|
Making a small little combat minigame type thing for quick paced dueling. Each player has 20HP, deals 5 damage per hit, and has an Accuracy and Defense that are 0 at default. For a basic attack exchange, the attacker rolls 1d20, and if the roll is under 12+Acc+Opposing Def, it hits, otherwise, the other player gets to make an immediate counter attack with the same roll. If the second attack misses, it keeps going back and forth until a hit happens, so every exchange ends in damage. If both players miss once, the damage dealt on the eventual hit is increased by 1, and increases again every time it gets back to the first player again if they keep missing. Trying to think of how to add some decision making involved, maybe cards that can be played before/during an exchange to modify the stats or have other effects.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2013 17:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 08:15 |
|
My idea has been sitting in google docs for too long, and I think it's time to change that. And so, I'm going to take the spirit of this forum to heart and go full out. I will have a product ready for playtest by January 1st of 2014, and if I don't, then it's the  for me.I have a couple projects that are floating at the moment, and a few more in purely brainstorming phase. First, I have the setting I'm working on for the November contest and its related FATE hack. The other thing is probably something of a White Wolf Heartbreaker, about psychics summoning monsters from their psychological issues in order to change the minds of those around them. It's very rough at the moment, still in the design document phase, but if anyone wants to take a look you can find it here. I'll post up more as it develops.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2013 02:52
|
|
|
Meinberg posted:the November contest and Hey man, if you want another set of eyes on it, I'm happy to volunteer, hit me up in PMs.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2013 02:58
|
|
|
Meinberg posted:The other thing is probably something of a White Wolf Heartbreaker, about psychics summoning monsters from their psychological issues in order to change the minds of those around them. It's very rough at the moment, still in the design document phase, but if anyone wants to take a look you can find it here. Have you read Sorcerer? This sounds very similar. I like the setting! I've been doing some work on my own setting recently, here. It's turning into a groovy magical realism explore astral space kind of game.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2013 14:31
|
|
|
Zerilan posted:Making a small little combat minigame type thing for quick paced dueling. Why 20 and 5 instead of the mathematically identical 4 and 1? I guess the slow damage boost?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 02:27
|
|
Mors Rattus posted:Why 20 and 5 instead of the mathematically identical 4 and 1? I guess the slow damage boost? Yeah, so the increase is 20% of the base instead of doubling it.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 04:57
|
|
|
So, uh, what's the context for the dueling minigame? As it is, it looks to work pretty much like a round of D&D combat: He attacks, and then she attacks, and then he attacks, and... Also, if the duel is to first blood, you don't need an HP mechanic. If it's to the death, the damage bonus looks kind of superfluous since unless both players have a long cold streak, you still need to hit the other guy about four times. I think the odds of both characters missing are about 16%. Siivola fucked around with this message at 11:13 on Nov 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 11:10
|
|
|
Yeah, I think without context and decision making the duelling thing isn't much of a game yet. Back to my ants Pathfinder stats are here: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81037859/Pathfinder_ants.pdf And CR is a load of old bollocks isn't it? I looked a the monster creation rules in detail for the first time (I usually just use out of the box monsters), was expecting things like, 'This ability is worth so many points of CR' and useful things like that, and instead got - 'here's some approximate numbers, eyeball the rest'. If someone could eyeball my alternate ants though, that would be appreciated.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 11:15
|
|
|
Angrymog posted:Back to my ants Under organization, hive starts with "7-18." Most of your numbers here are typically given as something that's fairly easy to arrive at with a dice roll, but I don't see that for this particular range. Other than that I'm just not a D&D/Pathfinder enough guy to really critique your mechanics. However, you did mention earlier that you were adding flying and floating ants and maybe some others that I don't see here. Did you cut them? Also, especially for things like "a typical bug, but no it's really huge", this needs more help to 'sell' it in the opening blurb. Drop a few hooks in there for why adventurers would encounter them. They're weirdly huge—what special kinds of environments draw them? Are they attracted to the wastes of other, more dangerous monsters? Do certain evil people try to lure them in as a sort of natural defense for their dark wizard towers? Most of their treasure is the detritus from unlucky adventurers—why do those adventurers come to them in the first place? Do they produce some valuable alchemical substance? Is their chitin useful in certain constructions? They're giant, tough bugs—do people try to herd and tame them, using them in the above ways, or maybe as mounts and cargo haulers? Maybe there are certain cultures that do this? Or a variety of cultures but in a certain region where the ants are plentiful? Sorry, if you've covered this kind of stuff already. I skimmed back through your posts and didn't see it. That Old Tree fucked around with this message at 11:47 on Nov 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 11:36
|
|
|
Plague of Hats posted:Under organization, hive starts with "7-18." Most of your numbers here are typically given as something that's fairly easy to arrive at with a dice roll, but I don't see that for this particular range. That's the pathfinder statblock - I couldn't work out how to get 7-18 either - I went with 4d4+2 in my intro blurb. Will adjust the stat block. quote:However, you did mention earlier that you were adding flying and floating ants and maybe some others that I don't see here. Did you cut them? quote:Also, especially for things like "a typical bug, but no it's really huge" needs more help to 'sell' it in the opening blurb. Drop a few hooks in there for why adventurers would encounter them. That's all in the initial document - https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/12155227/in_lair_001-giant_ants.pdf but a 'Uses for a giant ant' section is probably a good idea too. quote:Sorry, if you've covered this kind of stuff already. I skimmed back through your posts and didn't see it. No worries, thanks for looking at it. Next steps * Bit more fluff * Mechanics for honeypot ants and trophic eggs * How to disguise yourself as an ant * Make sure that fluff and crunch match * Art (Cover, couple of interior pieces) * Layout * Publish * Kickstarter that inexplicably makes 100s of thousands of dollars, with which I then run away. This has turned into a much larger thing than I was intending - the original plan was a series of 2-3 page articles on various monsters that normally get ignored or glossed over in encounters.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 12:21
|
|
|
Angrymog posted:That's the pathfinder statblock - I couldn't work out how to get 7-18 either - I went with 4d4+2 in my intro blurb. Will adjust the stat block. 1d12 + 6
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 12:23
|
|
|
Mystic Mongol posted:1d12 + 6  I totally forgot about d12s for some reason.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 12:36
|
|
|
P.d0t posted:For my own flavour of fantasy heartbreaker, ability scores go like this: Crossposting from the TG Design thread. I've been churning over this system for-loving-ever and it fluctuates all the time, but here's about where I'm at right now. Core mechanics:
• Advantage on a d6 means you treat 1s as a 6; on d10s treat a roll of less than 5 as 5; you always have advantage when rolling HP • Attack rolls are 1d10+1d6 • one-handed weapons use d6; two-handers use d10 • defenses are Block (STR+shield die vs. Melee or ranged weapon attacks), Parry (INT+melee weapon dice vs. Melee attacks), Dodge (CHA+1d6 vs. Any type of attack) • Skills are roll-under a stat; trained skills roll 1d6 and 1d10, pick the lowest; competent skills roll 1d6; other skills roll 1d10. You have "advantage" if you roll against the secondary stat for a skill Thoughts?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 16:06
|
|
|
Double-post V VSo after gaming today, I asked our DM if he would be interested in playtesting my game sometime, like while we are waiting for people to show up (gently caress 3.5  )Anyways he said that was doable, so over the course of like an hour or two this evening, I wrote up 5 pages (handwritten) of the core rules. I figure I can test that a bit before working on distinctive class features; I kinda started drawing a blank once I got to that part.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2013 07:53
|
|
|
Your system suffers from the D&D ability score names. It makes no sense to dodge with your personal attractiveness, and the names are bland as hell in general. Why not, I dunno, Brawn and Practice and Swagger, or something? Those three sound like buckle-swashing adventures, so pick something that fits your theme. (This is, incidentally, the most fun part of knifing Apocalypse World.) I like the three defenses. The combat system's kinda bare bones and the probabilities sound kinda funky, but the three defenses feel like they could result in some actual tactics. So what happens when you block a dude's sword? Does it work the same against a giant goat demon's double-handed overhand swing? How about when you parry an attack? And hey, if you're bogged down, tell me how magic works. Are there discrete spells, or will it be a more free-form system? Are all the characters magical enough to cast spells, or will some need to pass in exchange for other talents? You've got a combat system. Now tell me about the rest of game. What do you do in it?
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2013 10:43
|
|
|
My tablet ate my post  I'll try to respond later today.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2013 20:01
|
|
|
It may have taken me a bit longer than I would have liked, and its definitely a rough draft, but I've written up my Core Rules, as they are. None of the setting specific stuff is here, theoretically the rules set could be used for any generic modern day game. Any and all feedback would appreciated. I know the combat section is rough, but I don't want there to be too much emphasis on combat. The skill set feels incomplete to me, and I probably could reword the way actions go. I probably also need to talk a bit about flow of play. The mood system is something I like thus far, but I'm sure it needs further work. Click here for the rules, on google docs.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2013 22:05
|
|
|
Meinberg posted:It may have taken me a bit longer than I would have liked, and its definitely a rough draft, but I've written up my Core Rules, as they are. None of the setting specific stuff is here, theoretically the rules set could be used for any generic modern day game. Any and all feedback would appreciated. Definitely an interesting focus for RPG mechanics. Never been all that fond of the "social conflict" mechanics I've experienced. Without playing your system, I can't really comment on how well it executes that central premise, but I have a few comments: 1. I think this section might be out of date: quote:In the rare case that you keep more dice than you rolled, you add the difference (Y - X) to the total. In effect, this means that every die that you keep but do not roll is counted as a 1. I don't see Y used anywhere else, and it looks like you always "keep" two rolled dice. For the sake of simplicity, it might make sense to have 2 be the minimum skill level, instead of 1. That way you don't need special cases like this, and don't get weird effects like it being impossible to have an exceptional success if your skill level is 1. To keep the same number of degrees of freedom in skill level, maybe have each skill start at "2, but untrained", where untrained is a -2 penalty, and getting rid of "untrained" costs whatever buying from 1 to 2 costs now. 2. Crafting seems overly complicated, and out of place given the core focus of the system. It also provides a very significant benefit with no real cost, other than what the GM invents in terms of limitations due to time. So it is not balanced by design, and leaves balancing it in practice to the GM. Balance should be your job. 3. Composure to "turn off" compulsions seems too easy a choice. If you're about to do an action which your compulsion would oppose, there's very little reason not to try composure. I guess you might exceptionally fail, and the GM might decide to make you worse off somehow, but again, without defining exceptional failure more strongly, that's not a real mechanical counter-balance. That you don't get the positive benefits of the compulsion anymore is a real downside, but it seems likely to me that compulsions will tend to help or hinder, not both, in a given situation. 4. Combat appears to be entirely separate from the mood system. It shouldn't be. In fact, I'd say make combat be more about the psychology that your mood system already models than tracking wounds. It's really only in the world of games that killing the opposition is the only possible outcome. In reality, combat, from bar brawls to battlefields, is as much about getting the other side to back down and retreat as it is about actually wounding them. Realism isn't worthwhile just for realism's sake, but this model might fit better with your central mechanics.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2013 00:08
|
|
The system thus far is entirely untested, so I have no idea how it will work in practice. But I want to get some feedback and input and do a few rounds of revision before I put the rules into some playtester's hands. I don't think it's their responsibility to handle stuff that anyone with eyes can see. This is also my first system, so there are definitely going to be some rough edges, so the input is definitely appreciated.eth0.n posted:1. I think this section might be out of date: That section is absolutely out of date. I'll go ahead and make some revisions there after I'm done with this. I think I'll stick with the penalty system, at least for the moment. Part of the system that will be introduced with the "special powers" chapter will be the ability to keep more than 2 dice, and so there'll likely be some finagling involved there. eth0.n posted:2. Crafting seems overly complicated, and out of place given the core focus of the system. It also provides a very significant benefit with no real cost, other than what the GM invents in terms of limitations due to time. So it is not balanced by design, and leaves balancing it in practice to the GM. Balance should be your job. Spot on here. I was going into crafting with, for a lack of a better term, a gamist perspective. Crafting will be hit especially hard with the next round of revision, to make it into something more revolving around narrative impact: fixing objects, appraising value, solving specific solutions by creating objects, etc. eth0.n posted:3. Composure to "turn off" compulsions seems too easy a choice. If you're about to do an action which your compulsion would oppose, there's very little reason not to try composure. I guess you might exceptionally fail, and the GM might decide to make you worse off somehow, but again, without defining exceptional failure more strongly, that's not a real mechanical counter-balance. That you don't get the positive benefits of the compulsion anymore is a real downside, but it seems likely to me that compulsions will tend to help or hinder, not both, in a given situation. This is probably the only feedback that I'm not entirely sure about. I need to include a section on flow of play, and then it will be more clear that the penalty for taking a resist compulsion action is action efficiency. You'll be losing your turn if you want to resist the compulsion. If that's not strong enough, though, I'm open to further consideration. eth0.n posted:4. Combat appears to be entirely separate from the mood system. It shouldn't be. In fact, I'd say make combat be more about the psychology that your mood system already models than tracking wounds. It's really only in the world of games that killing the opposition is the only possible outcome. In reality, combat, from bar brawls to battlefields, is as much about getting the other side to back down and retreat as it is about actually wounding them. Realism isn't worthwhile just for realism's sake, but this model might fit better with your central mechanics. And this is something that I wish I was smart enough to figure out on my own. Tying the combat system into the mood system is a brilliant idea. I had already planned to incorporate "mooding out" (though with a better name obviously), as a way of excess moods removing a character play. Figuring out exactly that'll work, and how to incorporate it into combat will take some time, but now that I'm thinking about it, I'll be working towards. Once again, thank you for the feedback! Any further input will be greatly appreciated. If you don't feel comfortable leaving it here, you contact me at m[my user name]@gmail.com or via PMs.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2013 02:09
|
|
|
Siivola posted:Your system suffers from the D&D ability score names. It makes no sense to dodge with your personal attractiveness, and the names are bland as hell in general. Why not, I dunno, Brawn and Practice and Swagger, or something? Those three sound like buckle-swashing adventures, so pick something that fits your theme. (This is, incidentally, the most fun part of knifing Apocalypse World.) Ability Scores: without getting into a derail, Charisma can mean a lot of things, including the favour of the gods or just plain luck. Basically it's meant to do the passive or defensive things DEX would normally do, while Strength would do the active things like combat and some skills. I actually use Body, Mind, and Spirit to describe them usually, although the legend of Zelda's Power, Wisdom, and Courage could also work. Defenses: I'm debating whether or not taking a hit should reduce your defense die til the start of your next turn. That way you'd have to use all your defenses each round if you get dogpiled, but that also could result in a lot of... dogpiling. I had the idea that some classes would excel at particular defenses, like fighters could push/slide/prone an enemy if they successfully blocked their melee attack, or they could reflect/deflect spells at higher levels. Parrying might allow a reposte for a bit of damage, or reduce the enemy's damage by disarming them. A dodging specialist might be able to shift/slide a few squares if they successfully dodge. Magic: spellcasters get a basic attack that can target on enemy at range or a handful of adjacent spaces, and maybe a line of some kind. But basically other than that, for out of combat purposes they would have 3 domains. Mages get Earth, Sea, and Sky; Warlocks get Poison, Bone, and Shapeshifting; cleric/paladin gets Crusader, Blessings, and Curses. My original designs had distinct spells in trees (inspired by Diablo 2) but for now I'm just focusing on the mechanical framework of the basics. What do you do in the game: it's meant to run sort of like a miniatures game, mostly focused on combat, with some simple skill resolution (which I've revised since my previous posting) for exploration and social stuff. So you can play it as a conventional RPG but it's mostly DM fiat/magical tea party if you do. Tbh I don't like a lot of rules getting in the way of roleplaying. The skills could also have combat applications. I'll leave it at that before my machine eats another post. P.d0t fucked around with this message at 02:41 on Nov 25, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2013 02:37
|
|
|
I just made a post for my game Spirit of 77. It's a 70's action adventure game using the Apocalypse World engine if anyone wants to check it out. I have some questions about organization. Does anyone have thoughts or strong opinions on how to organize a RPG book? It seems like every book I own is deficient in one way or another and I'd really like to overcome that. Should you put the rules first? the worldbuilding? some fiction? I had a dilemma about the character creation chapter, traditionally base attributes are explained first, but they're kind of irrelevant until you know what type of character you're going to be playing. I put them in the middle of my character creation chapter (after character classes) but it feels weird having them there.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 04:13
|
|
|
I just finished the second chapter of the rough draft that I'm working on. Again, I am open to feedback and input. If it would be preferred that I wait to post until everything is finished, I can do that as well. But for now, click here for the real main rules, about magic and stuff. And yes, I know that there aren't any powers current listed. Those are going to need more time to develop, but their modular nature means that I can develop new ones while also working on new material, without altering the new material.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 04:48
|
|
|
I've been noodling off and on with a bid-based fantasy game. I think I've got all the system in place and enough explanation that people can see how it works, but I'd like some people to kick the tires and see if it works outside of my head. Here's the system.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 11:48
|
|
|
This Friday I'll be doing a hardcopy edit (i.e. printing everything out and going over it with the red pen of doom) and at least drafting my cover image.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 12:21
|
|
|
I have completed a tiny supplement for Apocalypse World: it's mostly a reskin of the weapons system to replace them with martial arts. It's here. Any comments are appreciated.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2013 14:51
|
|
|
Oh god I've done nothing writing in so long  I went back through my DW Elementals thing and made a few changes. CHANGELOG • I edited the Champion of Fire so it's only based on two stats, not four. • I adjusted the core Champion of Nature move so it's a bit more thematic. Monsters: Done. Champion of Water: Pretty much done, I think. Champion of Fire: Set now, I think, now that the stats are more focused. Champion of Earth: Still need a fourth move. Champion of Air: I think I need a better move than Fresh Air. Champion of Nature: Also done to my satisfaction. Champion of Metal: Is the CHA penalty too much of a downside? Should it be -1 ongoing to CHA moves, or dropping the stat? Are those two things equivalent? Magic items: still in draft.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2013 19:46
|
|
|
Got about a dozen more demons stated up for Quest of the Wizards 2nd Edition. Gonna get it done by the end of the year. The Dictionnaire Infernal owns: 
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2013 22:16
|
|
|
Well, I'm feeling good that I've finished my November contest entry. Making this the 2nd project and contest I've finished, ever. I feel like I'm getting a better handle on things every time, maybe now that I'm finishing what I start, I can start refining and tightening up what I write a lot more.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2013 04:54
|
|
|
So here goes. Card Subject To Change (working name, although I'll probably keep it around as a subtitle) is a mostly cooperative puzzle-solving/resource management card-based professional wrestling RPG. Instead of portraying the on-screen story as genuine (as most rasslin rpgs do) CSTC instead drops kayfabe and looks to emulate wrestling if not realistically, then at least 'realistic' to the understanding of the internet wrestling fanbase; in-ring to business to backstage and most everything else in between. The point of a match is to fill the Time allotted with entertaining ring work, hit the Spots required to tell the story, generate Heat for the match and for the winning competitor, and doing so while managing your Fatigue and avoiding Injury to yourself and your fellow performers. To do this, each involved player utilizes their own personal deck of house cards (that serves as your character sheet) that details things like their Gimmick, their Style, their face/heel Alignment, and various other cards that detail or affect their persona or ability to work a match. Each of these cards has a small bit of rules text that, when combined with the various house cards related to match stipulations or feud details or the like, generates the particular emergent approach or 'game' each player has to play to work their end of a match. Everybody in-ring plays with their own poker deck to build hands individually and with others to hit certain moves to carry the match to it's decided conclusion; out of ring players play the  commentary and interview team. Mechanically, it's shaping up to look something like a semi-cooperative trick-taking Fluxx with a moderate grading & scoring system.I'd also like to account for are those all-too-often fuckups and  moments, as being irritated and/or outraged with X story or Y's push or Z's stupid decisions is a real and universal part of being a wrestling fan, I think. So there's a Swerve Deck of back things that can happen to characters, in both the immediate and the long-term. Freak injuries, awful turns, stupid booking calls, all of it's there. Cause being a professional wrestleman is about rolling with the punches.I've got more lofty goals I'll detail later as I have make more substantive progress on the basic engine. Karma to Burn fucked around with this message at 11:04 on Dec 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2013 08:37
|
|
|
Guys, I keep trying to write the kitchen sink into my game! Every time I think I've settled on a set of mechanics, I hear about something cool and try to change stuff around. Maybe it's because I'm writing more of a rule set than a game, and so I don't have a laser-focused goal (this was a big mistake, what the hell am I doing). But, like, last month when people were talking about playing cards as a resolution mechanic, I went OH OH OH I SHOULD DO THAT and then when I read about EotE's way to create all these different outcomes from a roll I went OH OH OH THAT TOO and now I'm losing sight of my original plans. I'll never finish anything because I keep wanting to change it. How do you guys keep focused and how do you know when to set some rules down and leave them the gently caress alone?
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2013 18:06
|
|
|
Error 404 posted:Well, I'm feeling good that I've finished my November contest entry. Making this the 2nd project and contest I've finished, ever. A belated congrats on a success! The true secret to finishing more is to finish something. As for keeping focused, well, the contests help. And also I usually end up writing more than fits into a project, so I have to start cutting, and that's not something most RPG designers are comfy with even though they should be doing it. Cut your ideas out, leave them aside, scrap them, just focus on your core elements of play, the things that make your game what it is. It's basically writer's self-mutilation. Writers are a sorry lot.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2013 18:23
|
|
|
Rulebook Heavily posted:A belated congrats on a success! The true secret to finishing more is to finish something. I totally do the same, especially because when I'm inspired I get non-linear as gently caress so working on sci-fi X will give me great ideas for fantasy Y, or a mechanic for Z that doesn't fit anything I'm working on now. my solution has been to make a note and file it for later. It wastes a little bit of time now to save a lot of time later preventing my getting distracted and sidetracked (because I'm ADHD and neurotic, natch) I have at least 2 full notebooks (also stuffed with scraps of paper from when a notebook wasn't handy) and I'm legit scared to try counting all the little one-line to several paragraph .txt files in my Ideas folder. Xaander posted:Guys, I keep trying to write the kitchen sink into my game! Like I mentioned above, I tend to do this too. For example, working on my november entry gave me no less than 3 different ideas for game resolution mechanics, an idea for novel modifications to existing systems to play my game's setting, and one entirely new setting/mechanic/game unrelated to anything else that is my current obsession until I get bored and move on. My point in all this, is to mention that maybe you should also 'Take notes, Move on' like I do?
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2013 18:48
|
|
|
Right, I'm making an appeal. I have the core engine for my game mostly down, but I'm having a serious blank on ideas for actual powers and items and stuff, and it's proving pretty hard to test how the actual engine is working when I don't have a car to drive it in. I made this thread to datamine from (and also because I thought it would be a fun thread) but it kind of died. Any suggestions as to what to do now?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 14:44
|
|
|
First, find a game with a million powers in it already, like 4th ed D&D or Double Cross or something, and try and translate as many of the "Basic" powers across as you can. The ones that are either low level, or in the core book, or just do something really simple like "damage that guy and give him an accuracy penalty" rather than off-the-wall poo poo. Make them fit within the rules of your game, as close as you can. Once you've done that, you a) have a big powers list so it looks like you've done some work and b) all of these powers are presumably from a professional product and thus are good in the context they came from. Step two is get a bunch of idiots together and playtest this poo poo. Any time someone says "why would I take this?" or "this doesn't seem that useful" or "holy crap this is broken in half" or something along those lines, you know you've hit something that didn't quite work. Take notes, ditch stuff or make modifications as needed. Really, the only way you're gonna find what's good is to playtest a whole shitload and see what sticks. An alternative is to do a playtest where nobody has any powers and say "you guys are all playing magical wizards who can make their own powers up, go" and see what people come up with. You'll end up with a lot of bullshit but at the very least you'll get some kind of idea of the kind of things people want to be able to do in your game. If everybody picks variants of "giant laser beam" you know that a big ol' offensive power is wanted. If everyone picks "Fly" seems like mobility is king. Round two of this is where you pick the best powers, rewrite them yourself to make them balanced and effective then do the playtest again with "Okay, you're all playing your characters' children and you've inherited both their 'make poo poo up' powers and some of the powers they wrote down" and hand out the rewritten previous game's powers. See if they still like and use them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 15:58
|
|
|
Just start writing out ideas. Freewrite if you have to. I wrote a full supplement for Fortune system using this method, and that's "cool ability shopping list: the game". I'll do a relatively free-written list of "cool attack abilities you can have/do" right here, stopping as soon as I hesitate for a few seconds: deflecting missiles blocking spells moving and attacking everyone you move past attacking everyone in reach riposting against everyone who misses you get extra attacks when you meet a condition light your weapon on fire light yourself on fire light someone else on fire spit in someone's eye go into a rage when you take damage, making counterattacks more powerful when you kill someone you feel reinvigorated biting insults disarm opponent literally target bodyparts for special effects (like wings to make flying enemies go down) There, not a bad list. You don't actually have to write everything at once, just sit down and write. Write about what you had for breakfast if that's what you have to do to keep going. And of course you can steal from a ton of systems and games and novels and whatnot for effects you want: I've stolen the various elemental arrows from Thief before to flesh out an equipment list. If your problem is more that you don't know how to fit the powers around your resolution engine, you should consider revisiting the core engine with options in mind from the start - rolling more dice and picking highest, special effects on matching dice, powers that have specific "maybe" conditions (if your system has more than a yes/no core to it) that replace a normal attack's "maybe" condition, damage that lingers and deals more damage after the attack is resolved and similar. Very often you'll find a cool mechanical trick first and then make up a cool power theme to attach it to afterwards.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 16:35
|
|
|
And don't forget the basics like: Attack one target, Attack more than one target, Make yourself harder to hit, Do nothing but move, Negotiate with opponent, Perform healing. That kind of stuff.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 17:53
|
|
|
Doodmons posted:First, find a game with a million powers in it already, like 4th ed D&D or Double Cross or something, and try and translate as many of the "Basic" powers across as you can. The ones that are either low level, or in the core book, or just do something really simple like "damage that guy and give him an accuracy penalty" rather than off-the-wall poo poo. Make them fit within the rules of your game, as close as you can. Once you've done that, you a) have a big powers list so it looks like you've done some work and b) all of these powers are presumably from a professional product and thus are good in the context they came from. Rulebook Heavily posted:If your problem is more that you don't know how to fit the powers around your resolution engine Rulebook Heavily posted:Just start writing out ideas. Freewrite if you have to. I wrote a full supplement for Fortune system using this method, and that's "cool ability shopping list: the game". Splicer fucked around with this message at 22:39 on Dec 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 22:36
|
|
|
quote:I was writing a big thing about how this meant free-writing wasn't working, but when I started trying to explain what I meant using the swordmage as an example I came up with a bunch of neat teleport-based ideas. It's like magic, I tell you. Magic.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 22:42
|
|
|
Well, I've hit a mental roadblock on Power of the Elements, so I went to another of my mostly-done projects and started doing a little more work on it. Because I can't focus on a drat thing. I made a Fate Accelerated hack based on the old Hijinx d20 minigame. It's about playing a band (talking animal optional) who tour in an old beat-up band and solve mysteries. It does need some work, because I wrote a good chunk of it before I really read all of FAE (because that's how I roll :smugbrows:), so I need to adjust the stuff about NPCs and the special conflict types. (Comments are on in the doc, so feel free to kibitz)
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 22:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 08:15 |
|
|
I didn't make my initial deadline due to concerns such as getting a grant and being drunk a lot, Crusader Kings 2 and Skyrim. However, my OREclone death-to-OSR thing is chugging along nicely. I finally ran some playtests with my co-writer yesterday and turns out that the dice mechanics (roll for matches, stuff knocks off dice from your matches, doing two things at once drops dice from your pool) are really really goddamn fast to start working for a newbie once you get over the "what the gently caress's an elfgame and whats up with these weirdass dice"-barrier. The problem with writing anything is that you actually need to write them and even if you're working on something based on existing mechanics, you need to write your own poo poo because there's a difference between plagiarism and not-plagiarism. I got an assload of drudgework ahead of me to write up spells, combat disciplines and poo poo like that. The basics are there now, just need to formalize and balance the character creation stuff which is again a ton of drudgework since there's like urrr thirty templates/kits or so to choose from. I might need to cut that down for size.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 11:12
|
|
