RolePlay onLine RPoL Logo

, welcome to Community Chat

15:31, 28th March 2024 (GMT+0)

An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

Posted by DarkLightHitomi
DarkLightHitomi
member, 1471 posts
Sun 17 Mar 2019
at 08:38
  • msg #1

An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

I'm putting together a very simple system to fit 1 or 2 pages, yet with expansions that can add greater detail to certain areas of the rules. For example, the core conflict resolution system works for any kind of conflict, whether combat, diplomacy, or challenges of skill, but one expansion adds a combat system of greater detail similar to d20/gurps/sw/etc.

I haven't gotten any interest in trying the system, but I thought I'd see if anyone was interested in discussing the concepts I'm going for, the general design, and what might gain interest vs what makes players turn away.

It's all on paper right now, and I'm in the process of typing stuff up, which takes a while.

The basic check is to roll 2-5 dice each representing an attribute, skill, or other stat, and total them for a single value, high is good, meet or beat a target value and you succeed. This has an interesting way of being a flat-topped bell-curve that gets more consistent and better as a character goes up in skill.

Skill based but with power as a stat, so you can raise power often to mimic DnD from vl 1 to lvl 20, or keep it low so characters get skillful while staying in the realm of real world people, or even starting high for superheroes who have great power but must learn to harness it.

I'm working on the initial write-up, but I figured I get some feedback on these basics and perhaps discover questions to address in the write-up. Then when I get it all digitized I can c&p it over here somewhere.
RosstoFalstaff
member, 164 posts
Sun 17 Mar 2019
at 13:07
  • msg #2

An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

Okay what's it designed to simulate? Is there a specific genre or subject it's aiming at?
DarkLightHitomi
member, 1472 posts
Sun 17 Mar 2019
at 20:10
  • msg #3

An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

The design is not about simulating something in the way most systems are "simukating" cinematic action, or pulp fiction, or supers.

There is a distinction between "playing the game" and "playing the rules." The design I'm going for is all about the reasons for using rules when you are not playing the rules.

So, start with a freeform game and the goals of freeform play, namely, the game is a choose-your-own-adventure book with infinite choices, thus the "author" writes each "page" during play based on what choices were made because any choice that could reasonably be made by a character is available.

So, why do I not play freeform? Certain issues crop up, namely communication and issues of trust with the gm. There are two additional reasons for using dice, the tension of risk, and the presence of uncertainty.

Simple "stats" can be used to ease communication, for example, "how strong are you?" is more easily answered with "14 strength on this chart" then a 5-minute discussion of what "very strong" actually means and is actually capable of. More detailed rules can communicate things about the world within the narrative, such as how in d20, common folk get 3d6 for stats informs you of the general capacity of people in d20 narratives. (this part can go wrong in some occasions, like it does in d20, where people routinely think Gandalf is some high level wizard in d20)

I'll detail this further later. I've got to go.
DarkLightHitomi
member, 1473 posts
Sun 17 Mar 2019
at 23:46
  • msg #4

An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

Then there is feelings about the gm. No matter how honest or truly fair a gm is, when a character fails, that generally feels bad, and when the gm simply chose to say you fail just so you don't always succeed, then it generally makes you feel bad about the gm. Feelings that the gm is playing favorites is always a concern, and even when a gm is trying to be fair, it is all too easy to have subconscious favoritism. The exportation of success/failure decisions to dice alleviates this, so instead of it being a person choosing, it becomes chance. A much better emotional outcome for everyone, especially when the player can exert at least some control over the amount of risk being taken (do the costly low risk, or try the high risk. Player choice means there is a self control on the emotional impact of failure.).

Uncertainty is also a very good thing to have. When reading a book for the first time, the reader does not know how things will turn out, and there is a sense of discovery in finding out what the outcome is. Dice add this uncertainty.

Gambling is something nearly everyone likes to some degree. Roll the dice to find out whether you won or lost. It is appealing. Of course, it only works if there is a chance for both victory and defeat.

And lastly, a system helps track options. In the a book about wizards, you do not need to know every last spell the wizard knows, you only need to know which spell the wizards chooses to use. However, when you are making the choice yourself about what spell to use, or what spell to research, or similar, you need to know what your options actually are so can make the kind of informed choice your character is making.

My system is about these things. Communication, tension, uncertainty, and a toolset for the gm to build a library of options for the players to know about what options are available in the campaign setting.
DarkLightHitomi
member, 1474 posts
Sun 17 Mar 2019
at 23:51
  • msg #5

An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

In other games, like chess, it is an exercise in system mastery and player skill. These things are explicitly not goals in my system.

My system is also supposed to be universal, a bit like gurps, except there are several issues I have with gurps, such as how sizes are handled, roll under, a skill check only against character capability rather than capability and task difficulty, poor scaling, etc.
This message was last edited by the user at 23:53, Sun 17 Mar 2019.
icosahedron152
member, 934 posts
Mon 18 Mar 2019
at 03:50
  • msg #6

An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

Hi DLH, I like playing semi-freeform for exactly the reasons you state, and I also like very simple 'indie' rule sets with minimal number-crunching. I've trawled through a good many over the years. The 2-page set you're working on sounds just my type, so I'd be happy to look it over with you.

It's so essential to avoid:

"Bang! you're dead." "No I'm not, you missed."

"My character's strongerer than yours, so there!"

and "Of course my character can leap that chasm."

Freeform works best when there's no PvP. When there is, you really need some rules to avoid a constant turnover of peeved players.
DarkLightHitomi
member, 1475 posts
Mon 18 Mar 2019
at 06:48
  • msg #7

An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

Here is part one, the attributes. Some of them could use better names, and I'm not a very good writer, so it's probably more verbose than it needs to be, and perhaps not verbose enough in some cases.

I'll add Skills and making checks next.
---
A check needs to account for A: Character capability and B: Task difficulty. Thus, characters have "stats" measuring their capabilities, among other traits, and there is a number line to rate how difficult things are. This is an objective number line, how skilled the character is does NOT change what difficulty rating a task has.

A character has Attributes (a measure of fundemental and inherent qualities), Skills (a measure of knowledge, experience, and practice of a specific kind of task), and Features (good or bad aspects of unique or extraordinary abilities and basically any other stat that is generally not possessed but can be gained as a singular ability).

ATTRIBUTES

A character has 3 basic attributes in each of four categories plus two "meta" attributes. They are,

PHYSICAL
Strength, ability to move things around, apply force.
Agility, speed and flexibility.
Hardiness, toughness and recovery.

MENTAL
Intellect, logic and memory
Creativity, problem solving and analysis
Awareness, notice things and pattern recognition

SPIRIT
Energy, how energetic and active one is
Aura, connection to the world/surroundings
Will, Sense of self and spiritual integrity

SOCIAL
Charisma, personal appeal and magnetism
Communication, ability to understand and be understood by others
Individualism, lead vs follow, trendsetter vs conformity, etc.

META
Tier, a character's overall agency in life.
Power, the raw power a character can have.

Attributes have a score and a rank (derived directly from the score). The reason for this is so the score can be descriptive with a finer granularity for non-dice uses and add advancement without growing the impact on dice quite as quickly. Rank is about one quarter the score minus 1, thus a score 1-4 is rank 0, 5-8 is rank 1, 9-12 is rank 2, etc.

For the 12 basic attributes, an average person's stats pretty well follow the 3d6 bell curve, averaging a score of 10.5 and the average rank of 2. In general, a score of 19 is legendary compared to real world humans.

Attribute scores are also for creatures of that size, thus in a game of mice, the average mouse has a strength of 10, just like the average human has a strength of 10.

Tier represents a character's agency in the world. A trap (or jellyfish) is the low end, as it simply triggers a set response, it has a tier of 0, simpler creatures act on instinct and have a Tier of 1, more advanced creatures such as predators do more planning and intiate action and thus have a Tier of 2. Sentient creatures start at a Tier of 3, though sentient creatures can advance their Tier. Advancing Tier however is very difficult. This happens only when a character has reached a breaking point. Something within the character has to change, break, or be let go in order to advance Tier. Characters do not seek to advance Tier, it is a growth of the character when they have faced a challange that is of life altering nature that requires them to risk everything for that one thing they care about above all else.

Power is raw power, as per the name. Power is generally a zero sum game against other characters of the same power save for one thing, higher power amongst all involved generally extends interactions, making conflicts take longer to resolve. Power is best when compared among those of differeing power levels, such as supers having high power among people of low power. For real world humans, power should stay 1-3, maybe up to 5 for the highest humanity has to offer.
icosahedron152
member, 935 posts
Mon 18 Mar 2019
at 16:14
  • msg #8

An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

Verbosity, or lack of it, can be edited in a final draft. It’s not important at this stage.

Having said that, the Meta Attributes are not very clear. Perhaps because they are not stock items like the rest, and so are less easy to grasp.

Do they have the same Score and Rank as the other Attributes? And does Rank equate to Tier?

If so, your average roll will give a Tier of 2 --> predator animal level...

If your average roll gives a Power of 2, that might be in line with your preference.
Aleph Null
member, 17 posts
I have my PhD
In Wumbology
Mon 18 Mar 2019
at 17:00
  • msg #9

An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

So would something with a tier of 4 or 5 be some sort of transcendent or multidimensional being? I'm not sure I fully understand the idea but it's very interesting.
DarkLightHitomi
member, 1476 posts
Mon 18 Mar 2019
at 20:47
  • msg #10

An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

Okay, I'll stop calling "Tier" and "Power" attributes. They are, according to how I defined attributes, but they are handled differently, having only rank.

Rank is a measure. It tells ypu size die you get. I use "rank" for two reasons, first, the math. As a rank, it is easier to +1 or -2 etc. Second, I have a second way of using ranks for simplton electronic rollers that can't sum differently sized dice. This other way is not as fun nor as elegant, but significantly easier to use on most forums. Using ranks means both methods are available without changing a single thing.

For the normal rolling method (which shoukd always be considered to be what I'm discussing unless explicitly stated otherwise), the number of ranks for a die is the average of that die, alternatively stated, double the ranks to get the die size.

1 rank = d2
2 ranks = d4
3 ranks = d6
etc


Sentient races are Tier 3 and above. Humans for example have Tier 3 as the common people, Tier 4 are the motivators in society, generally being the common middle leadership, the people in your everyday life that tend to solve other's problems. Tier 5 are exceptional thinkers and have great ability. Tier 6 are the legendary people who can rise from poverty to radically change everything, such as Steve Jobs and Elon Musk. Newton and other radical thinkers usually would be Tier 5. A tier 5 can figure out new revolutionary concepts which just happen to be world-changing, a tier 6 is trying, and succeeding at, changing things on a massive scale regardless of obstacles and usually end up changing the world.
Aleph Null
member, 18 posts
I have my PhD
In Wumbology
Mon 18 Mar 2019
at 22:03
  • msg #11

An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

In reply to DarkLightHitomi (msg # 10):

Uh-Huh.

Then things that are superhuman would have tiers higher than 6?
DarkLightHitomi
member, 1477 posts
Tue 19 Mar 2019
at 05:01
  • msg #12

An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

SKILLS

There is no absolute set of skills, though a list of basic and example skills is provided, a list of skills built by the campaign creator can say a lot about the setting, and different genres and magic/tech styles may need vastly different lists of skills.

Skills come in 3 groups based on how difficult they are to learn.

Natural Skills are skills that everyone basically has by default and uses at some level quite often, such as athletic skills (everyone can jog and jump after all, unless afflicted with an unusual drawback).

Learned Skills are more difficult skills to learn, and usually learned from a trainer/mentor of some sort, but could be self taught through a great deal of trial and error. Examples would be martial arts or vocational skills.

Advanced Skills are generally the sort that have a requirement of some sort to even start learning. For example, knowledge skills quite simply can't be learned without studying a source of the knowledge to be learned. Though some may simply be unusually difficult, such as learning to pilot a V-22 Osprey which requires more training to achieve the same level of proficiency as other aircraft.

Skills have only ranks, and Natural Skills start at 2 ranks by default. Learned skills start at rank 0 thus first improvment is gaining rank 1. Advanced skills however have a +4 to the TN (Target Number, explained in the next section) if used untrained (if it even can be attempted untrained). When an Advanced Skill is first learned, it starts at rank 0 (but no longer suffers the +4 to TN).

MAKING CHECKS

A standard check rolls 3-5 dice and sums the total as a result to compare to a TN (Target Number). Each of the dice comes from the character's stats.

Tier provides the first die and applies to all standard checks.

Checks also will have a skill and an attribute to apply, with the Tier die, these make the core three dice.

A secondary attribute or skill may sometimes be added, usually at a reduced rank. This can only happen if there are no specializations or equipment bonuses (as these basically do not stack with each other).

Lastly, bonus dice, such as from spells, environmental effects, or Features.

Additionally, a check can have advantage dice. Advantage dice are extra dice added to a check. for every extra die added one will be removed after being rolled but before being summed. Advantage would remove the lowest dice, while disadvantage would remove the highest dice.

The stats mention ranks. This is because ranks are easy to deal with, but also because there is a second way of making checks that is easier with electronic dice rollers like those found on internet forums. This other method will be described in it's own section later on.

For the size of a die, take the ranks and double them for the number of sides a die has. Thus rank 1 is a d2, rank 2 is a d4, etc. All die sizes are thus even numbers. If a dice has more than 6 ranks, then break it into multiple dice all a d12 or smaller.

The result of these dice is taken in two ways. First, it is descriptive of the character's result, how well they did. Second, this is compared to the TN of the task to find out if how well they did was good enough to succeed.

The number line is intended as an objective baseline. Both task difficulty and check results can be compared to this line for how difficult/spectacular they are. The results of the individual dice can also be used as inspiration for describing the narrative results.

It should also be noted, that failure can mean many things and need not be literal failure. It can also be success at an extra cost, or an extra obstacle that must be faced, or anything that basically makes the plan go awry in a negative fashion.

 0 is something that is automatically a success, such as walking.
 5 is something that rarely fails even for average people.
10 is the average result for an average person's main job when rushed.
15 is the average result for an average person's main job with comfortable time and little presssure.
20 is an expert's level of craftsmenship with comfortable time and little pressure.
30 is a master's work.
50+ is legendary, nearly mythical.
icosahedron152
member, 936 posts
Tue 19 Mar 2019
at 07:40
  • msg #13

An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

<Grin> I’m not sure I agree with your ranking of Isaac Newton (I'm trying to picture every schoolchild being taught the theories of Elon Musk, three and a half centuries hence...) but that’s a personal thing. Different GMs will apply the ranks in different ways. The Rank concept itself is sound enough.

Advantage Dice is essentially a re-roll of lowest and highest dice? Or can it replace a D2 with a D6?

It’s not immediately apparent how the Task Line works or whether the numbers are sound, but I’ll bide my time on that one and wait for further description.
Starchaser
member, 555 posts
GMT+0
http://bit.ly/2NvdzWG
Tue 19 Mar 2019
at 07:51
  • msg #14

An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

DLH: How long do you think until you have the system fleshed out enough to playtest? Ive been almost exclusively freeform until recently but would love to playtest this system in a game I'm running. I find systems out thereare either too conplex for forum-based games or too simplistic to bring much value to a game.
DarkLightHitomi
member, 1478 posts
Tue 19 Mar 2019
at 09:31
  • msg #15

Re: An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

icosahedron152:
<Grin> I’m not sure I agree with your ranking of Isaac Newton (I'm trying to picture every schoolchild being taught the theories of Elon Musk, three and a half centuries hence...) but that’s a personal thing. Different GMs will apply the ranks in different ways. The Rank concept itself is sound enough.


The thing I was trying to point out with that was that the difference wasn't about impact nor intellect. Newton was very smart, but what kind of obstacles did he need to overcome to succeed at the task he set for himself? Steve Jobs had his company taken from him and he still managed to succeed. Elon Musk is likewise giving the world the finger and doing things his own way, despite just how different his way is and how much the world is working against him, and he is still finding success. Perhaps I am simply not familiar enough with Newton's life, but as far as I know, he worked within the existing structure and simply produced new ideas, though great ideas they were, he wasn't fighting the cultural environment to actually produce those ideas.

quote:
Advantage Dice is essentially a re-roll of lowest and highest dice? Or can it replace a D2 with a D6?


It is an additional die that is then rolled with the normal dice, then after the roll, a die is removed based purely on the values shown on the dice. Thus, a d2 advantage die will basically give a 50% chance of replacing a 1 with a 2. Larger advantage dice naturally improve both the chances and scale of replacing low rolling dice with higher numbers.

quote:
It’s not immediately apparent how the Task Line works or whether the numbers are sound, but I’ll bide my time on that one and wait for further description.


The Task Line isn't really a thing that works, rather it is a consistant meterstick to make judging how numbers fit into the world easy.

There are three key ways this can be used.

A) when a pc makes a check, the gm can compare the result to the Task Line to see how well of a job the pc did. Was it the work of a master, or a novice? For example, if Alice rolled a 21, the gm knows she did a spectacular job to be expected from an expert who wasn't being rushed.

B) when a gm needs a TN for the pc to beat in order to succeed. All they really need is to decide how difficult the task is in terms of whether a novice or master would be able to defeat it. For example, the pc goes in an unexpected direction and the gm needs the TN to spot a pit trap. Well the gm considers who built it and how well. A novice or average farmer? TN 10-15. A master trapper built to trap sentient beings? TN 30.

C) a measure of quality. Appraise style checks and craft checks. When a craft check is made for crafting an item, the result can be taken as the item's quality. Likewise, an appraise check can reveal the quality, giving a simple measure of the item's quality of manufacture. This quality number can also be used in comparing two items, such as during contests, or can impact an item's value, or even impact an item's capability.

Really, as a meterstick, a gm should feel free to use it anytime a measure is needed that relates to quality and skill in some way.
DarkLightHitomi
member, 1479 posts
Tue 19 Mar 2019
at 09:47
  • msg #16

Re: An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

Starchaser:
DLH: How long do you think until you have the system fleshed out enough to playtest? Ive been almost exclusively freeform until recently but would love to playtest this system in a game I'm running. I find systems out thereare either too conplex for forum-based games or too simplistic to bring much value to a game.


Mostly an issue of typing it in. Not likely to get much more till friday. Midweek is busiest.

It is also a matter of how much the gm needs to feel comfortable. I coukd run a system with nothing more than what has already been posted if I wanted to.
DarkLightHitomi
member, 1486 posts
Wed 27 Mar 2019
at 04:05
  • msg #17

Re: An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

I intended to post the conflict resolution over the weekend, but I got sick and had trainees and basically, life happened. I've been dealt junk lately.

Anyway, it's almost ready so I hope to get it up soon.
pdboddy
member, 636 posts
EST/EDT [GMT-5/GMT-4]
Wed 27 Mar 2019
at 15:38
  • msg #18

Re: An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

I've recently developed an interest in rules light systems, mostly thanks to a FATE mush that I play on.  So I'm watching this with interest.
OceanLake
member, 1065 posts
Wed 27 Mar 2019
at 23:45
  • msg #19

Re: An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

Are you going to have the equivalent of classes? (careers, 'born-into" social ranks?)
DarkLightHitomi
member, 1487 posts
Thu 28 Mar 2019
at 01:44
  • msg #20

Re: An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

Certainly not in the basic set. I'll eventually include pre-built "paths," that make building characters quicker and easier, and provide inspiration, but they will not be required as they are basically just preselected choice collections.

It'd be rather easy for a gm to make a few to fit the campaign and require their use though.

I certainly will never require them though as A) I hate classes, and B) classes are about  enforcing balance which is a concept that works against my goal for the system.
Starchaser
member, 567 posts
GMT+0
http://bit.ly/2NvdzWG
Thu 28 Mar 2019
at 11:25
  • msg #21

Re: An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

+1 in total agreement with hating classes. If you think about RL although people have their specialities, most people do have a handful of unrelated things they are proficient in. Classes tend to get in the way of creating a unique 'flavour' to a character IMHO.
V_V
member, 815 posts
Thu 28 Mar 2019
at 23:04
  • [deleted]
  • msg #22

Re: An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

This message was deleted by a moderator, as it was against the forum rules, at 06:30, Fri 29 Mar 2019.
V_V
member, 816 posts
You can call me V, just V
Life; a journey made once
Fri 29 Mar 2019
at 07:48
  • msg #23

Re: An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

This is a great simple system, that gives me an idea for running a game of this at some point. Granted a different style than is mentioned, but yeah, it looks good. :) *thumbs up*
horus
member, 665 posts
Wayfarer of the
Western Wastes
Fri 29 Mar 2019
at 08:10
  • msg #24

Re: An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

Just seeing this topic.  This has promise.  I'll follow, and comment more after I've really had the time this deserves.  Playtest?  I'm really tempted.
DarkLightHitomi
member, 1488 posts
Fri 29 Mar 2019
at 09:01
  • msg #25

Re: An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

Not sure how clear this part is, I totally think it needs to be better written, but here is an initial draft of the conflict resolution.

This part is more of a kit to toss together a quick framework for handling any kind of contest from a chase scene to a dimplomatic negotiation to combat.

This kit is real simple, and is broken into three simple parts, Score, Goalpost, Check.

The Score is a measure of progress towards success/failure. The score can start at zero and grow, or it can be a value that shrinks to zero (or any other measure method you can think of). If you have a value, it could be based on a certain stat (i.e. your hardiness score) or an objective value (i.e. start at zero, aim to reach 20).

The Goalpost is the value you desire to reach/avoid with your score and how this affects success/failure. I.E. you might start with a score equal to a stat and desire to avoid having the score reach zero, or you might have a value that you want to reach with your score, or you might desire to be so many points above your opposition (though this is a form you want to be very careful with, lest you get a conflict that never ends).

The Check is what kind of skill/ability/etc check that is made each turn to gain score or avoid losing score. This can be a directly opposed check (like hiding vs finding), side-by-side checks (both roll same skill I.E. acrobatics, pick winner), or narrative tasks (such as completing a series of challanges/puzzles open for the player to develop their strategy). Once you get the hang of it, you can come up with many others as well.

Examples.

A diplomatic negotiation, each participant has their Score starting at their Independance attribute and last participant with a Score above 0 wins the negotiation (though both parties reaching an acceptable end before this can still end the contest). For the check each side makes a persuasion/oratory/social check and loser reduces their Score by one.

A combat encounter, each particpant has a Score based on their Hardiness, if score reaches 0 they lose whether it be death, capture, or simple unconciousness. Each turn, a character can do something, but affecting an opponant's score requires an attack against the opponant's defense, which, if the attacker wins the check wil reduce the defender's score by an amount dictated by the weapon used.

A chase sequence through a city, each group has a score starting at zero. Each turn, participants make a check such as athletics (to outpace), navigation (lose pursuers by taking difficult to follow routes), or acrobatics (by taking difficult paths requiring jumping and tumbling) and success gains one score point. When one party has 5 points more than the other group, they succeed in making their get-away (if the runners succeed) or capturing them (if the pursuers win).

These can be stacked, such as running a combat side-by-side with a chase. Losing the combat automatically loses the chase, but winning the chase would end the combat. Another way these can be combined is performing a task to win favor as part of a negotiation.
Starchaser
member, 568 posts
GMT+0
http://bit.ly/2NvdzWG
Fri 29 Mar 2019
at 09:12
  • msg #26

Re: An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

I could so use that in a combat situation that is about to occur in a game I co-gm right now (Though in reality I already know what the outcome will be).

Mind if I playtest what you have posted ao far in one of my own games?
DarkLightHitomi
member, 1489 posts
Fri 29 Mar 2019
at 18:26
  • msg #27

Re: An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

Certainly. Just let me know how it turns out.

If you have any questions about it, I'll be here.
icosahedron152
member, 941 posts
Sat 30 Mar 2019
at 04:10
  • msg #28

Re: An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

Just a couple of points.

You've used the word 'score' previously in a different context.

If your purpose in a contest is to reduce a person's Hardiness, say, from 15 to 0, at a rate of 1 point per game turn, that contest is going to last a looooong time. Especially in a PbP game.

You've already picked up the fact that rising number contests can last indefinitely.

Maybe you need some way to limit long contests?
DarkLightHitomi
member, 1490 posts
Sat 30 Mar 2019
at 05:02
  • msg #29

Re: An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

>Score, noted. I'll figure out a different term. Good catch, thank you.

>reducing score, The combat example, you reduce the score by the weapon dmg. I missed a typo in which the diplomatic example should reduce the score by one per successful turn but starts at the attribute rank.

I also need to make it clear that the points of the contest are independant of any stats they take a value from, thus while combat points start out equal to hardiness, your attribute doesn't drop from standard dmg.

> Long contests
The dimplomatic example should last around 4-8 turns. The combat example woukd last 2-6 turns. The only example with significant chance of lasting a long time is the chase, but I don't really think a rule to limit that is a good idea.

In a sequence like that the gm has two options, first is to bring a story close to the chase (in which a rule brings a hindering expectation), the second is to make the chase the adventure (in which the rule is directly hindering), so players are being chased but are worrying about the small things like their tracks, getting around obstacles, making diversions, etc which can benefit from lasting out, so really, the gm needs to have the ability to handle it appropriately anyway in which case, more freedom is better than arbitrary limitations.

Basically, at this core level, it isn't the point to stop the gm from making mistakes, but rather enable a great gm to focus on being great, while later add-on blocks can bring in the limitations that make it easier for less experienced gms to avoid shooting down their own game.

A good analogy is programming. Assembly is a language lacking a lot of built-in protections, a fact that allows an experienced programmer to make amazing code, while java is a language that is easier and safer to use as a newbie but is less efficient.

This kinda how I see this core and block relationship. The core is a minimalist structure for great versatility in the hands of well-practiced gms while the blocks to be added later build on that to achieve a systemic goal, such as enhacing a particuoar feel, or making it easier for newer gm to avoid mistakes.
DarkLightHitomi
member, 1491 posts
Sat 30 Mar 2019
at 05:10
  • msg #30

Re: An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

Belated consideration,
Some gms may have the experience and ability to handle the more advanced requirements of the rules not protecting against such issues as long contests, but who desire such protections anyway to make things easier on them.

This is fine, I think though, that having things so open lets such a gm use the blocks of additional rules (that will be added later) directly or to develop such protections themselves that they can apply to any game they later run without developing it again.

I also see it as part of campaign prep to fiddle, perhaps extensively, with the system to really fit the desired style, genre, and feel the specific campaign is going for. Arbitrary limits make that harder for anyone trying.

Edited for clarity and spelling.
This message was last edited by the user at 06:18, Sun 31 Mar 2019.
horus
member, 669 posts
Wayfarer of the
Western Wastes
Sun 31 Mar 2019
at 03:11
  • msg #31

Re: An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

DarkLightHitomi:
Not sure how clear this part is, I totally think it needs to be better written, but here is an initial draft of the conflict resolution.


It doesn't have to be perfect at this point in development - it seems like you're still brainstorming for definite ideas.  That's a valid phase of development and can result in some really innovative methods and practices.

quote:
...This kit is real simple, and is broken into three simple parts, Score, Goalpost, Check.

The Score is a measure of progress towards success/failure. The score can start at zero and grow, or it can be a value that shrinks to zero (or any other measure method you can think of). If you have a value, it could be based on a certain stat (i.e. your hardiness score) or an objective value (i.e. start at zero, aim to reach 20).


Seems like the Score here is the current value of something being either measured or diced for based on a skill, attribute, aspect, etc?  Is this right, or can the Score rise or fall in subsequent rounds/segments/turns/whatever?  (Seems like it.)

quote:
The Goalpost is the value you desire to reach/avoid with your score and how this affects success/failure. ... .


I would tend to nail this down a bit better.  If there are several cases relevant to your particular game where a Goalpost would exist, it needs to be well-defined, at least in terms of how one arrives at it.  (Or is this a task you are leaving to the GM?)

quote:
The Check is what kind of skill/ability/etc check that is made each turn to gain score or avoid losing score. This can be a directly opposed check (like hiding vs finding), side-by-side checks (both roll same skill I.E. acrobatics, pick winner), or narrative tasks (such as completing a series of challanges/puzzles open for the player to develop their strategy). Once you get the hang of it, you can come up with many others as well.


It seems, to me at least, all these variants can be encompassed in a single simpler mechanic:  Task Definition, Difficulty/Threshold Determination, and Task Throw.  I might, however, be missing the subtleties here and I don't mean to be a Philistine.

If two or more persons are involved in a matter, there is room for an Opposing Task Throw that determines the Threshold (Goalpost) which must be equaled or exceeded to indicate success in the matter, and for Aiding Throws that, in some way, add to the possibilities for success or failure (that is, a player could aid the opposing throw or the initiating throw, dependent on situation and player's inclination.)

quote:
Examples.

A diplomatic negotiation, each participant has their Score starting at their Independance attribute and last participant with a Score above 0 wins the negotiation (though both parties reaching an acceptable end before this can still end the contest). For the check each side makes a persuasion/oratory/social check and loser reduces their Score by one.

A combat encounter, each particpant has a Score based on their Hardiness, if score reaches 0 they lose whether it be death, capture, or simple unconciousness. Each turn, a character can do something, but affecting an opponant's score requires an attack against the opponant's defense, which, if the attacker wins the check wil reduce the defender's score by an amount dictated by the weapon used.


These rather put me in mind of Fate's "Ladder" system.  Things start on the Ladder and see-saw back and forth until one side or the other satisfies the agreed upon victory condition?  Is that about right?

Are you proposing a different variant of a general "task" system for different particular cases, or am I misunderstanding?
DarkLightHitomi
member, 1494 posts
Sun 31 Mar 2019
at 06:49
  • msg #32

Re: An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

horus:
DarkLightHitomi:
Not sure how clear this part is, I totally think it needs to be better written, but here is an initial draft of the conflict resolution.


It doesn't have to be perfect at this point in development - it seems like you're still brainstorming for definite ideas.  That's a valid phase of development and can result in some really innovative methods and practices.


There is that a little, but also there is a lot where I understand it quite well, but am not sure about writing it in a way that makes it equally clear to others.

This was a major issue in DnD, where their writing didn't always clearly communicate the intent (of course, plenty of clear sections were ignored by players as well).

As an autistic, I find this a big problem to watch out for.

quote:
quote:
...This kit is real simple, and is broken into three simple parts, Score, Goalpost, Check.

The Score is a measure of progress towards success/failure. The score can start at zero and grow, or it can be a value that shrinks to zero (or any other measure method you can think of). If you have a value, it could be based on a certain stat (i.e. your hardiness score) or an objective value (i.e. start at zero, aim to reach 20).


Seems like the Score here is the current value of something being either measured or diced for based on a skill, attribute, aspect, etc?  Is this right, or can the Score rise or fall in subsequent rounds/segments/turns/whatever?  (Seems like it.)


The score starts at the current value of something, but then is altered in subsequent rounds depending on check results.


quote:
quote:
The Goalpost is the value you desire to reach/avoid with your score and how this affects success/failure. ... .


I would tend to nail this down a bit better.  If there are several cases relevant to your particular game where a Goalpost would exist, it needs to be well-defined, at least in terms of how one arrives at it.  (Or is this a task you are leaving to the GM?)


The goalpost is the value at which a character either loses or wins the contest. This is thus dependent on what the contest is about and how the gm structured it.


quote:
quote:
The Check is what kind of skill/ability/etc check that is made each turn to gain score or avoid losing score. This can be a directly opposed check (like hiding vs finding), side-by-side checks (both roll same skill I.E. acrobatics, pick winner), or narrative tasks (such as completing a series of challanges/puzzles open for the player to develop their strategy). Once you get the hang of it, you can come up with many others as well.


It seems, to me at least, all these variants can be encompassed in a single simpler mechanic:  Task Definition, Difficulty/Threshold Determination, and Task Throw.  I might, however, be missing the subtleties here and I don't mean to be a Philistine.

If two or more persons are involved in a matter, there is room for an Opposing Task Throw that determines the Threshold (Goalpost) which must be equaled or exceeded to indicate success in the matter, and for Aiding Throws that, in some way, add to the possibilities for success or failure (that is, a player could aid the opposing throw or the initiating throw, dependent on situation and player's inclination.)


That is what this is attempting to do, to simply into a simpler mechanic.

Any contest that can be handled with a single check doesn't need anything beyond the one check, but if you want a series of checks to be required for victory, then you need a structure to unify those checks and measure progress.

Score is the measure of progress, goalpost is where you want that score to reach, and check is the type of check needed to modify the score.

There are however plenty of cases where the score needs to change in different ways to better represent different kinds of contests. A sprint race shouldn't be handled like combat for example.

Perhaps this would be clearer if I explicitly listed out the various ways?

quote:
quote:
Examples.

A diplomatic negotiation, each participant has their Score starting at their Independance attribute and last participant with a Score above 0 wins the negotiation (though both parties reaching an acceptable end before this can still end the contest). For the check each side makes a persuasion/oratory/social check and loser reduces their Score by one.

A combat encounter, each particpant has a Score based on their Hardiness, if score reaches 0 they lose whether it be death, capture, or simple unconciousness. Each turn, a character can do something, but affecting an opponant's score requires an attack against the opponant's defense, which, if the attacker wins the check wil reduce the defender's score by an amount dictated by the weapon used.


These rather put me in mind of Fate's "Ladder" system.  Things start on the Ladder and see-saw back and forth until one side or the other satisfies the agreed upon victory condition?  Is that about right?

Are you proposing a different variant of a general "task" system for different particular cases, or am I misunderstanding?


Not really, each participant has their own score and tries to achieve victory in one of two ways, reaching the victory score first, or being the last one who has not reached the defeat score, depending on which one the contest is going for

To make a more detailed exampled,

For a diplomatic negotiation, you have Adam and Bob.
Adam has an Independence of 10 giving him 2 ranks in that ability and thus 2 points for this contest.
Bob has a 14 Independence which is 3 ranks and thus gets 3 points for this contest.

The contest is last man standing, whoever reaches 0 points loses.

Each turn, Adam and Bob roll checks to try and cause the other to lose a point. Any check that makes sense could be used, so Adam could try Intimidation while Bob could try Diplomacy or even Haggling if he tries to buy his way to victory.

The last one with more than 0 points wins the contest, getting their demands met.

Other things can be done during the contest to alter the chances of victory. For example, if each turn is a day of negotiations, then if Bob finds out more about Adam, then Bob can adjust his demands in the negotiation at the start of day two (the second turn) to make victory more likely.

To reference Drowtales, if Bob finds out that Adam values Amber, then Bob can change from offering Gold to offering Amber, so that Adam is more likely to accept.
horus
member, 672 posts
Wayfarer of the
Western Wastes
Sun 31 Mar 2019
at 07:36
  • msg #33

Re: An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

A fundamentals question:  What do a character's basic vital statistics look like for this system?  What is their numerical range, in particular?

EDIT:  It looks like, from my re-reading of previous posts, that Stats are basically setting a dice pool, and that the number and type are defined by such things as "level" and other factors?  I'd love to see this doped out.

This numerical range is important, because it serves as the basis for "check" rolls in some cases, yes?  This, in turn, sets the number and type of dice to be cast for a check.

In one of my games here on RPoL, I use a basic range for attributes from 0 to 15.  Tasks are resolved using 2d6 + any modifiers against an opposing roll for conflicts, or against a Difficulty Rating for non-conflict tasks.  The degree of success or failure is determined by the difference between the Difficulty rating/opposing roll and the Task throw.  Snake eyes always fumble, and boxcars always crit, regardless of any modifiers.

If that looks familiar, you've probably played Classic or Mongoose Traveller at some point.  That particular game of mine is heavily based in Classic Traveller, in mechanical terms, anyway.

A technique of organization that may help is to write an outline for the system.  If the outline goes past one page, you'll have trouble fitting the whole system in two.

One last question:  is this a game system, or more like a System Reference Document that can be used to produce games (more like a "game engine")?
This message was last edited by the user at 07:44, Sun 31 Mar 2019.
DarkLightHitomi
member, 1495 posts
Sun 31 Mar 2019
at 08:11
  • msg #34

Re: An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

horus:
A fundamentals question:  What do a character's basic vital statistics look like for this system?  What is their numerical range, in particular?


3d6 is a good description for normal people's stats. The average score is 9-12, which gives an average rank of 2.

People's average tier is 3-4. Commoner level people are generally 3, while those who get better educated and experienced often get to tier 4. Getting tier 5 is uncommon, and is often the leading people of a nation, the heroes and household names.

quote:
EDIT:  It looks like, from my re-reading of previous posts, that Stats are basically setting a dice pool, and that the number and type are defined by such things as "level" and other factors?  I'd love to see this doped out.


A better way to think of it is to start with d20 and use the variable modifiers variant rules.

It is a dice pool I guess by way of technicality, though no dice pool game I've played really looks at it the same way.

Level is not about the dice rolled at all, but is just about advancement, gaining points for improving skills, attributes, new features, etc. It can be used for gaining power or tier if the gm wants a more DnD scaling style.

quote:
This numerical range is important, because it serves as the basis for "check" rolls in some cases, yes?  This, in turn, sets the number and type of dice to be cast for a check.


The range of attribute scores is actually the same as d20 (if you read the actual rules rather than the popular interpretation), and the results range is only half again larger than d20 being 0-60 (rather than d20's 0-40).


quote:
In one of my games here on RPoL, I use a basic range for attributes from 0 to 15.  Tasks are resolved using 2d6 + any modifiers against an opposing roll for conflicts, or against a Difficulty Rating for non-conflict tasks.  The degree of success or failure is determined by the difference between the Difficulty rating/opposing roll and the Task throw.  Snake eyes always fumble, and boxcars always crit, regardless of any modifiers.

If that looks familiar, you've probably played Classic or Mongoose Traveller at some point.  That particular game of mine is heavily based in Classic Traveller, in mechanical terms, anyway.


Traveller is one game I have not had a chance to even look at yet, though I haven't really heard anything that makes me want to give it a high priority as it sounds very much not really my style.


quote:
A technique of organization that may help is to write an outline for the system.  If the outline goes past one page, you'll have trouble fitting the whole system in two.


A major part of this however is figuring how much explanation is needed for various parts. For example, Strength can by with a sentence or less, but Independence probably needs more than that.

And also,  concise writing, which is hard to find even for non-autistic people.


quote:
One last question:  is this a game system, or more like a System Reference Document that can be used to produce games (more like a "game engine")?


Depends on what you see as the difference. Is gurps a system, or a SRD?

Truthfully, DnD 3.x was written with the intent to be modified by each gm to fit each campaign, not that anyone treated it like that. In fact, it amazes me how much popular culture misconstrues and misuses dnd 3.x, often outright ignoring what is actually written in the core books.

However, a good line to divide the two is to say that a system needs no modification to be played, while a SRD needs to molded before use.

Using that definition, the core of what I'm doing (the 2-page part, even if it ends up as 3-pages or so) is SRD, while the blocks I'll be writing later will be more of a system, just pick the blocks you need/want and go.
horus
member, 673 posts
Wayfarer of the
Western Wastes
Sun 31 Mar 2019
at 21:34
  • msg #35

Re: An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

DarkLightHitomi:
3d6 is a good description for normal people's stats. The average score is 9-12, which gives an average rank of 2.


And it seems this to be determined by a roll with dice added together to get a result.  The norms for 3d6 are 10 and 11, which tally well with the stated average score. Results of 10 and 11 each occur 27 times out of 216 permutations.  Thus a norm occurs 54 times in 216, or 25% of the time.  An "average score" would occur 104 times in 216, or a little more than 48%.

quote:
People's average tier is 3-4. Commoner level people are generally 3, while those who get better educated and experienced often get to tier 4. Getting tier 5 is uncommon, and is often the leading people of a nation, the heroes and household names.


I'll have to go back and re-read again, because I don't have a clear idea of what "tier" is being used to represent.  (Probably due to my lack of memory these days...)

Hmm...Tier, a character's overall agency in life.  Is "agency" a character's ability to determine and to act independently of others?  (Do I get the concept?)

quote:
Traveller is one game I have not had a chance to even look at yet, though I haven't really heard anything that makes me want to give it a high priority as it sounds very much not really my style.


I won't argue the merits of Traveller based on anyone's personal preference, but the mechanic I stated above is an elegant, understandable, task system modified by me to accommodate varying degrees of success or failure.

The basic mechanic is flexible, dead simple, consistent in all cases, and only varies in how the Difficulty Rating is determined for a particular task, more notably for combat tasks, which include the concept of an opposing roll.

Modifications to the basic task roll are made for applicable skills, "stats", and other factors (more so for combat tasks) as are specified in a Task Definition block.  (As new tasks are needed, I discuss with players and we define them together.)

quote:
quote:
A technique of organization that may help is to write an outline for the system.  If the outline goes past one page, you'll have trouble fitting the whole system in two.


A major part of this however is figuring how much explanation is needed for various parts. For example, Strength can by with a sentence or less, but Independence probably needs more than that.

And also,  concise writing, which is hard to find even for non-autistic people.

The whole purpose of an outline is to set down the major points of the document briefly, and to provide a framework to help organize one's thinking.  Don't explain at all - create a short list of major topics, sort of like a table of contents, then go back to each major topic and list under it subtopics relevant to it.

You'll find that you can work from the merest of outlines for a simple project, or "drill down" where more research and development is needed.

Example:

1.0) Characters

     1.1) Attributes
          1.1.1)  Strength
                  1.1.1.1)  Definition of Strength
          1.1.2)  Intelligence
          ...
          1.1.6)  Charisma

     1.2) Skills

          1.2.1)  Spells
          1.2.2)  Common Skills
          1.2.3)  Combat Skills

and so forth.  Different numbering systems are out there for use in outlines, or you can leave them numberless, as best suits your purpose.

Concise writing means using fewer more effective words to get one's point across.  That's all - there's no magic formula for it. If one's thoughts are disorganized, one's writing is also likely to be disorganized.

With respect to System Reference Documents:
quote:
Depends on what you see as the difference. Is gurps a system, or a SRD?


{snipped:  stuff about D&D 3.x, a system with which I'm not all that familiar, having stopped playing AD&D about version 2.0.  No accounting for taste, huh?}

quote:
However, a good line to divide the two is to say that a system needs no modification to be played, while a SRD needs to molded before use.

Using that definition, the core of what I'm doing (the 2-page part, even if it ends up as 3-pages or so) is SRD, while the blocks I'll be writing later will be more of a system, just pick the blocks you need/want and go.


Ah.  This definitely brings it into focus for me.  So... what we should concentrate on for now is what those first few pages (the basic system) will look like.
DarkLightHitomi
member, 1496 posts
Mon 1 Apr 2019
at 00:03
  • msg #36

Re: An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

horus:
DarkLightHitomi:
3d6 is a good description for normal people's stats. The average score is 9-12, which gives an average rank of 2.


And it seems this to be determined by a roll with dice added together to get a result.


Yes, in this case though, it is meaning that the bell curve of 3d6 fits closely to the bell curve of normal people.

quote:
quote:
People's average tier is 3-4. Commoner level people are generally 3, while those who get better educated and experienced often get to tier 4. Getting tier 5 is uncommon, and is often the leading people of a nation, the heroes and household names.


I'll have to go back and re-read again, because I don't have a clear idea of what "tier" is being used to represent.  (Probably due to my lack of memory these days...)

Hmm...Tier, a character's overall agency in life.  Is "agency" a character's ability to determine and to act independently of others?  (Do I get the concept?)


Sort of. You ever hear about player agency in a game? A game with no player agency is a game with no player choice in the structure of the game.

Basically, a railroaded game has little player agency as the players are at the whim of the gm. The story goes according to the plan of someone other than the players. But in a sandbox game, there is high player agency as the players choose the direction they direction they go, and the results are the reactions to the player's choices.

Tier is like someone's agency in life, their ability to make things work out according to their plans rather than following the plans of others. People who conform to society and do as they are told or remain stuck because they can't do what they need to do to get unstuck are people with low agency.

People who go their own way and forcibly change the world that struggles against them have high agency. Hitler was a bad guy and a large part of what him a big bad guy instead of a little bad guy was his high agency. He changed the face of the world largely because he had the agency to stand up and do something despite all the world trying to stop him. A very bad guy, but a good example of what a high agency person can do.


quote:
...

The basic mechanic is flexible, dead simple, consistent in all cases, and only varies in how the Difficulty Rating is determined for a particular task, more notably for combat tasks, which include the concept of an opposing roll.

Modifications to the basic task roll are made for applicable skills, "stats", and other factors (more so for combat tasks) as are specified in a Task Definition block.  (As new tasks are needed, I discuss with players and we define them together.)


Sounds like d20 and many other games as well.

quote:
quote:
<quote>
A technique of organization that may help is to write an outline for the system.  If the outline goes past one page, you'll have trouble fitting the whole system in two.


Not where I thought you were going with that. I've done some outlining for this. A few dozen iterations actually. Though swapping to a "2-page" core with add-on blocks is a recent shift in how I'm structuring it.

quote:
{snipped:  stuff about D&D 3.x, a system with which I'm not all that familiar, having stopped playing AD&D about version 2.0.  No accounting for taste, huh?}


I would say that 3.x was a distilled and simplified dnd experience. 3.x took the adnd and gave a unified structure and all that stuff you mentioned earlier,

quote:
The basic mechanic is flexible, dead simple, consistent in all cases,


Basically this was applied to dnd in 3.x, albeit imperfectly.

quote:
quote:
However, a good line to divide the two is to say that a system needs no modification to be played, while a SRD needs to molded before use.

Using that definition, the core of what I'm doing (the 2-page part, even if it ends up as 3-pages or so) is SRD, while the blocks I'll be writing later will be more of a system, just pick the blocks you need/want and go.


Ah.  This definitely brings it into focus for me.  So... what we should concentrate on for now is what those first few pages (the basic system) will look like.


Indeed, which at the moment just really needs clean-up and polish, and perhaps and example setting for listing out sample skill lists and features.
horus
member, 675 posts
Wayfarer of the
Western Wastes
Mon 1 Apr 2019
at 05:53
  • msg #37

Re: An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

DarkLightHitomi:
{snippage:  player agency, railroaded games vs. those more collaborative in nature, etc.}

Tier is like someone's agency in life, their ability to make things work out according to their plans rather than following the plans of others. People who conform to society and do as they are told or remain stuck because they can't do what they need to do to get unstuck are people with low agency.


Okay, so Tier is the basis for a mechanic that compels a more collaborative game?

I got the example you gave of a real person with high agency acting for evil.  World War II and the Holocaust are areas of some personal interest for me, so you shot close to the mark.

A high Tier, if I'm getting it, makes it possible for a player to take some control of the narrative under certain circumstances, right?

DarkLightHitomi:
Sounds like d20 and many other games as well.


I wouldn't know.  I've never played a d20 game that I know of.

quote:
Not where I thought you were going with that. I've done some outlining for this. A few dozen iterations actually. Though swapping to a "2-page" core with add-on blocks is a recent shift in how I'm structuring it.


Okay.  Glad the example clarified that for you.
quote:
I would say that 3.x was a distilled and simplified dnd experience. 3.x took the adnd and gave a unified structure and all that stuff you mentioned earlier,

quote:
The basic mechanic is flexible, dead simple, consistent in all cases,


Basically this was applied to dnd in 3.x, albeit imperfectly.


Obsession with perfection is the destroyer of good.  I bet it worked well enough for all practical purposes.

quote:
quote:
Ah.  This definitely brings it into focus for me.  So... what we should concentrate on for now is what those first few pages (the basic system) will look like.


Indeed, which at the moment just really needs clean-up and polish, and perhaps and example setting for listing out sample skill lists and features.


Yup.  That sounds like a great next step.  I'm looking forward to it.
DarkLightHitomi
member, 1497 posts
Mon 1 Apr 2019
at 09:47
  • msg #38

Re: An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

horus:
DarkLightHitomi:
{snippage:  player agency, railroaded games vs. those more collaborative in nature, etc.}

Tier is like someone's agency in life, their ability to make things work out according to their plans rather than following the plans of others. People who conform to society and do as they are told or remain stuck because they can't do what they need to do to get unstuck are people with low agency.


Okay, so Tier is the basis for a mechanic that compels a more collaborative game?

I got the example you gave of a real person with high agency acting for evil.  World War II and the Holocaust are areas of some personal interest for me, so you shot close to the mark.

A high Tier, if I'm getting it, makes it possible for a player to take some control of the narrative under certain circumstances, right?


It is descriptive of the character, not the player. A character with higher tier has a larger die on all their rolls, upping their results.

Also, some of the rules I'll be adding later will use Tier in things like contests of will (and of course, it is a perfectly acceptable stat for gms to select for resolving conflicts).

I never really cared for systems about narrative control, but for me, the gm is an author, the players are the readers. I much prefer playing in which I discover things as my character does and make decisions as my character, not so much being a shared authoring nor dictating things about the world.
horus
member, 679 posts
Wayfarer of the
Western Wastes
Tue 2 Apr 2019
at 07:30
  • msg #39

Re: An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

I'm beginning to think we're conjuring with words too much.  I still look forward to seeing your mini-system, however many pages in winds up being.  Cut cooling water in to your keyboard and let's see how it goes.
DarkLightHitomi
member, 1545 posts
Sat 27 Apr 2019
at 07:50
  • msg #40

Re: An expandable 2-page system, looking for feedback.

Update.

I haven't forgotten this or anything. I'm multitasking at the moment, trying various organization concepts, but also building a custom setting and a couple standard fantasy/sci-fi sets.

The idea is that can show examples of the three settings using the mechanics to establish the settings.

I did come with a name as well,
ACE T

Adventurous Campaign Engineering Toolkit

Since it is really intended for the gm to mold it to each game, yet remain the same enough that players aren't learning entirely new mechanics for every game, just the details.
Sign In