen from Einsteinian Roulette

>>51369416
Diaspora had a neat take on it. It kinds of blurs the line between words as attacks and not even a system.
>http://www.vsca.ca/Diaspora/diaspora-srd.html#social-combat

I'm having some trouble with damage and health.

So here's the current interacting systems:
I have a health stat that translates 1:1 stat to health. That health is applied to 8 hit locations equally, so if I had 5 in my health stat, I'd have 5 health in each my arm, leg, head, etc. When 3 of 8 hit locations reach 0 health, you die, with added support intended for hit locations reaching half health. When any hit location reaches 0, you can sever/coup de grace that location.

Now, stats are all combat related, so I have a stat that's just for accuracy and one for evasion. That stat determines hits, misses, and crits via degrees of success after rolling an opposing Roll+Mod, Accuracy vs Evasion check. In order to determine which hit location is damaged, a d8 roll will represent where the damage lands.

The problem I'm having involves incorporating Called Shots into attacks and damage. I think I should allow people to choose what locations to attack, especially if they want to take advantage of crippling and severing, but I'm not sure exactly how to make that happen. The hit locations are Head, L. Arm, R. Arm, Torso, Torso, Torso, L. Leg, and R. Leg. One thought I had was to swap the intended hit location with Torso, so you had a 3/8 chance to hit where you wanted, but I'm not sure if that's sufficient or if something more needs to be done. Also, I need to figure out if I should freely allow a Called Shot, or make a requirement for it. Any help is appreciated.

>>51370281
This actually makes me think. You could have penalties apply to different health groups based on the status of the others. Like if you took damage to your physical pool, you might not be able to regain your endurance as much. You could have some of the attrition of a death spiral without all the sting of a full death spiral. I think I might have an idea with this.

>>51357594
Nice, the VVVV is good. I might even steal some of it for my system.

I've played in systems where a single combat took 6 hours and ones were it was 5 minutes. Combats should be fast enough that you don't fall into routine by repeating the same actions (where rounds are small) or that you loose immersion (where rounds are long). A combat, in my opinion, should take as long to resolve as any other encounter (maybe a bit longer) e.g. if meeting a fairy on the size of the road who offers rewards to travellers who can solve a puzzle takes 30min to resolve, then a combat should be around that time (+ or - 30%)

File: spellwars.jpg (69KB, 500x489px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 500x489px

Hey guys, silver/gold card guy here, after playtesting all weekend, I've decided to retool my game. What do you think about a damage tracker built into the card where you slide a token down (or up) the tracker to indicate how much health you have? For example, lets say I want the card to have '30 health', is it better to have a panel for tracking damage, or better to use tried-and-true methods such as a counter/damage tokens stacked on the card?

Here's an example of a game which uses a tracker built into the card, although in this game the card exists only to express your health, whereas mine will also need to include deckbuilding rules and play rules.

>>51375015
I feel like you could get away with a wheel inside the cards that would show the health through a small window, but I don't know how possible it would be from as printing aspect. The other methods might just be simpler.

>>51375015
The game you're referring to is quite silly, almost Munchkin-tier and players have little board presence (2-5 cards usually) besides the life tracker and hand. Consider how much table space will your game need per player.

>>51376352
>>51376407
I abandoned the idea almost as soon as I posted it, to be honest. It was a passing fancy. I think I'll go down the FFG route and just have a thousand tokens.

It's that Digimon guy here again with another basic game design question because I had to throw out my old stats that were basically D&D copies as a result of me being a former 3.pf fanboy.

I have a question about how to handle characters who would be normal people in a normal modern setting with nothing special about them. Most games naturally assume that your character is a hero with something that sets them apart from the rest or at the very least some things that will be a little better or worse than the rest of the world. Since the human characters in my game will be average schoolkids I'm a little unsure how to proceed.

What I was thinking of doing was to just have it be really rules light and have players write down something like: My character's strengths and interests are X and Y, but they struggle with Z. I think something like that accurately represents the small differences present within normal kids as opposed to one having 12 int while another has 10. I don't know what to do for dice mechanics yet, but I wanted to see if it's a good idea or if there there is a precedent to just writing down what you're good and bad at rather than using numbers and stats. Or if anyone thinks there is a better way to represent the differences between average humans.

For a simplified old school retroclone, how fucked is
>Ability Scores are 3d6
>No skills, just Ability Scores ( standard fare: str, dex, con, wis, int, cha )
>Ability Checks are 3d6 roll under, roll additional dice for advantages/disadvantages and take lowest/highest 3 dice respectively ( did the math on anydice and an additional die is about equivalent to about +/-2 )
>Players roll for everything. When they attack they roll 3d6 under their attack stat, instead of DM rolling for monsters attacking them the players has to roll under their dex
>Armor is handled by altering the number that needs to be rolled under by the player
>Weapons all do 1d6 damage, no str bonus to damage instead str determines what weapons you may wield effectively
>Different weapons have inherent bonus dice when attacking i.e. get to roll extra attack dice when using a blunt weapon vs armored opponent, extra attack dice using a whip vs unarmored opponent, extra attack dice using a dagger vs restrained opponent

Sounds decent on paper but it might be dubious in practice having the players roll for their attacks and defense rather than player roll for attacks and DM rolls for monster attacks. I'm assuming there is a reason D&D didn't go this route.

File: 1442608248826.jpg (908KB, 1208x1600px) Image search: [Google]

908KB, 1208x1600px

>>51379575
>roll 3d6 under a stat
If you do that you've just made your base stats and the RNG from having to roll for stats HUGELY important while OSR games emphasize how the bonuses are rather minor so having bad stats don't fuck you, but in your game bad stats would seriously fuck you. Dex is also super powerful because if you've got a ranged attacker suddenly all they need is 18 dex and they can both dodge and attack effectively.

I don't see the advantage of having the players roll for everything. It seems more like a style choice rather than something that would impact gameplay so unless you have something you think you're gaining you've needlessly changed a system that worked well and have to rebalance everything around this.

I like the idea of certain weapon types granting bonus attack dice rather than just damage boosts, but if all damage ever is just an unmodified 1d6 your combats might take longer. Although maybe with more consistent hits it'll go faster? If you're trying to simplify by removing some math (1d6 + str mod + magic weapon mod, etc) I think you've again just given yourself something new to balance the monsters around (higher chance to beat AC and less damage in general) without really simplifying things because you've just removed some basic addition.

I don't mean to be harsh because old-school D&D does have some things worth changing, but I think the changes you're proposing for the core of the game's systems create more problems than they solve. So yeah I guess there is a reason D&D didn't go this route. Interesting concepts though!

>>51379860
>OSR games emphasize how the bonuses are rather minor so having bad stats don't fuck you

That's interesting. One of the things that's always bugged me in d20 games (and that I do different in MY superoriginalnotjustanotherd20 game) is the scaling of the bonuses.

Hey /tg/, hoping for a couple ideas.

I'm building a Skirmish game where you build a couple Hero characters which have the regular 6 attributes and a variety of feats.

The roll mechanic is 2d6+modifier, success is 7+, and many skills have a different tiers for success (7+, 9+, 11+, etc).

I would like for each archetype to be reliant on their typical primary attribute (Strength for fighters, Intelligence for casters, etc) but also give plenty of options for potential secondary and even tertiary attributes.

What are some attacks, maneuvers, or traits that could run off of the Wisdom, Intelligence, or Charisma stats for a physical fighter, fluffed in any conceivable way you want (ie, Fighter, Barbarian, Soldier, Javelin thrower, Ranger) that DON'T default to amplifying damage with spells?

I do think that my physical archetypes are fairly fleshed out with Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution feats, and to an extent Charisma representing leadership with a slew of battle commands. However, the only real thing I can think of for Intelligence relates to anatomy and basically taking +to hit or attacks causing certain debilities to aimed body parts.

A couple examples skills and traits for reference:

Power Attack
Attack; Roll+STR - On a 10+, deal +2d6 damage.

Armor Breach
Attack; Roll+INT - On a 10+, Ignore your target's armor.

Apply Pressure
Trait; You may Roll+INT to attack instead of your normal roll. On a 7+ your target becomes Vulnerable.

Learn From Mistakes
Trait; Add your WIS to any Skill roll that you have failed during the current battle.

Fundamentalist
Trait; You may Roll+WIS to attack instead of your normal roll. On a 7+ deal +1 damage and take +1 to Defend.

Any suggestions?

>>51381162
Don't know about Charisma, but for Wisdom, any kind of reading your opponent's moves. And for Intellegence, feints and trick moves. Like a skill that doesn't do damage, but allows an immediate Strength skill at reduced TN.

>>51371092
>>51371288
Me again, just reporting in for anyone who by some miracle is interested. I just playtested my system for the first time, and it was a success!

Was just me and my one friend, wanted to run it by him to make sure the combat wasn't too clunky and see if anything needed streamlining, so I just put him in a simple scenario - it's dark, you're standing next to a lake on your right, there's giant glowing mushrooms on the left, and you have a 9mm pistol to go with your rags.

Placed an enemy in the scenario, did a lot of background each time my friend made an action to check everyone's perception, eventually the enemy lines up a shot and grazes PC's side. A gunfight ensues, with cover, moving around, sneaking, trying to line up shots, and so on. Eventually, after taking a few grazes, PC manages to put a round through the enemy's heart and the enemy critical fails his will roll (1 and 1) so he drops dead before his heart stops beating.

Long story short, my friend was so invested that he wanted to continue going after the little combat scenario! Playtest ended with him finding a companion (who he had to give the pistol he looted from his enemy to as payment to guide him to a village), then being beset upon by a huge sneaky shark dog (friend was very impressed when I explained after the fact how his critical fail perception roll led to him thinking the dog was in the exact opposite direction that it actually was, and that a perfect (but non-critical) perception roll aimed in that direction naturally turned up nothing. Basically he got a huge bite mark on his left knee and an even bigger chunk of flesh torn out of his right thigh, luckily without losing any arteries. Managed to convince/barter with his companion to carry him the rest of the way to the village, then promptly got a 2 for his will save (which I was rolling every turn after he received the horrific bite), and passed out. We ended the session there, after an hour and a bit of real time

>>51379165
When I was attempting a pokemon game, I decided to have players control both Trainers and Pokemon. The Trainers would take care of the non-combat related stats/skills while the Pokemon would use only the combat stats/skills. In essence, the Trainer and their Pokemon were one character with 1-3 fighting styles based on which pokemon was active at the time.

I envisioned that rulest could be converted to a bunch of other vidya related modules like Megaman Battle Network and others that have a similar style of partnership.

Since you recently decided on mixing up those pairings among players, the above idea might not exactly work, but it might be a springboard to a solution.

>>51381573
Next step is to add more people, especially of differing familiarity with TTRPGS. That will drastically change the overall and individual experience.

>>51381711
Yep, I' pretty optimistic though. I hadn't expected quite this positive a response. Now I just need to flesh out the world itself enough to start a campaign in it, or at least a one-shot adventure.

Oh and >>51364731
After playing a bit I've decided to combine wisdom and perception. With perception having not only 4 degrees of normal success (roll of 2-5) but also 6 degrees each of critical failure or critical success, any function covered by wisdom can probably be easily incorporated into perception, or intelligence on odd occasion.

Anyone else got any suggestions? Also, does anyone have any name ideas for the system?

>>51381665
Ah, that's an interesting solution to roll to two up into a single character. I don't think it quite works for me and I'll just have to use two statblocks for the human and the digimon, but it gives me something to think about.

However, something like that would work well for the digimon themselves as they evolve. I was wondering how to handle it, but from what you said it makes me think that the best solution would be to have part of the digimon's charsheet have all of their personality, character notes, and out of combat abilities listed and then have the combat stats separate and divided into boxes depending on their current evolution level.

>>51372800
Bumping for help

>>51383795
So I would only make it free use if the difficulty has a good increase when using it. Also idea is making torso count in addition to the targeted slot. 3/10 is still pretty low of a chance for something specifically aimed at.

>>51384292
Not sure I quite understand. If there are no restrictions to making a Called Shot, I'd think it better to have the benefit be a little less than if there was a restriction. A Called Shot would give you a 25% increase to hit where you wanted as things stand now, which isn't the worst bonus. I suppose I could try to make a called shot 4/8, but I don't want to just lose a hit location, so if I were going to do that I'd probably try to go Target Location 4/8, 2 secondary locations 2/8. How those secondary locations would be determined, I have no idea. Maybe if I imagine a body as a circle or pentagram I could use the adjacent limbs as the secondary locations (like if you aimed for the Left Arm, your secondary locations would be the Head and Left Leg. Or if you targeted the Left Leg, your secondary locations would be the Left Arm and Right Leg). The pentagram representing the body would be pretty flavorful, but I don't know if it would truly fit my theming.
I'll have to think more on this.

Does anyone have a decent resource on dice pool probabilities or knows what kind of math I need to work with?

A game I'm working on uses d6 pools with 4+ being a success. The max a pool can have is 10d6. In addition, I'm adding some colorful flavoring where Characters can activate special abilities for producing Pairs, Trips, Quads, etc.

How do I math out the probably, say, of getting any pair from a pool of 10d6, or any trips? How does the math differ if the pair has to be SPECiFIC. I.E., probability of getting a pair of 3's from 10d6.

>>51386547
anydice.com

That's the extent of the help I can offer you

File: 9780973105216.jpg (32KB, 400x430px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 400x430px

>>51386547
Get pic related for $15 off bookdepository.

You won't regret it.

>>51386978
Ah, noice

Everyone has a static skill result. This is the lowest result they could roll if they actually put effort into it.

They can spend a couple action points to actually roll their dodge, but they only get so many of them. Action points can be recovered by delaying your turn (turns usually happen every ten ticks).

A flat footed character cannot spend action points.

>>51386547
I had a lot of similar questions about dice probabilities. I went over to /sci/ and got a math nerd to make me a spreadsheet. Good times.

>>51386978
pdf share?

>>51387324
care to share?

>>51370281
Makes me think of the d20 modules for Star Wars and Spycraft, actually, where your HP was subdivided into Stamina and Wounds. Stamina was generated normally (hit dice) and Wounds were just = Con.

Attacks ate at Stamina first, represented by your character being grazed, or bapped, or just '''''barely'''''' getting out of the way in time, which eats away at your ability to keep doing that. A

After Stamina is gone, you start taking hits to Wounds which is when you actually DO take damage with negative modifers at certain breakpoints. Crits ALSO bypassed Stamina.

I kind of liked it, from a immersion point of view, since it was always weird that your Fighter with 50 HP just soaked 10 crossbow bolts and spears like it was a party.

>>51387377
If I'd found the pdf myself, I wouldn't have bought the book. I'd scan the relevant tables on probabilities (complete with some really wonderful charts and graphs) but my scanner is shit.

>>51386547
You're guaranteed to get a pair in 10d6, but if it needs to be a pair of successes then I think the odds are 93%. If we are talking about a specific number then your odds are 52%

>>51357530
>how do you handle "flatfooted" or "unaware" attacks in your game? Should everyone get a to-hit bonus or damage bonus? Just a to-hit bonus? How do you feel about that?

I just give them a free turn. Usually players are brutal enough that being able to strike first is more bonus they'll ever need.

>>51372800

What kind of requirements do you think you need for a called shot?

>>51389474
By requirements I also mean things like trade-offs. Maybe you try to make a Called Shot, but if you miss the target of the Called Shot you miss completely. That would be redundant as I already have a stat dedicated to accuracy, two chances to miss would be far too much risk for little reward. I'm also thinking of things like resource costs to making a Called Shot, but I'm not sure if that's necessary. I'm actually starting to think that free Called Shots might be the way to go, and have whatever is the called shot take up 3 slots on the targeting roll. You get a decent +25% bonus to hit with no other requirements, and unless specified, you'll just default to calling a shot on the Torso. Dividing up health into the body parts is one of the ways that I'm increasing the defensive side of combat. Since you only need to reduce 3/8 hit locations to 0, the randomness of which hit location takes damage essentially increases effective health.

So reading back on >>51370600, how would we try to design a social system for any random game?

If we tried to make our own Diplomacy, what are some good things to keep and what should be avoided. Same with a Reputation system. What might work best, and what would need to be dropped?

>>51381162
Cha could be for bluffing, intimidating or taunting. All are pretty handy for a melee defender/controller type of character.

Time to put the thread on life support.

>>51392096
Bump

Does anyone have any game ideas that aren't tabletop pen and paper? Like a game you can play on a spiral ring notepad, or a drinking game that's an RPG?

>>51393655
Why couldn't you play a tabletop pnp on a notepad or incorporate a drinking game?

Just trying to write some unarmed rules, quick question.

Does it make sense to anyone for punches to be Physique based and kicks to be Finesse based attacks? Assuming someone who isn't a martial arts master, I don't think you can really throw your weight behind a feasibly fast kick in combat. Seems like effective kicking is normally about balance and flexibility.

>>51393655
I'm working on a miniatures game.

>>51395452
Why are both not based on both? Punches and.kicks both need lots physique and finesse.

>>51395452
Seconding both, you really need both precision/speed and power regardless of your choice to throw a punch or a kick. Instead you may consider a higher attack bonus for Physique based characters and more individual attacks for Finesse characters.

>>51395452
Small changes in technique will drastically affect the amount of power delivered in both punches and kicks. Speaking from experience, it would be a poor decision to differentiate punches and kicks along those lines.

Don't you go gently into that sweet archive thread.

>>51394614
I've been wanting to bring the RPG experience into other social contexts and through other methods, just to see what happens. I feel like pnp is sort of overdone, as if we've thoroughly plumbed the depths of the medium and now we're just arguing over whether something should be decided by a d6 or a d20. LCGs are just about there, too, and miniatures games are even older. I mean, we have ubiquitous new technology that they didn't have in the 80's, can't we use it to do something different?

>>51402955
What makes you think it's overdone? You're right that technology is different than the 80s, but with that technology we are able to see innovation in pnp. Anyone can publish a game at zero cost through online pdfs so we've got countless games from independent developers all doing their own interesting things creating new mechanics and ideas that wouldn't be worth the risk for a big company. Hell, these threads of people doing their own thing is proof of that or just look at some of of the /tg/ made homebrew systems.

The use of forums for play by post games have created their own subgenre of games that have rules that make sense for that style of play so that's certainly original and a different method. If you want to get REALLY fucking old school with different gaming methods there's an interesting example back before TRPGs existed and wargames were king. Players were few so many had to play literally by post and to resolve dice rolls they would set a date and chose a company and then on that day they would check the stock price as a means of random number generation since it was reliably unpredictable. Is something like that along the lines of you're thinking of?

Although if you're looking for pnp drinking games check out Justice Hobos on 1d4Chan. The mechanical twist is that you flip bottlecaps for task resolution hoping to have your caps land face up. Every drink you finish adds an extra cap to flip thus improving your chances the drunker you get.

If using a pool of 3-4, D12's or D10's?

>>51403509
I'd like to say d12s just to be original, but d10s are more common so you can get 3-4 d10s with two average dice sets rather than 3-4 dice sets for the requisite number of d12s. If you think it'll be played online mostly then don't worry about it.

The answer might depend more on math, but I don't know what you actually want to do with the pool.

>>51403559
To be fair, its not hard to find dice now. Walmart sells 10 packs of D12's online. Even then, there's a number of free die roller programs.

I'm doing an individual success pool with a sliding double success. You roll the dice, and your stats determine which are a success, and the TN is how many successes based. '12' counts as two, and the power of the weapon lowers that by 1 for each point; a power 2 weapon rolls 2 successes on a 10+.

That's why I'm leaning towards D12's, the degrees for power make them more attractive, but the point you bring up about common availability is a good one and is why I still consider D10's. They are also becoming more common for war games, a few games are moving fron D6 to D10 pools.

>>51403458
>Anyone can publish a game at zero cost through online pdfs so we've got countless games from independent developers all doing their own interesting things creating new mechanics and ideas that wouldn't be worth the risk for a big company. Hell, these threads of people doing their own thing is proof of that or just look at some of of the /tg/ made homebrew systems.

Those games are a lot like each other. We've got countless PDFs that are just different enough to make you learn new rules to play the same game, I don't see that as truly innovative.

I'm looking to brainstorm taking what we already know into places it hasn't been.

Like maybe somehow playing a well known game like WoD over Twitter, with players as renegade vampires for hire and celebs unwittingly playing along as various Methuselahs, you decode the shitty prefab tweets they annoy us with daily to determine who they are feuding with and whether you can contract with them.

>>51403820
> a few games are moving from d6 to d10 pools
Seriously? That's interesting.

I can see why you want d12s so I'd say go ahead if they work better. Practically if you're not planning to seriously publish this game then you don't really need to worry about your playerbase. If you're doing this for fun then do whatever you want and if you post it online and something thinks it's cool enough to try then they'll make it work.

>>51403840
>playing WoD over twitter
I see what you're getting at and it seems interesting, but it also feels pretty pointless. I makes me think of the people who port DOOM to strange formats. Sure playing DOOM on a digital camera is neat, but it certainly doesn't improve the game or the amount of fun you can have with it.

The reason the games haven't left the table is because there is no reason to. If alternative formats created some noticeable benefit then certainly some games would have jumped on it by now. Although you might gain some neat features with moving a game to Twitter, as in your example, you're losing a whole lot more of what makes tabletop games special and fun along the way.

I also think you're seriously mistaken when you say that all of the different games out there are just "new rules to play the same game." You don't need fundamental alterations in how a a game is played when small changes to game mechanics can inspire new styles of play and very different feels to the whole world that's being played in.

Experimenting with alternative mediums is a great idea that I'd like to see, but games don't have to leave the table to be unique.

>>51404482
A lot of companies are leaving the GW influence of handfuls of D6's and looking elsewhere. Some games like Dark Age and Infinity use D20's, while some like Gates of Antares and This Is Not A Test use D10's, and there's even Wyrd Games using playing cards for their games.

It started out just for fun, used to homebrew rules for WHFB and 40k when I was younger, but as time has gone on, and the barriers for entry have steadily gotten lower for new entries, I've been taking it more and more seriously. Also why the setting has been driving me nuts, looking at it with marketing also in mind. I've got it down to two that I enjoy fleshing out and may have market appeal; a Hellgate: London and DOOM inspired post-apoc one with earth being overrun by demons; and a fantasy one with a Mediterranean flair.

>>51357530
Is 5 square feet to much space for a game?

>>51405378
Generally, yes.

What's a good amount of health to start players out with? Things I've seen are are around 8-10, but I don't want them dying in two hits.

>>51405442
That will be determined entirely by how much damage they're expected to take and how frequently.
Numbers are meaningless in a vacuum

>>51404482
>playing DOOM on a digital camera
that gameplay doesn't really change, so how is it innovative.

I see reasons for gaming to go beyond the table, namely that nearly everyone I see on the bus or train is jamming a game on their mobile device. But it's usually a clone of some game from the 80's. We've got a wireless network that could support all different kinds of gameplay, I was hoping people would think about ideas for that.

Small mechanics changes may change which decision you make in game, but what is effected? The pace? The difficulty? What game today doesn't have a toggle on it to adjust the difficulty. I don't see that as innovative, you can say the game is technically different, but we're still pretending to be fantasy heroes or whatever. I'm talking about kinds of gameplay that are so different that you have to explore how it works, and maybe they're even so weird that they can never fully be figured out.

I mentioned a drinking game RPG mashup as a game that doesn't have to leave the table, maybe one where your character's current health is determined by how well you can recite stuff after a few drinks. Or maybe you have to do more and more ridiculous fantasy genre stuff the tipsier you get, like having to sing along with the dwarves in a cut from The Hobbit.

>>51405475
Sorry, I'm kinda new to this so I didn't think to specify. Most non-special enemies will be doing around d6 or d4 and combat is going to be fairly frequent as it's supposed to be combat focused, usually designed to be atleast a few encounters between each 'safe spot'. Not sure if that clarifies it.

>>51405567
I'd make a list of how many rounds combat would take if you had minimum, average, and maximum damage rolled. Balance it around the average result, and as long as the minimum and maximum values are acceptable then you've found a good amount. You'll also need to factor in how often they'll be hit too, so take whatever amount of accuracy your system uses into account also. That'll affect your comparisons of expected damage taken.

>>51405743
Oh shit, that's way smarter than just trying ballpark it, thanks.

>>51405545
What you're suggesting seems to transcend the idea of tabletop gaming entirely.

A TRPG can't be translated to mobile world because the games are designed around extended play and killing 10 minutes is not the right medium. That's why play by post games exist so you can take only a few minutes to make a move then check back later. The innovation there already exists and has for many years.

The pace and "difficulty" of the game isn't even close to what I'm talking about. Take games like Fantasy Craft and 13th Age. At their core they're just about pretending to be fantasy heroes, but they go about simulating things in different ways that engender different approaches and play styles. FC has a lot of mechanics that detail and quantify your character and a combat system that requires a lot of thinking and strategy. 13th Age instead puts a lot of focus on narrative and so instead the connections your character has with the world are focused on with more fluff and less crunch and the combat is simplified so the focus is taken away from how the numbers crunch out on a grid. The way TRPGs differentiate themselves are not nearly as simplistic as you make them out to be.

Of course, I think this is beside the point because you want some really strange stuff. What you're suggesting sounds like more of a party game and not even close to a TRPG. Random number generation is used because it's an impartial way of simulating chance and the things that you suggest, while they sound amusing and fun, are poor choices for game mechanics. Having a character fail a task through a roll is fair because you have rules in place to alter that roll based on your character's skill as represented by modifiers to the roll. Having a character fail a task because the player is bad at singing while drunk has nothing to do with the character and is retarded because there no interaction between the mechanics and the fiction. It is very funny but it makes for a terrible TRPG.

Out of Curiosity, does anyone here know what it takes to properly copyright/trademark a PNPRPG for sale? on the one hand, I could assume a final draft of a book would be protected by the standard 35bux (for US sale anyways) the same as any other collection of words on paper. I'm simply worried that when it comes to the system I've done, the selling point is Adaptability, and that poses the legal question of exactly where the copyright protection stops.

>>51406684
Well, you can't copyright mechanics so chances are a copyright won't protect you in the way you might be wanting. There used to be a resource that had a legal overview somewhere around here.

This is decent alternative: https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/493249/mythbusting-game-design-and-copyright-trademarks-a

I'm thinking a lot about a moba to boardgame adation, as it hasn't

Thinking about making a cardgame. What is the maximum acceptable handsize? I guess 10-12 should be managable for the majority of the game? 7 would obviously be the best imo, but I definitely need more.
Also we should have basic advice on probability and statistics in the OP for cases like this >>51405806

>>51407290
Treat cards as dice, with multiple cards making up a single die. That's the best way to approach card statistics.

And 5-8 is the best range for a hand size. You can do more, I've worked on games where the hand size goes up to 16, but for every card you add after the eighth in hand the level of complexity of each card must be reduced in order to keep the game manageable. For example, having twelve cards in Catan is fine as they only fulfill one function, which is demonstrated by a single picture. Having twelve cards in hand in Magic is a nightmare, and something best left to the expert players.

>>51407468
I see, I have to keep in mind that for me managing 10+ cards in mtg is not a problem because of experience. I want to tone down the complexity to hearthstone levels but keep more interaction. I'm not sure if I want to use cards at all, as they bring in 'card advantage'. A 'mechanic' I really don't want to put a focus on, but is a huge factor in basically any game. I guess the only way around that is limiting the number of cards playable per turn or let the players always draw to the max (or at least a certain number).
The thing is, having abilities on cards is really nice to implement a combo kind of gameplay. But adding stuff like equipment can get weird, if you want to have certain 'builds' possible, so the players rely on drawing certain cards.
I really don't want to have more than 1 deck (one for equipment, one for abilities etc.). Though, thinking about it, putting equipment in a deck that is only accessible through 'equipping/buying' would be possible.

Don't forget the ability to have double sided cards to cut down on cards-in-hand.

For example you could have a card that has "Last hit" on one side, but you can rotate it 180° and have "Harass" on that side.

>>51407583
I haven't played Hearthstone, so I cannot comment to its specific mechanics, but you're on the right track. We're in an age that kind of favours complexity through simplicity, rather than complexity for complexities sake. New players entering the market just do not have the time nor the desire to learn the incredibly complex games we played as teenagers, hence the surging popularity of simplistic formats like EDH/Commander.

Cards that have simple functions, but which can be modified through another means to create new and surprising effects, are your best bet at creating strategic depth with a hand size greater than eight. If fewer, feel free to treat it just like Magic - why reinvent the wheel? I'm stepping out for a few hours, but if you post a more in-depth explanation of your game, I'll happily post my thoughts when I get back. Typing them all out might help you to shake loose some new ideas, too.

>Have homebrew system I'm trying to make rules light
>Hear about dungeon world on here, decide to take a look at to see if there is anything good to rip off
>A lot of the ideas I already had, Adventure World already has it
I don't know if I should feel proud or embarrassed

>>51407872
Don't feel bad anon. I was working out a combat system only to realize that I was just using WoD mechanics. There's only so many ways you can fuck around with dice so unintentional plagiarism is inevitable. But you can't copyright game mechanics so fuck 'em!

>>51357530
d10 or 0-9 twice d20?

>>51407872
>>There's only so many ways you can fuck around with dice so unintentional plagiarism is inevitable.
Well, there are may be a few more ways, but they can get a bit complex/non-intuitive after the basic ones. Currently I want to make a 3d8 roll under/above game as I find it the most attractive standard dice roll possibility so far.
Perhaps convert my current project...
3d8 statistics: http://anydice.com/program/5f

>>51408536
What for? For all I can say there is no difference (except that you would have to use 10 as 0, or go 1~10 and (11~20)-10)

Stupid question, does the 1/10 in d10/percentile represent 1/10% or 10/100%?

>>51409720
Just wondering if there's an statistic bias from the d10 not being a platonic solid.

>>51412422
10/100%, I believe. I'm assuming you mean when using a D10 for percentile, instead of D100.

File: 19569aebb19f82027abea8539aeecad7.jpg (128KB, 1000x750px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 1000x750px

How does one come up with a combat system?

It's a bit of a weird and broad question, but as I'm developing my digimon game I've been able to find a simple way to handle humans and out of combat stuff, but I'm struggling with the stats for the monster characters and the way combat will work. I'm in a catch 22 where I need to know how I want combat to run so I can figure out what stats are needed, but if I don't know what stats I'll use I can't figure out combat. I'd love to hear how you guys developed your combat system.

>>51415291
Grab inspiration from other sources. Something (or things) will be close enough to what you want that you can take those and modify as necessary. End result might be far and away from where you started, but trying to pull an idea out of the ether takes some time and luck.

>>51415291
I set up some statements of intent and inferred what I'd need from there. In my case that meant things like:
1. Character creation should be quick, requiring few decisions to make a lv1 character
2. Rules in general should be kept light
3. The setting is sexual fantasy
4. As many fetishes as possible should be supported

From that I was able to decide on keeping the number of attributes and resources as low as possible and the mechanics abstracted enough to be very flexible.

>>51415346
I had considered doing that, but I worried about it being an issue with people saying "Oh, you just copied X!" Still, I'll likely have to modify whatever I take anyway and I'm probably being too self-conscious about the opinions of a bunch of anons on a nerd forum. I guess I'll try plundering some systems then! Thanks.

>>51415454
>rules light
>fetishes
That sounds like an interesting game. I look hope you post it some time!

That's pretty much what I did as I developed the human characters after I realised that I wanted it simple and very rules light/narrative more than anything else. I guess I'll do that with the monster characters too by listing what I want out of the system and what I absolutely need to be able to do within it.

>>51415553
It's maybe 20% complete, i'll probably start posting it once it's playable without a ton of fudging and improv.

Hope you like puns and wordplay, because there's a ton of it.

>>51415458
I guess what I really wanted to say was a combination of >>51415454 and >>51415346.

Figure out what you need your mechanic to accomplish, then look for other places that have done it before. Even if you steal wholesale from something else, you cant really "get in trouble" for it and you should be tweaking to better fit your needs anyway. Whatever adjustments you make will make it unique enough. Its like making a passenger car. People complaining that your car has 4 wheels is really a non-complaint. The real differences in design happen elsewhere.

>>51415291
First you take parts of games you played, know and like.
Then you change things you don't like about them.
Then you keep whacking at it for about three years, periodically chopping off and adding new or freshly stolen ideas.
At least that's how I always do it.

>>51415454

Finally, an Oglaf game!

>>51417917
...actually, yeah, that's not a bad way of describing it. The gods are similarly ridiculous and exploitative and shit like being cursed to be the best at blowjobs is totally a thing that could happen.

>>51418370
I have to ask, have you taken any inspiration from FATAL? The game may be an abomination, but it did have some interesting tables. Or how about some anal circumference rolls?

>>51418717
I decided to make this specifically because no one should ever have to play FATAL. It's also intended to be far more rules-light so no, no anal circumference rolls.

Magical Realm anon here again, progress on combat, classes, magic, deities, and the bestiary is all coming along swimmingly. However a realization just stuck me - I have completely ignored non-combat situations up to now and though I've got a hundred different ways to murderfuck a gaggle of l'imps there's currently no way to have consensual sex, seduce the barmaid, or haggle down the price on that shiny new dildo-lance.

Now I have a couple ideas for some of those problems but I'm a bit stuck on the subject of the economy. See, the primary setting is a twisted dimension build by a god of depravity and obsession that's been left to rot for a few centuries without him. Under the perverse physical and magical laws of this place basically everything has come to run on a single resource - Life Force. Plants still grow with just water,soil, and sunlight but even the non-aetalutavorous plants get a significant boost if they can get ahold of some - and all living creatures produce at least some Life Force.

So there's a thing everybody wants and needs, but not everyone/thing produces the same amount right? Seems like an obvious choice for currency if it can be converted into a stable form. So therin lies the rub - no doubt some monsters and maybe some enterprising people have found a way to harvest and crystallize Life Force somehow, but how do I allow players to make up financial shortfalls with their own LF reserves without then incentivising sitting around town milking themselves for wealth?

Cont'd

>>51419753
A couple options occurred to me
1. Only certain monsters harvest and store LF. This is often fatal to the one being harvested but the resulting concentrated gems/ingots are all the more valuable for it. Craftsman can use standard perishable LF as long as it's fresh enough so they'll still accept it in trade if they have to.
2. Players come equipped with a magical LF conversion device that traps spent LF from their foes and converts it into currency. They can convert their own LF as well but the exchange rate is much higher for LF taken by force.

Both have problems though.
1. Players may seek out lairs of harvesting monsters deliberately in the hopes of hitting it rich quick and lose interest in less valuable monsters.
2. This doesn't make sense fluff-wise for some monsters. The Thirsty category of monsters for example are infused with negative LF - logically defeating one would either award no LF-bux or only as much as they'd drained from the players.

>>51419753
>>51419852
Please tell me that it's actually called Magical Realm.

To answer your question, what if instead of harvesting LF monsters just inherently possess crystallised LF within them? When you kill a monster you can pull out a piece of LF from them which means that stronger monsters (those naturally bolstered by higher levels of LF) will provide proportionately greater rewards. So instead of monsters harvesting it maybe it's just treated like any other trophy taken from war so a barbarian lord with a pile of LF shards is shown to be a dangerous ruler for instance. That way monsters without LF just don't possess any so there's no harvesting complications. If you want your players to be able to convert it then maybe only recently science has mastered the ability to harvest with great machines installed in some cities so if they're in a city and need quick cash they can get drained.

Not sure if that's what you're going for, but I hope that it might spark some ideas.

>>51420064
>Please tell me that it's actually called Magical Realm.
It's actually called Magical Realm.

I'd considered that as well but honestly it kinda has the same problem as #2. Take the most basic Thirsty monster, the Husk. It's literally the remains of a humanoid that's been completely drained of its LF but whether through darkest fuckmagik or sheer force of libido it still walks, ever hungering for the LF of the living. If such a creature had crystallized LF why would it not simply feed on that?

As a side issue I've debated on allowing players to use some of their LF-bux to restore LF should they be out of restorative spells/potions and pressed for time. Obviously this'd need to be far less efficient than buying potions but I'm not sure if the option is even necessary on top of natural regen.

>>51420215
Ah, I see what you're getting at. What if instead crystallised LF is instead generated at the moment of a creature's death? All that life that flowed within them needs somewhere to go after the body holding it stops working so it plops down nearby as a chrystal again proportionate to the strength of a monster. This still encourages the party to go out adventuring for sweet LF bux and harvesting can be a thing with creatures killing others for LF. Strong monsters hold more LF and likely store more which works for what you want I think. This also solves the issues of Husks so they had all of their energy gradually suffused from them. Then they need to feed off of a living creature's LF, but draining a creature of it is better than killing it because the high lasts for longer or whatever. Again, this might be off base of what you intend, but I hope it helps.

If you've got potions, scrolls, and natural regen I'd say you're okay with not giving them an extra health safety net. I'd say make a note of it and if players have trouble keeping their health up then maybe allow it. I think that runs the risk of players just amassing a bunch of LF and then not bothering with shopping and instead just spamming their LF heals whenever in danger. Depends how you implement it I guess.

>>51420378
Really the only reason I'm considering it is there's only one resource in the game. There's no mana or stamina or energy and while some spells and abilities are on per encounter/day timers most are not and almost everything costs LF or makes you more likely to lose LF. So adventurers stuck in the middle of a dungeon with no useful consumables or cooldowns and low LF are kinda stuck waiting for regen or hoofing it home.

>>51420467
I've always thought that adventurers should prepare for adventuring beforehand. It's more of an old-school notion, but old D&D was always a bit of a resource management game where you have to decide whether you should move forward with what you have or leave and come back resupplied. If the players are trapped with no potions and no spells I'd say it's their own damn fault and it's up to them to figure out how to get out. Add the ability to burn LF and now they've just got another resource they could potentially run out of. I'd say that such a mechanic would just mean they can delve a little deeper rather it than preventing them from getting stuck like you hope.

>>51420594
The idea is that it'd be a last ditch effort to finish the last leg of a dungeon but you might just be right, I can imagine a party burning through their saving failing to finish an adventure and winding up penniless for their trouble. Needing to whore yourself out to gear up again might be thematically consistent but I'm not sure it makes for compelling gameplay. Then again that is pretty Magical Realm...

I think I'll just leave it as a note in the back of my book for now pending further playtesting.

>>51419753
>something something Life Force
If its about sex and depravity, why not make it thematic and have Sperm and Eggs be containers of Life Force? Its literally the force that makes lives. You can price the Life Force value by how "fertile" the respective reproductive things are. If 200-500 Million sperm are in an average ejaculation, but only one actually fertilizes (and even then, only sometimes), then it's valued at whatever amount. Then you could have monsters with much more valuable concentrations of Life Force so the players just don't milk themselves to exhaustion. Death could be a way to keep the reproductive organs intact so that they could be magically preserved (which would incentivize killing monsters over just running Life Force livestock ranches, although those might be financially viable on the low-end). Plants also reproduce, so they wouldn't be excluded either.

I'm just trying to write as much down before I possibly get podraced so I'll leave it at that for now.

>>51421061
Too much detail, too simulation-y. This is a light system, abstraction is a key tenet. Hell I don't think the words sperm or egg (well, not that kind of egg) are even in the text at all atm. Life Force is an abstract value representing general well-being and sexual energy, sexual fluids are just the most obvious carrier of Life Force.

>>51421171
Right. You don't have to be specific, but the idea that reproductive fluids (or hell, call it Life Milk) hold the all the importance in a sex/fetish game. Just like in real life, you can make some bank by donating sperm. In addition, you could have ritzy bukkake clubs, male/female milk harvesting ranches, Husks giving blowjobs for sustenance, and a bunch of other crazy, fitting things.

Its very internally consistent, gives you a lot of options, and you still of have to be as specific as you want. It makes almost too much sense for me to accept any other options.

>>51421286
Erm, are you suggesting that the money is made of solidified reproductive fluids? Perhaps I didn't make it clear that that was already the case.

Hey there.

I'm one of the people working on the rather forgotten BIONICLE RPG thing, and I worked on a system that I think is simpler and more streamlined than the system that was mostly created.

Dice pool system of d6's, successes are 4 and above, 3 and lower are failures. 6's explode, 1's add additional complications to successes and failures.

I built the thing of Unity, Duty and Destiny, which are pretty big things in BIONICLE. Unity is a pool of dice that you add on to a roll when you work with somebody else and you can spend them whenever you work together. Duty is your skills and determines how many of them you have, as well as giving you a dice to the relevant stat. Destiny is basically 'action points' that give you a free dice and can also be permanently spent to avoid death.

Stats are:

Speed: Agility, how quick you are, stuff like that.
Strategy: Ability to plan ahead and think things through.
Willpower: ability to push on through mental fortitude and resistance to mind-altering effects
Stamina: physical fortitude.
Strength: pretty self-explanatory.

Roll a certain number of successes, you do the thing. Other bits include elemental manipulation stuff, vague conditions and other stuff that I can go into detail about. Mostly my problems are with the levelling up stuff, but I feel that it's at least in a somewhat workable state.

>>51421372
That is what I assumed, but with Life Force being found within reproductive fluids in general, it makes them the source for everything. It all depends on how those fluids would be refined.

I'm thinking in terms of reproductive fluids are the equivalent of crude oil. Bodies produce it naturally, how it's refined changes what applications it's used for (fuel, lubrication, plastics, gels, food coloring, etc). So in order to make money, you need to find the best places to extract it from. Perhaps that means the sexual equivalents of drilling, fracking, dredging, and whatever. Its probably a shit analogy but whatever. I replaced Life Force in the above discussion with Reproductive Fluids, and I don't really see where any of the problems remain.

With Life Force being the Sperm and Eggs (even if you don't mention that), and the Sperm/Eggs are in the fluids, then that would make it the most thematic explanation. You'd extract the life force any normal sexy way, but some ways might be better than others. If we go specific again and consider how fragile sperm really are, then just mere ejaculation is risking a huge amount of profit/power/life force. If you kept the whole system intact (sperm+penis+testicles, breasts, womb+ovaries+fallopian tubes) then you'd have a better "survival rate". Even better when you have some magical way of preservation. So I guess it might be like Monster Hunter, but with sexy bits.

There's probably something about recreating the whole concept in my head that's preventing me from answering your concerns better.

>>51357530
Thoughts on a custom dice tower? Not sure if I'm in the right place but I want some ideas on how to go about dice rolling in a nice little contraption

>>51421862
To be frank I have no idea what you're getting at. That said you are correct in surmising that crystallized Life Force can be refined and is a key component in all but the most basic goods. The exact method of extraction doesn't matter much either - well no, that's not quite correct since it's probably be handled the same way as combat which is to say that the individual's kinks, traits, LF reserve, stimulation and arousal tracks would be involved. Possibly defenses too if the harvest isn't consensual. Regardless it's not really the kind of thing that'd come up in normal gameplay, it's more of a dungeon diver than a ranch management game.

>>51421991
That's where I had the creature part harvesting idea. The ranches were when the players needed some funds when inside a city (involuntary participation could be a potential plot hook, or busting up an illegal ring, etc). In my mind, ejaculation or pumping breast milk would be very raw, so its not nearly as valuable in either money or material terms. Killing the monsters and preserving the parts would net more/better quality life force and could therefore be more valuable (since you have the parts that produce the life force for an arbitrary reason).

So I guess its a combination of both 1 and 2 from >>51419852. Harvest monsters to get the most valuable life force, or go donate for chump change. There's a lot of storytelling room available, so like with the illegal milking ranch, you could have a plot that doesn't need dungeon crawling. And as far as your issue with 2 and creatures with negative life force, it's perfectly fine if you have creatures that just destroy the resource, or perhaps if they eat it the way most living things eat, then you could justify having some unrefined life force in their "stomach" after you kill them.

What are some other concerns? I'll try to answer them as directly as possible. I have nothing better to do, but I'm also obviously very interested.

>>51422269
It's a little out-of-scope really, "combat" is all sex and neither side necessarily winds up dead, just good-as in the case of things like mind-breaking. That said, establishments like ranches would have to exist since it's not feasible for a civilization to get all of its currency from adventurers and trade with the more intelligent monstrous entities.

Anyway it's getting late and hard to think but I'm open to suggestions if you have punny class or monster concepts. I could use names for the fighter/rogue/cleric-esque base classes especially. Oh and my monsters are separated into categories to help with broad theming. For example:

The Thirsty: Horrible loci of negative Life Force, ever-thirsty and often single minded in their lust. Ranging from the withered, shambling Husk to the terrifying Cumpire these monstrosities are unique in their ability to drain LF directly from their victims.

The Depraved: A group comprised of the fallen god Nkk'Brd's malformed servants and those worshippers who drank too deep of his blessings and became something... other. Ranging from the pathetic L'imp to the domineering Succ/Fuccubi or the mighty Butt Thirster these magical malcontents sport powerful spells and/or bizarre mutations.

The Perverse: Otherwise intelligent humanoids that have proved too belligerent to be allowed to join civilization. This group includes the rapacious Gropelins, man-eating Ronri, and the testosterone-fueled Bull Mantaur. Notable traits of this category include nearly single-minded fulfillment of base desires such as food, drink, and sex that belies a kind of animal cunning that may surprise unwary adventurers.

cont'd

>>51422866

The Unformed: Massive, ever-shifting entities seemingly comprised of the combined kinks and secret shames of every living thing, these kindom-sized alien beings have only been sighted since the Gate was opened. To date only a single specimen has been properly catalogued: The creature known as the Thousand-Hung She-Goat of the Black Wood, the very force that brought the mad Jizzard Gherkin's life to an untimely end in its hunger for virgin orifices.

The Fetid: Wretched creatures possessed of fell desires that turn the stomachs of ordinary folk. Daiberds, Urinacorn, and Beelzebabes fit into this category. They often weave fell enchantments that allow them to inflict their disgusting fetishes on their victims before fulfilling their desires.

There's more but I'm falling asleep on my keyboard here. Like I said, be grateful if you've got any ideas for me.

File: Untitled.png (607KB, 2728x1752px) Image search: [Google]

607KB, 2728x1752px

I think this has already been done to death, but I'm trying to smash together SS13 and Paranoia.

I'm working on the new 'secret society' antag, Syndicate Changeling. Here's a sample objective.

>>51421912
I know I've seen some LEGO designs for such a utility.
I might make one soon, it's a cool vector for which to make a themed tower for any campaign

>>51421912
You can buy premade ones out of mdf that look either like fantasy or sci-fi buildings to double as scenery.
If you were just asking about getting one and not designing a new one yourself.

>>51415291
Best come up with a list of things you want to support or simulate in your combat.
In the broadest of senses, a ww2 fighter plane simulator might play differently than a fantasy rpg, but what are the elements that make it so?

For my fighters, I want the pilots to feel in control of their flying, but really emphasize the razor thin margins of success or failure and the consequences of correct/wrong choices.
Of course style for pushing the limit, so someway to both encourage players to try risky things and a way to reward them for it.

Altitude plays a role, as does airspeed. Since you can dive to pick up speed or climb quickly and lose speed, these may be best shown as resources the player can choose to use and perhaps interchange. There may be other things they can do, too. Let's consider "Resources" a good category header for now, as things players can use/spend to accomplish things. Ammunition immediately follows as going into this category.

Fuel could play a role, but it more is a limiting factor, so something that for now I'll throw under Consequences-it's really only a concern in a game a bit more gritty than I want (more of a dogfighter simulator), but losing fuel in a bad hit/leak might be bad.

Accuracy/Gunnery is something I want to be a bit more luck based, due to ranges and weapons of the time, but at the same time I want it to be something the players can tangibly influence, so we'll loosely put it under the 'Reward' banner. I can already imagine it being a pilot vs pilot, with the planes unique qualities as well as aforementioned speed/maneuvering weighing in, and already I can see how a margin of success system will let them maximize success while also minimizing failure, should they make the best choices and be in the best of the other attributes as rewarding.

So, after a brief brainstorm, I have Resources the player can use (Airspeed, Altitude, Ammunition - "Three A's" maybe we can add Ace Points for a fourth.)

>>51415291
You start from the basics and you add stuff to "correct" things you think are wrong with the initial system, or to add whatever you think makes the game better (fun? Requiring more tactical thinking? More randomness?)

You could start at the very lowest level of design : each opponent has a value. Those values are compared. Whoever is biggest wins.

Just that opens up questions : what happens when you have equal values? What happens if you have more than one opponent on either side? Isn't that a bit simple? (it is, but it didn't stop card games from being popular for centuries))
Etc.

So the question is, what do *you* like in a combat system? What do you find *fun*?
What challenges do you want to solve while playing (ie, what decisions do you have to make; and they make you feel good if you make the right ones)

These are pretty important questions that need answering first!

Bump in the night

>>51423145
>Well, The Wizzard is a given.
Whizzard would likely be an enemy type, it's too narrow of a concept for a player class.

>Virgin Mary/Harry
I don't see this working as a class or a monster. There is a sect that has virginity as its taboo, but most clerics are free to fuck all they want.

>Clerics belong to Sects
Love it, fucking canon. I'm thinking about putting all of the gods save one under the purview of one polytheistic church with each Sect being devoted to a particular deity.

>Every Bard performs Hot Sax
I'm limiting class scope to fighter, rogue, cleric, and wizard archetypes for now. Paladin and bard-esque classes are a possibility but I need to see how much room the core classes take up first.

File: 149a0e4457360da4b114dd8e50da20b7.jpg (107KB, 800x566px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 800x566px

>>51425091
There have been some great suggestions, but I think this is closest to what I've been doing. I found a system that I was going to modify for my purposes and decided on three base stats that I considered essential. I'll start assigning those values and see if on the most basic level it is fun and logical to smack each other around with what I have. From there I have a few things that I want to add and others that I'm unsure of so I'll just keep building from what I have.

>>51425091
Not that guy, but are racing board games the only examples we have which highlight the importance of maneuvers and positioning? Been flirting with non-numerical combat (feel it focuses attention on gaming the system, putting the players mind in a state opposite of where a commander's would be) and they are all I've found.
Wings/Sails of Glory as well, but haven't really engaged with them.

Which systems base their skillchecks on cards? I know malifaux (a wargame) does someho, or at least I think it does. But are there pnp rules that do this or some other wargames?

>>51430861
Check Through the Breach, it's in the same setting as Malifaux and uses cards too.

>>51430149
Maybe I get you wrong, but basically every wargame has some kind of maneuvering and positioning. Obviously dogfight games like wog/x-wing or any naval/fleet-scale-scifi focus really hard on it, but even in the most basic ones like AoS it matters. I mean chess is nothing but maneuvers and positioning.

>>51430861
Only game I know of that uses cards is Savage Worlds for initiative.

However, I read an article that mentioned that prisoners who play tabletops use cards in lieu of dice because dice are banned so it's their only means of simulating random chance.

>>51430957
>AoS it matters
Arguably. But yeah, the basic idea of using physical pieces make placing and distance important. The good games take into account of things like flanking into account.

>>51427926
I was going to post a whole long list, fucked it up, and never finished. (ha)

The Whizzard and Bard don't need to be classes, but they can be included for fleshing out the setting

>>51430957
I think there is a fundamental difference between real world military maneuvers and positioning/movement seen in most wargames on the market today. Players seem forced to primarily concern themselves with the opponents abstracted stat values and abilities, not traditional maneuvers.
In 40k, no amount of maneuvering would save you from Tau and Daemons in 6th, or Necrons and GK in 5th, or Eldar in 2nd, etc. Warcasters in WMH inherently increases the value of positioning, but the ignores, buffs, and casts of mkII Cryx occupies the opponents mind all game for similar reasons.
My intent is to create a system which doesn't use abstracted stat values for determining success and gives more importance to maneuvers. That is why I'm trying to find more games like Formula D, Thunder Alley, Wings/Sails of Glory. Chess/Go may be too abstracted even if thematically similar to what I'm pursuing.

>>51433410
Well sometimes you fight fire with fire. Take abstract stats, then add unit interactivity stats that modify units' stats based on their positioning related to the terrain, ally units, enemy units, the status of objectives and enviromental modifiers.

You may realize what this ammount of complexity is left to computer games, or be the hero wargaming deserves.

>>51433806
I'm a little slow, not sure what fire with fire refers to in this context.
Your example is one of many examples why I'm avoiding stats for determining success. I want players to face the same dilemmas and think in the same terms as a battlefield commander, so that even a recounting of a game would be narrative in nature. None of this boost pow 7 for the win.

not

>>51433220
I'm sure there will be bards of some sort, it's hard to imagine a setting that has no use for entertainment. The Whizzard would likely be a unique character, much like the Jizzard currently is. Then again I'm considering making Jizzard the base spellcaster class with the specializations being Cummoner and Bonermancer. It's still up in the air though, I'm also considering things like Whorecerer, Magicunt, Divinards, Whorelock/Warcock, Boobsayer, and Occultaint.

design threads seem to slow at night

>>51436972
I'm guessing not a lot of Aussie game designers.

>>51434703
No matter what you do, you'll need to abstract some things. Stats and attributes themselves are abstractions of the capabilities of whatever the stats/attributes represent. You're going to need to think hard about how you want players to accomplish goals. Battlefield command can easily have many situations represented by abstractions. Hunger, Fatigue, Morale, Positioning, Training, etc can all modify a single abstract "combat effectiveness" stat, and I'd be willing to bet that real commanders use a similar formula to determine odds of success of real missions.

early morning bump

>>51440700
Or as we call it in China, late evening.

>>51434703
I think >>51433806 example is that you could add positioning to an existing system, to modify stats. You're not really getting rid of stats, but you're not making positioning the sole factor for victory.
Chess, Checkers, Go, only use positioning.
Many games use stats, with some positioning.
I guess making positioning a vital element and removing dice rolls would be close to traditional wargames? (I'm sorry I never played real ones, so I'm not positive here).

But to go back to your original question >>51430149 it seems to me you would be looking at really classic stuff, here. Like Go and Chess, Tic-Tac-Toe, stuff like that.
Off the top of my head, I recall Guilds of Cadwallon having something in that spirit, with possession of a given cell being calculated by looking at tokens in the cell and adding support from tokens in nearby cells.
A game like 8 Minute Empire Legends similarly has a very simple system to determine the owner of an area (count the tokens).
So I'm starting to wonder if that would fit your question?

Might as well pose a question while I bump.

How should large numbers/power differences be handled in games? How do you avoid going the way of the classic DBZ RPG with either modifiers so high that rolling dice is meaningless or dice pools so large that rolling all of them becomes excessive?

>>51443757
My system has multiple variables to the roll. Roll 2+A number of B sided dice, keep 2+C, add D. So scaling gets distributed finely and never really hits rediculous numbers. They have huge dice? Wait for them to roll low and strike with your nearly-always-max result due to a large pool. Hes a medium sized guy with decent muscle tone but is hitting like a truck? Must have some supernatural trait letting him keep extra dice, figure out how to negate it or get fucked. So on so forth. Types of power feel and function differently is the takeaway I guess, and the responses require more thought than just "his numbers are too big!"

>>51423186
>robusting your fellow players
Yes please!

>>51443757
Both of my more fleshed out projects use bounded accuracy that makes bonuses just about equal to the dice roll. In all of my games, I balance around average/expected values, and max vs min values to see if everything works smoothly.

I'm not really a fan of quadratic powerlevel increases, even if everything uses the same formula. I like 5e for its own bounded accuracy, and even vidya like Guild Wars 2 will downscale you to keep earlier game areas moderately relevant.

File: Savant Homebrew + Spells.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

Comments for my Homebrew class for 5e?

If you think it reeks of Sorcerer, it's because I mishmashed Sorcerer and Warlock together with custom archetypes, because I just felt Sorcerers didn't differ enough from Wizards.

I "slapped it together", meaning I worked somewhere around 10-15 hours on it. Most of the time I was just designing the Conduit and especially the Shapeshifter archetype.

>>51358073
>Stats are as follows:
Too long. Trim to four.

>>51449172
why?

>>51451667
Because you can make a game plenty granular with 4. With 8 it's just pointless. See also: White Wolf games.

>>51451755
The number alone means nothing. DnD has 6 attributes, Palladium has 8, Storyteller has 9, and Harnmaster has 11-13. Redesigning a system purely because of some numbers is what's pointless.

>>51449172
If the game is skill-less, having more attributes is better than having too few. The granularity of just four attributes makes it too easy to max them out out to a ridiculous level. I know this from experience. I had a system with only 5 attributes, but I upped it to 7 because I counted that it would take the players only 20 play sessions or so to become godlike statistically.

>>51448961
What is the idea behind forcing conversion of slots to motes at the first short rest? That'll make players really want to use their slots and motes as quickly as possible, or they'll waste spells (since you can't have more motes than your maximum, and it costs more motes to cast a spell than you get from converting a slot of the same level to motes).

The conversion rate of slots to motes is a bit stingy. The advantage of motes over slots is that you can cast more spells of lower levels instead of fewer high level spells, but a 4-level slot will only get you two 1-level spells. You'll also use motes for metamagic and other abilities of course, but since you have to convert all slots on the first short rest, you'll spend the rest of the day casting only with motes.

Then there's that huge jump in power between levels 8 and 9 where your slots go from being worth 8 motes to 15 motes.

Seems to me you could get rid of slots entirely and only use motes.

1/2

>>51454837
2/2

Shapeshifting: Maybe let the player switch out one transformation every time they level up? If you pick a transformation that doesn't work as well as you hoped, it's no fun to be stuck with it for four levels.

Wild Magic: Controlled Chaos seems real underpowered compared to the awesome stuff the other focuses get at level 14, considering it only happens in 1 out of 20 spellcastings.

Conduit: Magical Charge is high risk, high reward. You can do silly amounts of damage with every hit, but if you miss then you are burning lots of motes for no effect. Cost might be too high considering you are spending one casting to get the spell into the weapon, then half a casting every turn to keep it in. But if you multiclass with a fighter or something and do multiple attacks per turn... damn.

Spell Deflection seems super strong if you're fighting spellcasters. Maybe put a once-per-short-rest restriction on it? Also, you should clarify how it works with cantrips, do you need to spend 0 or 1 mote to deflect a cantrip?

Finally, I don't quite understand the overall theme of the class. That's not a huge issue, but it feels like three focuses that don't have a lot to do with each other except they use the same spellcasting system.

Wew that's a lot of criticism. But the basic idea, using motes a lot, is good. My number one piece of advice would be to go all the way and remove slots entirely.

>>51454470
Even that isn't necessarily the case if you can increase/decrease stats with a zero-sum rule.

Moral of the story is there's lots of inter-linking factors that will determine the worth of something.

>>51454837
>What is the idea behind forcing conversion of slots to motes at the first short rest? That'll make players really want to use their slots and motes as quickly as possible, or they'll waste spells (since you can't have more motes than your maximum, and it costs more motes to cast a spell than you get from converting a slot of the same level to motes).
The idea is that you would do it anyway, because you get the slots back during the short rest. I would elaborate more... but
>Seems to me you could get rid of slots entirely and only use motes.
That's not a bad idea, to be honest. I will try that to the next iteration.
>>51454856
>
Shapeshifting: Maybe let the player switch out one transformation every time they level up? If you pick a transformation that doesn't work as well as you hoped, it's no fun to be stuck with it for four levels.
Hmm, true. That would also encourage the shapeshifters to try something new every now and then and not punish them for, well, shapeshifting.

>Wild Magic: Controlled Chaos seems real underpowered compared to the awesome stuff the other focuses get at level 14, considering it only happens in 1 out of 20 spellcastings.
That's true. That was pretty weak even with the original sorcerer, even more so here. I changed the Wild Magic the least, so that kind of stuck. Will see what I can do. I was thinking of something like automatically activating the Wild Magic table, and you only roll the 1s die, 10s die is player's choice.

>
Conduit: Magical Charge is high risk, high reward. You can do silly amounts of damage with every hit, but if you miss then you are burning lots of motes for no effect. Cost might be too high considering you are spending one casting to get the spell into the weapon, then half a casting every turn to keep it in. But if you multiclass with a fighter or something and do multiple attacks per turn... damn.

I was actually thinking of giving Conduits a second attack. Crazy for multiclassing, though.

Cont.

>>51455087
Shucks those quotes fucked themselves up. Whatever.

>Spell Deflection seems super strong if you're fighting spellcasters. Maybe put a once-per-short-rest restriction on it? Also, you should clarify how it works with cantrips, do you need to spend 0 or 1 mote to deflect a cantrip?

(Yeah, cantrips count as 1, adding that). Once per short rest might be good, puts the player on the spot on when to or when not to use it.

>Finally, I don't quite understand the overall theme of the class. That's not a huge issue, but it feels like three focuses that don't have a lot to do with each other except they use the same spellcasting system.

That is a good point. The three archetypes are very different from each other, but in a way... The class' name is SAVANT. It is supposed to be an extremely flexible definition. The road to wizardry is to study your ass out, the road to being a savant? There is no road, you are born a Savant.

>Wew that's a lot of criticism. But the basic idea, using motes a lot, is good. My number one piece of advice would be to go all the way and remove slots entirely.

Thanks a lot! I'll try to see how I could implement a system that uses motes entirely. Of course, that would need some more balancing due to the costs would all change.

Now, last thing...

I just think that if I make it a mote-based economy, I can make Wild Magic casters REAL WILD. Like, reducing the amount of motes they need to cast spells wild. That would probably balance them a little?

>>51454856
Actually, more on the Conduit.

What if Conduit got, instead of spell absorption (even though I love that), something that they can use to burn motes to attack multiple times in a single turn? Or would it be viable to have one additional Focus Feature at level 10, or would it be too unfair toward other classes?

>>51455166
Wild Magic is difficult since the surge only happens 1 in 20 times. And it's not strictly a penalty since a lot of the results are harmless or beneficial.

If you want to go absolute madman then maybe something that lets you cast a spell for cheap, but you have to roll randomly to see what spell you are actually casting?

>>51455396
Extra attack is a real strong feature on its own, and with Magical Charge even more so. You'd have to put a heavy cost or restriction on it. An extra focus feature would be over the top I think, it feels like Conduit is already the most powerful focus.

>>51455519
What if the wild magic path lets the character choose how wild the magic they cast is? Like, they can choose how many motes to expend on it, but the less motes you expend, the more wild the magic will be and the possibility of misfire raises? And yeah, the Wild Surge is actually quite tame, coming to effect only 1/20 times, and for something to build a class archetype on, that's pretty inconsequential.

The 10th level feature would be for all of them, but that's probably scrapped by now anyway. I'm just trying to think of a way to sneak a second attack for Conduits (with conditions, of course) without making it sickeningly OP. Because at it's current, getting your weapon damage bonus for an attack that might not even hit (it does depend an awful lot on hitting) would probably not be enough of a reason to come rushing from the backlines.

Here's a link to the version that updates itself, don't need to make PDF:s at every turn.

http://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/rymjKpUjvx

>>51453667
Wrong.

>>51454470
Bad design.

>>51454882
Nope, less is always more.

>>51454470
>>51455847
Hell yeah it was bad design. Not ONLY did I increase the amount of stats (to add more granularity and choice, so less rolls are under the same stat), but I also remade my experience system in a way that engages the players but makes the pace much slower.

Your post is awfully vague. You don't have any kind of objective high ground here, you're just coming off as awfully smug and obnoxious.

You do realize that? That we're on an anonymous image board?

>>51455519
I changed the way Wild Magic Focus works fundamentally. They can reduce the amount of spell motes they use to cast a spell, down to 0. They can cast spells for days.

But, there's a catch. For each mote they reduce from the spellcasting, the chance of misfire and Wild magic surge becomes larger, where if you cast a 5th level spell for free, you have 50% chance of misfiring the spell, and 50% chance of activating Wild Magic Surge. Also, I changed the way controlled chaos works, it can now turn one misfire into a wild magic surge per short rest.

Probably hinges on the side of insane, but taking into account that they have 50% chance of misfiring, it's very much about the risk and reward. No motes to cast? No problem.

>>51359256
>Three months later and I'm still looking for a good system for Area Attacks. Does anybody have any ideas or suggestions for systems that dealt really well with this? It needs to work with your "regular" turn based IGOUGO combat structure, so any clever, but really abstract solutions for games that resolve combat completely differently probably won't work.

Er...some context would be helpful?
Are you working on an RPG or a Wargame? Do you use minis or something else?
Cause the easiest thing is just to use a template to determine what you hit, if you are using some kind of visual aid.

>>51456865
Forgot to mention that it was for an RPG. I don't like nailing RPGs to battle maps, much less of a specific scale, so templates aren't really an option. I'm trying to design this as a game that can be played with and without miniatures and battlemaps, with those things being more of a visual aide that can be used to represent the battlefield, rather than a fixed requirement.
My biggest problem is that I don't want area attacks to be automatic hits, but writing them to be satisfying to both the attacker and the defender AND actually functional during play has been challenging so far.

The current system works along the lines of
>D6 Dicepool Success Count System
>Attacker tries to hit a certain spot with the rocket/grenade/whatever with a difficult specified by the DM
>If he tries to shoot at someone directly, they get the usual defense roll against the attack
>If you miss, the shot scatters, if you hit it goes where you want
>You roll 2d6 for everyone caught in the blast, they roll dodge and subtract their successes.
>You inflict damage as Weapon Damage times remaining successes

It's workable, stable and resolves comparatively quickly, but I'm not happy with it.

>>51458015
I'm a wargamer at heart, so I might be biased here, but I think without a visual aid of some kind you'll always run into problems like determining who was hit.
> I'm trying to design this as a game that can be played with and without miniatures and battlemaps
Having a visual reference circumvents a lot of the issues that arise with determining where people stand and how big objects are that might give cover etc.
>My biggest problem is that I don't want area attacks to be automatic hits
An area attack that is an automatic hit would only be a problem with the defender doesn't get to save against it.
Miraculously doging the fire in a midst of an explosion is more questionable from a logical pov, than somebody being armored well enough to ignore it.

I might be missing to context to understand the rules properly but I have a hard time understanding how you are determining who gets caught in the are effect at all if it scatters.
That is a logical you'll have to resolve unless you are doing a dungeon crawler or something like that where everybody is assumed to be close together or you'll have to leave it up to the DM's discretion.

I ties into how you'd track movement and positioning in general, if you don't use battlemaps or the like at all though.

File: gitgudintensifies.gif (82KB, 217x215px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 217x215px

>>51455976
>Not ONLY did I increase the amount of stats (to add more granularity and choice, so less rolls are under the same stat)
Amateur.

>Your post is awfully vague.
No it's entirely clear. You're bad and should feel bad.

>You don't have any kind of objective high ground here, you're just coming off as awfully smug and obnoxious.
Says the namefag.

I realize that since you're on /tg/ you probably have only played D&D and GURPS. I get that, I do. But there are a lot of other games out there that were designed after 1980 that have really improved game design in general. You should read some of them.

The reason you want less attributes -- and note that removing attributes is not the same as removing granularity -- is because they serve mostly to distract players from engaging with the narrative. The fewer statistical computations you're making them do, the more into the story they get.

This isn't rocket science -- that's what I do for a living -- but it's very easy to hit the pitfalls of game design, especially when it's babby's first homebrew.

Decrease the attributes and if you find you're not getting the granularity you think you need (hint: you probably don't need it) simply find a multiplier; it can be an arbitrary number or derived from one of the other attributes.

Smug out.

File: Misfortune A5 0.94.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>51458323
Oh my god, you're the smuggest person I've ever met in /gdg/.

Like, have you even seen my game?

Dude, I haven't even touched GURPS ever, and I've only recently gotten to play D&D 5th, with no intention of ever running it because it goes against my design principles.

Also:
>Derived attributes
What kind of a barbarian are you? That wouldn't even work for my game, and it would require more mathematics to work them out than to play the game.

And for the record, PDF related is the game I'm releasing in a couple of months. And my character sheet is an A6, and if I squeeze it, it can fit into credit card -size, which I used in my playtests.

Like, we're on the same boat here, but you seem to be just a really toxic extremist.

Are you, by any chance, real_critique? Because you make me remember things.

>>51458239
My group usually plays with a 20mm square battlemap, but I want the system to be agnostic in regards to that, so you can play it with a bigger grid, hexes, purely drawn or pure theater of mind.
Personally, I prefer having a visual reference to make it easer on the GM to keep track where everyone is, but I like it better if the system doesn't force you to use a certain type of representation.


Every area attack has a certain radius. To simplify it, if you scatter the attack just spreads from there. Anyone caught in the radius saves against it.
Since it's a system that's trying to be more of in the middle between purely cinematic and purely realistic, it's not a problem if there are certain things that stretch verisimilitude. The "dodge" roll represents hitting the ground, twisting away from the brunt of the explosion, shielding yourself or doing something similar to lessen the impact of the AoE attack. Hence why the 2d6 Hits vs Successes (with the success range mostly being 2 to 4 for most people) work kinda well here: You seldom can protect yourself completely, but you can lessen the attack.

>>51458323
>Nope, less is always more.
I tend to agree with your points, but this alone makes me call you a shithead. Most games, especially homebrews, are grossly bloated and desperately need to trim the fat, but fuck you for making an absolute statement.

>>51458806
>Like, have you even seen my game?
I don't have to in order to know it's shit.

>I haven't even touched GURPS ever, and I've only recently gotten to play D&D 5th, with no intention of ever running it because it goes against my design principles.
Uh huh.

>What kind of a barbarian are you?
The viking variety.

>Like, we're on the same boat here, but you seem to be just a really toxic extremist.
You said stupid things, I called you out on it, you try to frame me as an extremist.

>>51459177
>I tend to agree with your points, but this alone makes me call you a shithead. Most games, especially homebrews, are grossly bloated and desperately need to trim the fat, but fuck you for making an absolute statement.
The worst part is it's not even hyperbolic.

Smug out.

>>51459484
>I don't have to in order to know it's shit.
Uh huh. I don't think I've heard any harsh critique toward my game in its current form, most of the people just say it's interesting.

>You said stupid things, I called you out on it, you try to frame me as an extremist.
Allright, I'll admit, saying extremist was a little harsh. But it seems to me you're toxic and stubborn aplenty.

Also, the most important question here: Where's your game bub? Do you come to /gdg/ to just talk smack of other people and their ideas? Or do you consider other people so beneath yourself that they couldn't hold the sight of your perfect game?

Or are you one of those who have found the "perfect game", and anything that doesn't follow the same principles is inherently shit?

What's your endgame, bub?

>>51459641
>most of the people just say it's interesting.
Interesting is the polite way to say bad.

>But it seems to me you're toxic and stubborn aplenty.
I've never claimed not to be a jerk.

>Also, the most important question here: Where's your game bub?
You can buy it on Drivethru. Small press. Near the bottom of the top 100. I am fiddling with a new one at the moment. You'll probably cry, though, because it's only got 3 attributes.

>Do you come to /gdg/ to just talk smack of other people and their ideas?
Mostly. You never know when shitting on someone's bad idea could produce a great result and a game worth playing.

>Or are you one of those who have found the "perfect game", and anything that doesn't follow the same principles is inherently shit?
Heavens to Murgatroyd no. But I have found that there are no mechanically good heavy crunch games and that each factor added to a game is just four new ways for it to turn out badly.

Less is more.

>What's your endgame, bub?
Same as every anon. To shit on namefags until they disappear.

File: 1369598980190.jpg (16KB, 250x314px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 250x314px

>>51460105
Ohoho, aren't you clever. Boy, your shitty attitude, ridiculous claims, and complete lack of understanding game design sure showed us!

I'm trying to make a chuuni weeaboo wuxia powerlevel fightan magic game.
How do I grind out a point buy system?
Is it worth the effort, or should I just go class based ( for what I want to do, this is really bad )
Point buy:
Pros
-Can do what I want it to do
-My target audience will love it
Cons
-Math intensive. And I'm not good at math.
-My target audience probably isn't going to even notice my game
-The people I can sucker into playing it probably won't feel like going through the trouble of character creation

Class system:
Pros
-Easier on the math
-Might actually be able to play it for a session or two
Cons
-Misses the point of what the system is about

As far as I see it, if I you can't make Coldsteel, XxSasukexX or Goku in my system there is no point in even making it on the other hand point buy and balancing it is really troubling.

>>51460105
>You can buy it on Drivethru. Small press. Near the bottom of the top 100. I am fiddling with a new one at the moment. You'll probably cry, though, because it's only got 3 attributes.
instead of just being vague why don't you actually try posting it.

>>51460105
>Interesting is the polite way to say bad
People go OUT OF THEIR WAY to say that. They say it on anonymous image boards when I post it randomly

You do know that most people who namefag on /gdg/ mostly do it that people who have questions can find you later?

>You can buy it on Drivethru. Small press. Near the bottom of the top 100. I am fiddling with a new one at the moment. You'll probably cry, though, because it's only got 3 attributes.
Really, that's great! And I mean that sincerely. And it's not like I have problem with 3 attributes, games that have mechanics to support as few as 3 attributes should, by all means, only have 3 attributes. But my game really doesn't, because of semantics, you know? Making characters from dramatic roleplaying with only 3 negative statistics (I can't really divide them to the classic 3 because of that "twist") doesn't really work.

Like. Let me give you an example, you don't need to read my game. The seven stats in my game are:

Clumsy, Frail, Awkward, Naive, Dull, Meek and Ordinary.

What of these stats could you remove willy-nilly? Can you even tell which were the original 5? The problem that may arise when a game has only 3 attributes is that the other parts of the game must have enough flexibility to not make one stat insanely more valuable than other. And do note, these 7 are the only numerical values that matter in my game, along with your amount of Despair and Strain, which are basically just damage you have taken and matter only if you roll under that number.

>Heavens to Murgatroyd no. But I have found that there are no mechanically good heavy crunch games and that each factor added to a game is just four new ways for it to turn out badly.
I agree. And I don't believe my game has any extra baggage as of now.

>Mostly. You never know when shitting on someone's bad idea could produce a great result and a game worth playing.
I know it's you, real_critique.

>>51460563
Not him, but: Meek shares some characteristics with Frail. Dull with Ordinary and to a lesser extend Clumsy with Awkward.
That said, seems like an interesting array of attributes.

>>51460652
You're not wrong in your assumptions, but the many-faceted connotations of the words (because they are negative characteristics) require me to kind of "define" the words more exactly than use their entire, full meaning (much like many games kind of double Dexterity as Agility). Although, explaining things well enough, I could allow stats to be cross-used (doing a thing that would need Awkward with Clumsy, for example)

Frail means strictly physical frailty. Meek, on the other hand, means mental frailty.

Dull means how dumb you are, obviously, where as Ordinary is actually a very literal characteristic connected to the supernatural. A socially weird character would probably just have a higher awkward score or a disadvantage for being weird, depending on the type of weirdness.

Clumsy and Awkward are a hard one though, because while Clumsy is the physical trait and Awkward the social trait, they are (in my mind) very closely related. But I could actually see many of those "clumsy-clumsy" things actually keyed to Awkward due to it also being a mental state.

File: DANMAKU BOUNDED FIELD MANUAL (HORIZONTAL).pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

This is the first time I post here and I made a little something that it may interest you. During the last month I've been designing a card game based on the Touhou series. It's a simple and fast-paced game for two players basically inspired by Magic.

Players play three different types of cards, shoot cards behave like creatures, focus cards stay in play like enchantments, and move cards have one time effects like instants. Aside from the common mechanics, the game uses a duel system that works as rock-paper-scissors that allows players to interrupt the opponent as if most cards in their hands were counters. Players spend cards from their hands as resources to pay costs instead of waiting to draw land cards like in Magic. Game cards have no rarity, but they have a swarm value instead that serve as a handicap and forces the player to add worthless cards to the deck. The rest of the rules are included in the manual

Do you mind taking a look? It's less than two pages long. I intend to freely distribute the game as PnP once is finished, but I need to know if the rules make any sense first...

>>51460563
>People go OUT OF THEIR WAY to say that.
People only put the extra effort in when they hate or dislike something. I can link studies if you don't believe me.

>Clumsy, Frail, Awkward, Naive, Dull, Meek and Ordinary.

>I used a thesaurus!
Ok. But you used it poorly. Clumsy and Awkward are the same thing from a simulation perspective. Dull and Ordinary are the same thing. Congratulations, you now have five attributes.

Unless, oh my god, are you doing social combat? Bwahahahaha.

>I know it's you, real_critique.
I am not your bete noir and never could be, because I am not a namefag and you are.

>>51460799
Oh shit justification of bad decisions. Please, continue.

File: 1424131409030.png (38KB, 597x663px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 597x663px

>>51461324
Please stop. I know you're not actually here to critique or discuss game design otherwise you'd have a lot more detail and a lot less attitude. I get you're deliberately being inflammatory to piss him off for fun and he's falling right for the bait, but c'mon, there's better avenues.

Why don't you go to /v/ and post a "now that the dust has settled" thread? Or go to /pol/ and post about anything slightly liberal. That'll get way more people angry. Just let us autistically make games no one will ever play in peace.

>>51460423
The way I see it you're going to spend more time making the game than people will spend playing it. Just do what you think is fun. If you'll enjoy designing a point buy system then go nuts! A compromise could be to later create archetypes of prestatted characters so new players won't have to go through the whole character creation process.

>>51455847
... Whatever.

Allright, let me pose you a question. You can only take one attribute out of clumsy and awkward (Hell, if you give me a better word, use that, my stats are highly reductible), and say you can use it in both cases:

>You are to confess your love
>You are to climb up this steep wall

Clumsy would be more applicable to both, but a character can be physically agile but socially clumsy at the same time.

And about Dull and Ordinary:

You are the conduit of greatest superpower of all, you are by no means Ordinary. But you're also dumb as fuck. How to solve this?

>Unless, oh my god, are you doing social combat? Bwahahahaha.
Not precisely, the same conflict rules can be used for anything from beating someone up, trying to find a robber who always seems to get away, cake-making contest... And yes, solving a heated social situation.

>I am not your bete noir and never could be, because I am not a namefag and you are.
That's a shame. real_critique gave me actual advice while also being a smug asshole. The only reason I kept talking to you was because I was expecting it might turn the same way. It seems I was wrong.

>>51461564
Don't worry, unless that anon starts spewing beans on actual knowledge, I have no reason to continue this meaningless argument.

Well, I've renamed my attributes to be called something other than attributes, so now I have the best game ever made with 0 attributes.

>>51461735
>You are the conduit of greatest superpower of all, you are by no means Ordinary. But you're also dumb as fuck. How to solve this?
Role-playing?

Do you even know what you're doing?

>Not precisely
Okay, so social combat. Got bad news for you, that's always tricky to get right.

>That's a shame. real_critique gave me actual advice while also being a smug asshole.
Oh was that the Strawman you set up in hopes of burning me down? A shame I've ruined it for you.

>I've got nothing
I know, namefag. I know.

>>51461848
>Well, I've renamed my attributes to be called something other than attributes, so now I have the best game ever made with 0 attributes.
A bold move! But regardless of whether you call them skills, attributes, characteristics, abilities, or whatever have you, they are attributes. They describe the character's capabilities, after all.

>>51461564
>Please stop.
Stop posting? Rude to ask someone to stop posting, anon.

>Just let us autistically make games no one will ever play in peace.
Ending on the truth, eh? Is this meant to be appeasement? But you're not a namefag.

File: 1412654660889.png (113KB, 266x323px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 266x323px

>>51461951
8/10
Your commitment to character is impressive. I'll be sure to copy your style next time I want to derail a thread for fun.

File: notevenmad.jpg (263KB, 700x1069px) Image search: [Google]

263KB, 700x1069px

>>51462169

Its a shame that the most discussion this thread has drumed up is people arguing with a troll.

>>51463479
It happens. Besides, discussion was pretty slow so it's nice we had something to discuss I guess.

Here's a new discussion question: For all those developing a game at what point will you consider your game playable? How much more do you have to do before you're comfortable releasing an Alpha V1 build for /tg/?

>>51463833
> For all those developing a game at what point will you consider your game playable?
Once I have rules to handle most common occurrences and have at least placeholder names and numbers for all of the classes, abilities, and important figures like deities.

>How much more do you have to do before you're comfortable releasing an Alpha V1 build for /tg/?
About three times as much as I've got done, plus putting it all into a pdf. It's going to be a bit, my current classload is a bit of a bear.

>>51463479
people on tge internet will always jump to the opportunity to shitfling and argue
genuine discussion is too much work
also, stop namefagging unless there's a point to it

>For all those developing a game at what point will you consider your game playable?
The moment I've built the ground rules. I try to build the games in a way that you don't actually need all the parts of the game to actually run it. Ironically, this makes interlinking the mechanics easier, because they are not dependent on each other.

>How much more do you have to do before you're comfortable releasing an Alpha V1 build for /tg/?
Have a coherent ruleset that can run at least two types of basic scenarios you could see in the game without too much interference from missing rules. Really vague line, but alpha versions always hinge on a vague spot.

The better way to tell it is just... When it "feels" right.

I have an actual rules question I'm working. Current mechanic is each player rolls a pool of D12, and for each die that rolls a certain score counts as one success, and rolling X+Armor/Power so that it is a 12+ counts as 2 successes. The pool size and score for a success is based on stats.

Right now, most things affect the score needed for the rolls, but I'm thinking of simplifying it to only affect dice pool size. Most of it is simple +/-1-3 modifiers that most don't stack, so it translates well. The only issue I'm having is range modifiers. Right now, ranged attacks get a -1 to dice rolls for ever increment equal to the weapon's range; a model shoots at a model 20" away with a weapon with Range 8, it would suffer -2 to rolls. My problem is a direct translation would make shooting too weak at range; the game is skirmish, so most models will have cover, 1-2 dice versus 4-5 is a bit much, even with 'popping' dice.

One thought I had was decrease range, but up the number of dice ranged gets. The average would end up being a Range of 6-8 and 4 dice, so close range would be strong, average distance would be normal, but it falls away quicker than before. I also don't want it to turn into a shooting gallery, since those changes, plus close combat being risky, could turn games into "sit in cover 8" from each other and shoot". Obviously some things will favor combat, but if it turns into this guy with a big two-handed combat weapon would rather stay back and plink with a pea-shooter, there's a problem.

>>51463833
I like to have an actual game ready. It doesn't have to be complete, but there needs to be enough that I can say "Here, play this" when I post the rules.

>>51464791
>"Stop namefagging"
>In a thread with people working on progressing their projects to a finished state
I know your character is to be retarded, but stop being retarded.

>>51465414
>unless there is a point to it
you attentionwhoring turbofag. Up until now you posted fucking nothing warranting a name.

>>51465485
wew lad

>>51465414
If you're afraid of ranged being too strong up close why don't you instead have there be a default range and then outside of that normal effective range then you start getting penalties. So each weapon has its own range then you have a set increment that applies penalties to all weapons firing beyond that range. So melee fighters won't be putting themselves in progressively more danger the closer they get. It might be less realistic, but I don't think it's sacrificing too much if it makes the game more fun. Assuming I'm understanding your system correctly.

>>51465833
Could do that. Could make it that the first Range doesn't apply a penalty. So for example, a Range 8 gun would go up to 16" before taking a penalty. I could then keep it at the standard 3 dice in the pool.

>>51359615
You're describing Battlestations.

battlestations.info/index.html

So whats a good base mecchanic to use?
I hate roll+ like D&D or Gurs
I like dicepools but want to add a bit of a kick.
So i thought of old 7th Sea & the roll & keep method. Which i really like.
But i want to give nonhuman races statistical differences, without just a shitty +n to something. I kind of like the idea that say an elf could succeed on a 6+ using d10 dex roll, where as a human succeeds on a 7+
Could this work?
I dont know what to do as i dont know how to consolidate all that i want into a clear & simple base mechanic

>>51468392
>But i want to give nonhuman races statistical differences, without just a shitty +n to something. I kind of like the idea that say an elf could succeed on a 6+ using d10 dex roll, where as a human succeeds on a 7+
Isn't that the same as giving the elf a +1 on his dex roll?

>>51468481
Not in the same sense.
Where as a +1 to the dicepool can be replicated by higher skill, impluying natural proficiency, an easier success rate denotes talent. There would arguably be no other way to replicate the advantage

>>51468392
The base mechanic is entirely dependent on the type of game you're trying to run. Read this article from the OP: http://www.diku.dk/~torbenm/Troll/RPGdice.pdf
It goes into detail on different dice roll mechanisms which should help.

And while I get what you're saying here >>51468535 I'm afraid that >>51468481 is still right. If you're using a dice pool then yes having a success on 6+ is different than a +1 because the bonus is to multiple dice, but you implied that you were rolling a single d10 which would have been the exact same as +1. A system of inborn talent or racial ability reducing the number you need to beat and skill increasing the dice pool sounds like a decent system.

>>51468594
Okay i see my mistake. Its late & didnt want to type a shit ton. But basically i was thinking rollinga number of d10s, success value is based on race/whatever, & maybe have somekind of limiting factor to cap the number of dice that can count as successes.

Thanks for the link

>>51463833
All I need is to stat out some test planes and missiles at least. The rest of the planes and special weapons can be done later, but then again, why stop partway?

As for my other projects, one needs either a complete rewrite from memory or my computer being fixed. The other is still mostly in concept phase.

>>51465833
>>51465966
Forgot to mention, the other part of it was still deciding between my sci-fi or fantasy setting for this game. If fantasy, then the current number would be fine, since its basic ballistics, like slings, bows, and javelins.

>>51468392
>>51468535
>>51468716
Still a little confused. What role would the actual stat have in resolution? I'm getting the feeling that it determines pool size?

File: 1485532276029.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

Hi, a few days ago I missed this thread and opened a new one to share a system I'm working on: >>51427526

You can find the character sheet and other documents there, but I'll attach the manual itself here.

The system uses 3 main statistics, each represented by a different type of dice (d4, d6, d8).

Out-of-combat checks use 2d[stat] against a difficulty of 7 or more.

In combat PCs roll all three dices to create a pool of points to use during a round.

If any skill is relevant for combat or a non-combat check, they add +3. In combat you must assign the bonus to a specific stat pool.

Actions in combat are simultaneous, there is no initiative.

Character creation, if you already have a clear concept, takes only a few minutes.

NPCs are super-simplified mechanically and organised around Poker suits and card types (instead of calling them minions, bosses, tanks or w/e).

File: Savant Homebrew w Hotfix.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>51448961
A vastly superior version.

Is shapeshifter's level 6 ability too powerful? Should I actually switch it up with the level 14 one and switch it to regular polymorph, with a less restrictive time limit? Or would that, too, be too powerful for a 6th level feature?

I'm kind of comparing it to Warlock's Sculptor of Flesh Invocation, except this always targets self.

>>51458806
Hey I'm not the idiot you were talking to but I skimmed the PDF and I didn't really understand what the game is about. It says
"Misfortune emphasizes on the negative aspects
of the character to bring tragedy, comedy and triumph to everyday or
not so everyday events."
in the introduction but that's kinda vague. I didn't notice anything that really stood out except the abilities are named "backwards" and you can take possibly lethal damage from all types of failure.

Again, this was just from a skim read but that's what should give you the basic idea, right? I think an example of play would be good to have.

>>51470896
Im still trying to determine the best dicepool mechanic trying to determine in it should just be
[Stat + Skill] like World of Darkness or
[Stat + Skill] keep [Stat] like Legend of the Five Rings/7th Sea or
[Skill] keep [Stat]

>>51472425
I admit, something like an example of play would probably be useful.

>"Misfortune emphasizes on the negative aspects of the character to bring tragedy, comedy and triumph to everyday or not so everyday events."
Yeah, that's kind of vague. True.

Because, the idea in my game is, that the player character's worst enemies are they themselves, and by extension, the players. It's a really character-based game, where basically the only thing that can seriously kill your character is the player's hubris and persistence. The catch is that you need persistence to gain experience (you can only gain it from going into disadvantageous situations, which again, have a greater chance to wreck you), and I've seen that players do pretty much anything if they can get experience out of it.

The most important source of damage is not failures, per se, but pushing, making a failing roll into a successful one. You're going to need pushing to slog through your character's problems and other sticky situations (again, which you have to go through to gain experience). But trying to balance out failing versus taking despair is the most important aspect of the game. It might not be immediately apparent, because I didn't really emphasize it that much (maybe I should), but it is probably the most important aspect of the game.

This all leads to this: It's a game about Misfortune, a game about failing. But the thing is that I'm trying to make failure enjoyable. Your character can't confess their love to their crush, now you can explain how they fuck it up. Or alternatively, you can push and do something dirty to make your confession successful.

>>51472583
You could also take strides from FFG Star Wars:

[The higher] amount of dice, of which [the lower] amount are better dice.
Say, with d6 and d12:
Stat = 2, Skill = 3
Your roll is 1d6 + 2d12. (3 total dice, of which 2 are d12)

Otherwise I would probably suggest L5R style, maybe with d6s instead of d10s though. If they explode like in L5R, then d10s for sure.

Thinking on the subject of attributes, I was just pouring over http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=21479 (link already in OP) in the attribute section. There's a lot of useful information and ideas about the meaning and weight of whatever you yourself are using as character capabilities.

With that in mind, What attributes do you have and why did you choose them/what purpose do they serve within your game?

File: nemesis-system.jpg (4MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 3840x2160px

Hey /gdg/, i know you have some homebrewed nemesis system variants or known books with similar ideas?

>>51474518
Strength
Agility
Reaction
Toughness
Intellect
Wits
Grace
Charm

Or something like that, still hashing it out

>>51474518
My game's seven weaknesses are the attributes, and as before noted, they are:

Clumsy, Frail, Awkward, Naive, Dull, Meek and Ordinary

They serve actually very little purpose in the game as of now, save for Ordinary. If I wanted, I could cut all of them out and just give characters more saving graces, and the game's core would not change almost at all.

Currently they only work on two levels, the player and GM levels. On player level, they are simply the difficulties you must beat to succeed in a task, for the GM, they work inversely, as a number to roll under to see whether an opponent succeeds in a task.

Theoretically I could just put the bar to like 7 and let the character's problems and saving graces do all the work, but I think it would not give as much meaningful choices, and would result in saving grace bloat very quickly.

File: magnify.gif (3MB, 250x140px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 250x140px

>>51477064
>They serve actually very little purpose in the game as of now
You get trolled all day and then you drop this.

Stop fucking namefagging.

>>51477784
I actually realized that only yesterday. Maybe something good came from that shitstorm, after all. And I namefagged because I don't think anyone has any doubts about who I am when they see that array of stats. But one could also say that as a reason not to namefag.

The weaknesses serve most as a buffer to slow down character progression. Otherwise character progression would work on a very freeform-y word-description basis, and suddenly everyone could be dashing, strong, agile and perfect after a couple of play sessions. They also serve a purpose to reduce redundant saving graces or problems, such as strong, charismatic, dumb, ugly or fast. Mostly because those character traits rarely change at all, which is not supposed to be the case with problems, at the very least, and to a lesser extent with saving graces.

That is, unless I want to replace weaknesses with character traits. Hell, Misfortune would become even more thinly-veiled storygame after that. No crunch, AT ALL. Three numbers on your character sheet, two of which are basically damage types and one of which is a threshold after of which you start dying.

>>51478081
Honestly, I hope more people would namefag, just to piss that guy off. This is the first time I've seen someone actually care about it in a year. Its like seeing someone paying at the grocery store with a check, you think "Wow, people still do that?"

As for the characteristics, if what you were saying in >>51477064 is true, then I'd say cut them. If you can achieve the same effect without the clutter of stats rarely used, trimming the fat is always good. Personally, I'd try to see if I can work them in better into the system before cutting them out.

>>51476269
Actually scratch this. Instead go with

Strength
Agility
Reflexes
Toughness
Intellect
Wits
Awareness
Resolve

That gives you a "Power", "Finesse", "Speed", & "Resistance" trait for physical & mental abilities.

If you must include social as a spectrum
Charisma
Cunning (or trade terms for wits)
Charm
Grace

File: PRAISING INTENSIFIES.gif (41KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 200x200px

>>51474518
Wow, it's been a real shitstorm in here hasn't it?
Well, as of right now my attribute's are

>The Layman - Clarity of thought and mind
>The Minstrel - Appeal to others and initial impressions
>The Scholar - General learned knowledge; book smarts
>The Thief - Reaction time and physical dexterity
>The Worker - Physical strength, endurance, and durability

There is technically a sixth one called the Open, which serves as a way for GM's to add a stat to better the theme of their game.

I made them the way they are to be fairly vague, yet defined. If you want to building something, you could make an argument for Worker or Scholar for example, but dodging will always be a Thief related ability.

They also function as health, because I like spiral down.

Been considering changing Minstrel into something else.

Something to represent a Force of Character and personality, not strictly charisma, but something tangible about a character that when they walk into a room or start talking you definitely know "oh shit, it's them"

>>51479318
The Idol, maybe?

>>51479318
The commander, maybe? Or is that too authoritative?

>>51479318
Which archetype covers wilderness skills & abilities? Say tracking?
To cover the minstrel with something else... the Icon, the "King" or the Champion, the Marshal

Say that you would have a game with basic mental attributes: One for book-smarts (let's call it Intelligence) and one for Street-smarts (Let's go with Cunning). How would you go about dividing skills between them? I really like the thematic divide, but it seems like "Cunning" gets the social skills and "Intelligence" gets everything else.

>>51479862
You divide them with a razor-sharp wit

File: Skooma Lion.jpg (472KB, 1384x1491px) Image search: [Google]

472KB, 1384x1491px

>>51479812
Wilderness Skills and Abilities would probably fall into an Open Persona of some sort. My plan is to keep the main five as generic as possible so the Open Persona can be the more niche one.

I'm leaning toward Icon or the Idol (as proposed by >>51479701) personally i'll run it by some of my players on what they think and go from there.
Thank you guys

>>51479318
>>51479701
I dig The Idol. It carries a lot of weight in its meaning.

File: 5085f5588e6ce28456a513976059d9b8.jpg (317KB, 700x700px) Image search: [Google]

317KB, 700x700px

>>51474518
For my Digimon game the players make both a human and a digimon so I'm using two different systems for each. I'm still in early design stages so please feel free to critique.

Humans don't have any real attributes because the way I see it you're going to play normal kids so differences in strength and intelligence are really going to be negligible. You're kids, not powerful heroes and you're not doing any crazy adventuring stuff so traditional stats and skills don't have much of a place. I'm running it really rules light so instead you list 2 things you're good at, and optionally one thing you're bad at which grants you an extra thing you're good at. Whenever you want to do something you roll a d6 against a target number set by the GM with a reroll granted if the GM believes a thing you're good or bad at applies which gives you a reroll with you taking the higher or lower result respectively.

Digimon actually have measured attributes because they're the ones who'll be engaging in combat.
Attack
Defense
Speed
They're all measured in dots for now (ripping off WoD until I can think of something more thematic) rolling a pool equal to dots measuring successes by the number of dice that roll over a set number. Roll ATK vs SPD then the attack's damage vs DEF. They are only combat skills and like humans the digimon use the same d6 system if they need to do something out of combat.

>>51474518
Since I'm doing an Ace Combat style game, I feel like the players can have complete control over their pilots. I didn't feel the need to include attributes or stats for the pilots themselves, so only the aircraft are represented mechanically. Stats range from 1-10 which give me the benefits of bounded accuracy and allows me to easily stat out aircraft (whenever I get around to it).

Plane stats are:
Price - Technically an attribute, Money is both money and xp; the more money you have the more capable you can be. Money buys Aircraft, Aircraft modifications, special weapons, repairs, etc.
Speed - Both acceleration and top speed. Each point of Speed correlates to around 300mph (each grid cube is roughly 1/2 mile^3)
Mobility - Weapon evasion and maximum turn radius. Its main function is abstracted weapon evasion, but in certain cases having a low mobility/high speed will affect how tightly you can turn.
Stability - Recently became more important, its used to recover from a Stall. There are speed penalties for flying at high altitudes, and low speeds help turn radius, so there's plenty of opportunity to start dropping out of the sky.
Defense - Damage Reduction. It takes 1-4 missiles to down a plane and represents the difference to flying tin cans like the MiG-21 and hardy cannons with wings like the A-10.
A2A/A2G - Mechanically they're the accuracy stats for airborne and ground/sea targets. These stats create the target number that Mobility is rolled against. They represent the internal computer (weapon lock) capabilities of the aircraft.

I feel like these are good, open representations of aircraft attributes. They cover most event cases that you might run into while playing an Ace Combat-like game. Pilots are for freeform RP, Planes and combat are for the mechanical game.

>>51474518
I'm starting to suffer stat bloat. I was trying to keep it simple, but changing mechanics ended up adding more to it. I think I'm up to 8 standard in each profile, and 4 more on weapons.

>>51479132
To be honest, that might be something I would implement further down the line, because the system is actually still balanced around them, and it works.

Like, when I changed static modifiers to advantage and disadvantage dice, I made the conscious choice to make them nullify each other if both apply, making the roll a simple 2d6 against a number on the sheet.

And I've optimized the Weaknesses into the game as of now in a way that ironically any possible change I can think of would actually cause more mental math to be done.

So they do not have a lot of weight in the system, because they are optimized to be as lightweight as possible.

>>51485173
Well, that sounds like they are more integral than you initial said. Just because it a simple system, doesn't mean its not important. Its also why the "less is more" mind set isn't always right.

A good example is the game a Song of Blades and Heroes. They got it set up so everyone uses 2 stats. Everything else is covered in special rules. So there's a lot of special rules bloat, where you could do something like adding a movement stat would cut out a number of them.

>>51474518
I use Mind, Body and Soul. They effect skill caps and the amount of exp you gain to spend on those skills.

>>51485267
Well, the thing is that they don't hold a lot of mechanical significance by themselves (there are no derivative attributes, they are nothing but static numbers that work as TN:s), their role is still very important.

Because at its current, for example, there is no significance, for example, for how many attributes I actually have in the game, I can change that on the fly. But that is kind of a good thing, because if a setting I make requires a special attribute.

They are like images on a web page. They are empty elements, but have a lot of sway about how the web page looks and feels like. And best of all, I can change them at whim. If I come across a setting where I can go with only having 4 attributes, I can.

I have created this weird equilibrium, where they hold the greatest significance in my game while playing, but hold no importance to the rules themselves.

I am become modular, destroyer of worlds.

>>51474518

Strength, Agility, and Mind. They each cover the very basics of combat and skill use.

>>51474518
I have 7 stats.
Attack vs Defense
Magic vs Magic Defense
Accuracy vs Evasion
Speed

I'll probably come up with better names later, but for now they're pretty self explanatory. There are 3 pairs of opposing stats that you can divide into Physical/Magical/Accuracy or Offense/Defense. I really liked the symmetry of the 6 stats and how they interacted with each other. You could become a pure Glass Cannon, or focus on absorbing a lot of damage, or perhaps being very accurate at the expense damage, or maybe high damage with high evasion. However, I didn't want there to only be pure symmetry, so I made Speed a stat that has both Offense and Defense in its applications. The original symmetry still exists, but now there's a new wrench where you cannot max out every aspect of a character. There are enough opportunity costs that even if you were to become "good" at 3 stats, you'd have to be "average" or worse in 4. This ensures distinction between those who specialize and those who generalize.

Characters also have archetypes that determine a starting stat array that determines your stat growth rate as you level. For example, the Warrior archetype will have a high growth rate for Attack, and therefore a good Attack stat by level 20 (max). Conversely, the Warrior will have a poor Magic stat at low and high levels. As you level up, you'll get free points to add into whatever stat you want, so you can use that to increase your strengths (to a point) or to shore up your weaknesses. The Warrior and Mage archetypes are opposites of each other in relation to their Attack and Magic stats, but if you put all your points into the poor stat you could create a gish either way. Because of the rest of the stat array, there would still be differences between a Warrior based gish and a Mage based gish.

I really like the Nature vs Nurture dichotomy, so I had it appear within my stats. Likewise, characters can be customized a variety of ways because of that Nature vs Nurture.

>>51481909
Don't forget the virus/vaccine/whatever in digimon for extra effects.

And for the kid, go archetype. The nerd, the jock, the emo and such. They can modify the digimon a little so even at start the same digimon can be different if tamed by different kids.
This can even be used for personal grow since the kid part of the show is overcoming some weakness.

>>51488106
Hey, good to see someone else who knows his Digimon stuff.

I wasn't sure about how to add virus/vaccine/data typing to the game, but I do plan to allow you to customise your mons with a point system instead of straight level ups so they might work as purchasable traits.

Archetypes aren't a bad idea, but it doesn't feel very "Digimon." How many of the kids in the show really conformed to stereotypes? No emos, no one is really sporty or tough, hell even though Izzy was good with computers but I wouldn't quite style him as a "nerd" or "geek." That's why I think that I need to allow players to create their own characters and decide their own traits, but again they're just average kids so I don't want them to be put into unrealistic roles you see in most cartoons.

I have implemented the idea of them overcoming weaknesses though. Character creation also requires you write out what important relationships you have and 2 or 3 issues that are present in your life. These would be long term problems that require significant time and effort to be resolved. This means that their family is already mapped out before play begins, and pretty much all the kids in the show had some issue with family, while also letting them outline what shit is going on in their life outside of the monster battles.

>>51488336
Agreed. Maybe, if going point buy, tamers start at 0 and can only buy something if they acquire weaknesses for extra points.
I like the vaccine data virus because of rock paper scissors. This way a more diverse team will have all 3. Maybe they unlock different type of attacks or bonuses. Data being more about buff and HP, virus debuff and damage, vaccine healing and defense.

You have a whole universe to work on and infinite ways to approach it. Good luck.

>>51486584
Your damage formula is (4*attack minus 2*defense) +/-20%?

>>51489178
No, actually.

Its currently HP=[W]+Atk-DR until something tells me otherwise.

>>51486584
>>51490765
Which reminds me, I forgot to mention the other specifics of what these stats do (don't forget the names are only placeholders, so they'll probably sound a little dissonant).
Attack - Determines how many actions (other than movement) you can take in combat (Min 1 Max 5). Also determines weapon complexity/amount and increases physical damage.
Defense - Determines HP and complexity/amount of armor (which counts as DR) you can wear.
Magic - Determines MP pool (which translates to complexity of spells) and spells known.
Magic Defense - Increases healing and reduces magic damage
Accuracy and Evasion - Opposed rolls that determine a Miss, Glance (50%), Hit, or Crit (x2) based on degrees of success. AoE effects slightly circumvent the need for Accuracy and Evasion at the cost of dealing far less damage.
Speed - Determines movement speed and adds a bonus to AoO rolls.

The stats can interact in interesting ways. For example, unless Mages invest in Attack, They'll only be able to cast one strong spell a turn, but any kind of gish will could cast multiple weaker spells, since the MP pool is for the entire round (and replenishes each round). Defense allows you to double up on physical resistance by increasing both HP and DR, but without Magic Defense you're very vulnerable to magic. With high Magic Defense but low Defense, you're vulnerable to physical damage, but you can get out of damage thresholds easier. You could make a character that focuses on only Defense, Magic Defense, and Evasion, but you'll need to sacrifice all offensive stats and movement speed (making you vulnerable to lingering AoE) to do so, so there are disadvantages to min-maxing any one direction.

There's some more design concepts I'll need to play with, but all my work is on a hard drive I can't access anymore, so I'm doing the best I can from memory.

>>51490765
It's because your stats are the same as RPG Maker ones. Was a joke.