|
 Most tabletop games focus on the "D&D scenario": a small group of people -- 4 or 5 -- playing one game in person for over a few years. With the advancement of technology, we have seen the rise of new ways of playing roleplaying games. Particularity, there has been a rise in online, traditional roleplaying: be it play by post or through a skype or skype-like program perhaps with a virtual tabletop. There aren't a lot of games that actively support this style of play. I feel this should be rectified. That is why I'm making the January Contest all about RPGs that actively support online, traditional roleplaying games and attempt to take advantage of the digital frontier to innovate in traditional roleplaying game design. Just like the contest I ran last July, this prize is a $25 giftcard to drivethrurpg for the person who comes in first place. Redeemable for many great games offered by the website. Questions Do we have to keep to a theme? The theme and type of game is completely up to you. If you want to do a traditional dungeon crawling game, that's fine. Want to do a newfangled storytelling game that focuses on emulating romantic comedies? Go for it! The point is to make a game that actively supports online, traditional roleplaying games: the subject matter of the game is up to you. Page minimum? Page Maximum? There is neither a page minimum nor a page maximum. The length is up to you to decide. Actively Support, how so? Most of the answer to this question should come from you, but mostly it means a game that was clearly designed to take advantage of this style of roleplaying. To drive ideas, here is a list of some of the differences in the gaming types. 1)In play by posts, gamers tend to be available at different times of day and it isn't uncommon to post only once a day or, even, once every three or five days. 2)In play by posts, due to the above, strict initiative systems can be detrimental and slow games to a halt. 3)Digital gamers aren't limited by what physical randomizers they own or what physical randomizers can be made. There is a lot of software out there that can be used to generate random numbers in sets of numbers whose randomizers either would be unlikely for a player to own or impossible for a player to own. 4)The cumbersome nature that comes with miniatures or setting up individual decks for games that use such a system is greatly reduced for digital gamers as there is software on the market that eases this issue. 5)In play by posts, players generally have a lot of time to think about their actions and describe them in detail. 6)In play by posts, players are generally expected to be more autonomous to a degree to speed up the flow of the game and GMs try to avoid too many intermediate rolls for the same reason. The above is just a small list of differences. Chances are, from your experience, you have more examples of things that are different between local and digital traditional roleplaying. About the software... Any software you want to use for your game, if you decide to focus on one in particular, should be free or at very low cost (under $10) since I may need use them to judge the title. Software that would aid in the playing of your game should be listed in the game somewhere. If this were a product to be sold, not everyone would know of what software would be best to use. The contest ends January 31st at 11:59P.M. EST. I'd like all entries to be in by then. I'd also like weekly status updates, if possible. This is not a requirement. Judging I am judging on the following factors: Creativity: How creative the title is? Support for medium: How effective is the game at taking advantage of the medium? Practicality: How practical is this game to run? Presentation: How easy and clear are the rules? (possibly) Playtest Data: I'm not committing to this, but I may run a few of the games to test them.
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2014 11:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2024 15:14 |
|
|
Definitely interested
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2014 02:44
|
|
|
Ah poo poo, this lines up semi-closely to what I was going to be doing all January anyway. I'm. . .kind of in. Basically, I'm doing an independent study next semester to create a tabletop RPG that's designed to be played in the browser of a phone, tablet, or laptop--sort of Jackbox style. I'm trying to make a dungeon crawlish RPG with a living digital rulebook/character sheet that's built so that you can introduce new players to it and let the game interface kind of naturally teach them how to play and automate things for them to avoid the whole "okay, now memorize this book before you can have fun" problem RPGs struggle with. My semester starts late January, and I'm hoping to have a prototype of it done by then. So I'm making something that's actually meant to be played face to face, but that uses the internet to do so (and would hopefully work just fine with Skype). I'm also going to be spending more time programming and trying to wrangle database hosting than I will be making game rules, and what I'll have by the end is going to be stupidly stupidly prototypish and unfinished--odds are strong I won't be able to pull off inter-device communication in only a month. All that said, this seems close enough that I'd love to enter as a semi-contestant--possibly not eligible for prize-winnings, but still posting updates and commentary here. Is that cool with you?
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2014 03:25
|
|
|
OtspIII posted:Ah poo poo, this lines up semi-closely to what I was going to be doing all January anyway. I'm. . .kind of in. The goal of the contest is for games that actively support online, traditional roleplaying games that take advantage of the medium and innovate game design. I'd be fine with you entering as a semi-contestant as your entry does seem close enough. If you're entry, when all is said and done, ends up seeming closer than that I might upgrade it to full contestant status, but that's a decision to be made then.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2014 03:33
|
|
|
I'm very interested in this kind of challenge and will be entering!
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2014 03:38
|
|
|
I have a lot on my plate right now, but then again I have a big plate. Count me in, non-committedly.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2014 04:29
|
|
|
*weeps softly for the anniversary of their own contest* i've been thinking about this kind of thing for a long time so i'll probably take part
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2014 08:11
|
|
|
Interested.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2014 17:10
|
|
|
I'm quite interested in this, though I currently have no idea as to what mechanics and theme I want.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 13:18
|
|
|
working title: kuiper crisis
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2015 10:20
|
|
|
Exquisite Dungeon Crawl or something coming right up
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2015 10:52
|
|
|
Petrolblue and I are interested in making an entry! WAYSTATION PARADISO We're going to be drawing influences from Space Station 13, the Dynamars Corporation, and every space disaster film that doesn't take itself too seriously. There are three big things we'll be looking to make sure the system can handle: Large numbers of players. A tabletop RPG is limited by how many people you can fit around a gaming table. A forum RPG isn't. Waystation Paradiso will be able to cope with twenty or more players. Discussion-driven action. Mafia works really well on forums because so much of the action is focused around having arguments, which forums are really good at enabling: if all you're doing is arguing back and forth, you don't need to wait for the GM to adjudicate an action before you start posting, so the game moves much quicker. Differing levels of engagement. Different people can spend different amounts of time posting to forums. One poster might be able to keep tabs on the discussion 24/7, another might just be popping in to post every day. They obviously won't get the same game experience, but they both ought to be able to get something out of the game and contribute something to it. I will hash out the rules in detail later, but basically: each player is a member of the crew of Waystation Paradiso, a space station that is chronically underfunded and more or less constantly in peril. Individual players can't do much by default, but they can be elected -- by the other players -- to one of four officer positions. The officers get to make hard choices about how to allocate Paradiso's resources (including the crew) and the direction Paradiso's future will take, and they have to balance furthering their own agenda for Paradiso with the need to keep the other players happy with what they're doing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2015 20:03
|
|
|
I've written up a first draft of the rules here: http://waystation-paradiso.wikia.com/wiki/Waystation_Paradiso_Wiki. We've not yet written up all the tags and mission cards that might show up, and I imagine they'll likely be the brunt of the work. If you can't be bothered to click, here's the game summary from the Overview page: Waystation Paradiso posted:Waystation Paradiso is a game for 10+ players and a GM, to be played on a webforum. Players are members of a space station facing imminent disaster.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2015 11:31
|
|
|
Whybird posted:Normally, there is little your character can directly do to affect the station. You forgot about the possibility of striking or sabotaging the missions. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2015 18:32
|
|
|
petrol blue posted:You forgot about the possibility of striking or sabotaging the missions. I'm in two minds about the strike / sabotage mechanic (it's included in the wiki but not in the overview page) -- the only current downside to it is the purely social 'it will piss people off' one, and players already have no-confidence motions as a means to punish officers they don't like. All other things being equal I'd probably leave it in but minimising rule density is a major priority, and it seems to add a fairly clunky mechanic for not much payoff.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 13:30
|
|
|
Accused! The players stand in the dock accused of a string of horrific, irresponsible or just down right random crimes. Each round they recount their part in the events which led them to this point, trying to pass the blame for each crime both through their descriptions and through the in game mechanics. This game is specifically genreless, allowing the Gamesmaster to lay out a setting at the beginning and players to work from that foundation. Are they fantasy adventurers whose murder hobo ways have finally caught up to them? Are they modern day high profile art thieves whose latest escape has gone awry? Are they unfathomable and capricious gods from outside time and space whose chthonic chaotic acts on earth are finally being judged? Players will be given a point buy based system of characteristics that will allow them to affect the action alongside their descriptions and allow some individuality in character creation. (This is my biggest loving headache in designing this at the moment). Influences:- Fiasco, Baron Munchausen and the old 411mania forums efed which degenerated into time travel and madness.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 16:34
|
|
|
Argument at Dinner / Court Gaffes / Gossip King The players are rival nobles seated to a violent five-course dinner. You have until the end of the cheese-board to claim your rightful place at the top of the table, through cajoling, gossip, demands, boasts, insults and outright vendettas. The game sits 4-7 players and a GM and is very much at the basic stage! It's based on a strict diplomatic ruleset of manners, where you harm your rival's reputations via spoken words. Do too much to someone in particular or one of your betters, however, and they may claim vendetta and kill you in a duel. Or destroy your reputation when you back down, you dishonorable cur. The game has two phases: a conversation phase and a resolution phase. 1. The Conversation Phase has everyone hurling insults, gossips and boasts at each other as much as they like. With anything you say, you may declare in your post that you are making a play: secretly send either a play type or a blank play to the GM. If you choose a play type, it must match the words you spoke; an insult, boast or gossip. You may make up to three plays in each round, but only one can be real; the others are blank and will have no effect. 2. In the Resolution Phase, the GM reveals the plays and applies their effects to the injured parties. After five courses (5 conversations and 5 reveals), the least ruined player is the winner. My key design aims are: * Character! I'm looking for something that'll generate heated and memorable arguments, with plenty of bluffing. * Post Variance: type as much, or as little, as you like. Separating play and posting should cater between the extremes of a single post and a multiple-page argument. * Simultaneous play. No waiting for a specific person! * Low workload for players: specifically a single resolution phase that only one person is responsible for, then right back into the action. The Supreme Court fucked around with this message at 18:02 on Jan 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 17:23
|
|
|
Update! I've now written all of the tags and all but two of the Mission cards. Most of the mission cards are all about changing around the tags on the station, with a couple more allowing the station's four officers to subvert the cause of democracy (by unanimously removing people from power, preventing people from voting, that kind of thing.) When those two are polished off, I'll be focusing on creating some copy/paste BBcode on the wiki so that GMs don't need to keep typing updates out, as well as a cheat-sheet for the process each turn. I also want to have a think about the percentages that low/medium/high manpower and risk correspond to, to make sure that the ones I have work. I'll also be working on an application -- not much more than a glorified spreadsheet, really -- for a GM to keep track of votes, officer positions, missions, and station tags. E: And a bit of late-night inspiration means that the final two missions are up now. Whybird fucked around with this message at 01:06 on Jan 20, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2015 00:50
|
|
|
We're reaching the end of the month. How are the contest entries going for everyone?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 02:00
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 02:04
|
|
|
My game kinda sucks in its current format and i dont think i can finish it in time. other than that, pretty good!
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 02:05
|
|
|
The rules on the wiki I've linked are good to go -- the only thing missing is random character generation rules. Whether I get the game-tracking application finished will go right down to the wire, but the game will still run without it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 10:17
|
|
|
I made an picture 
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 12:56
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 18:38
|
|
|
Yeah I've crashed and burned. Ended up playing too many games of my inspirations (Fiasco) and not enough actually working on my own project.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 22:56
|
|
|
i'm still trying, but i am in the "oh god gently caress this gently caress me gently caress everything" phase of design (it's all of the phases)
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 23:05
|
|
|
Well I'm crazy late to the game but I think I'd still like to make an entry. Hopefully I can make a post this coming week - have all the rules and whatnot written down on one folded up piece of paper, but it'd be nice to get it prettier. My concept is basically wacky racers/Mario kart + permadeath. Players take the role of corporations entering racers into a death race around the world. Racers are expendable, and may die often, but the longer they stay alive the more points the players get. Points can be used to upgrade further racers, and change aspects of the game world. Racers start out with certain stats - these stay static throughout the game. During the race, racers can equip parts that modify their capabilities and stats - but if the racer dies, vehicles behind them get to roll for access to their dropped equipment. One of the main factors in the game is character agency in creating the game world - the storyline is set up mad-libs style, so people can fill stuff in when prompted; the parts that racers can equip are created by the players themselves on an group excel spreadsheet; and the racecourse itself can be modified by corps spending their accumulated points. The gameplay is very similar to my currently running CYOA, Lord of the Tower - each turn, each player rolls for their action, and once everyone's taken action, the GM weaves it into narrative. As part of character creation, the racers are assigned an AI action, which is used if the player cannot post - and since every death gains points for the corp anyhow, even if the racer dies due to a poor action its no biggy. I'm still nailing down finer points, but I'm hoping to get a rough writeup this week!
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2015 02:22
|
|
|
that sounds much cooler than my idea gently caress
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2015 02:44
|
|
|
Still working on it (needs lots of polish), but here's a working draft of Sundown Run, my play by post car racing/corporate advertising/apocalyptic play by post game! --Sundown Run--  A world, doomed to die in fusion fire, destined to be blasted to nothing by an encroaching supernova. Common enough in the galaxy, but dramatic just the same. And a world living on borrowed time is the very picture of deniability, attracting those who want something buried forever - or those who want to test the limits of science without short-sighted ‘ethics’. Thanks to the gracious funding and logistical support provided by the Ascended Executive Mega-Corp RAMA, this year’s Sundown Run will be taken place on this forlorn garden world. Thrill seekers, conscripted prisoners, adventurers and assorted badasses all compete in a race around the world, knowing death is right around the corner - but if you’re fast enough, death’ll take second place instead. Features: - Play both a corporate sponsor and a racer at the same time! When your racers die (and they will!), the points they've scored in challenges will revert to the company, for use in building a new, better car, for smearing opposing corps and reducing their point gain (or boosting your own), or putting them towards research (along with other corps) to benefit all corps at the same time! - Racers on the other hand can spend the points they've earned in garages to add other Parts to their vehicles. But watch out - if someone croaks you because you're ahead of them in the race, people behind you get a crack at the Parts you've installed! - Extremely common death means many people on the forum get to get a crack at racing, but even those not playing get a say - each round, non-players are free to donate one point to whichever racer they want to help. In addition, most Parts are user made, via a shared google spreadsheet - when at a garage, racers can choose from a wide list of already created parts. Hoping to get it nicer by the deadline, but worst case scenario I'm still planning a playtest later this year! Dog Kisser fucked around with this message at 07:00 on Jan 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 06:55
|
|
|
dog kisser posted:Still working on it (needs lots of polish), but here's a working draft of Sundown Run, my play by post car racing/corporate advertising/apocalyptic play by post game! Wow, one part NASCAR one part Deathrace. I really like this! In the grim darkness of the 1980s... Suggestion: Not that it's super likely, but you may want to figure in audience-size with your crowd participation mechanic. If there's a lot of spectators, you can end up with one maxed out racer and everyone else stuck at scrub tier (or various bits in between) which can end up not being too fun (even accounting for Death being Certain in the rules) So what if you made a scale or cap based on how many are 'actively' spectating? like you have your OP listing all the corps and their racers and then a list of Spectators that have story access. 1-10 Spectators: everyone has that swing point they can throw at a racer, and everyone can make a part to throw on the list. 11-20 Spectators: everyone has a swing point, but it takes 2 swing points to equal a 'real' point or something, the new parts list has a limited number of spaces, you take suggestions for parts, everyone votes on the coolest/most useful to go on the list. 21-30 , etc. That way you can still keep outcomes relatively controlled regardless of how popular the game in question will be.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 20:21
|
|
|
Error 404 posted:Wow, one part NASCAR one part Deathrace. I really like this! Yeah, that's a great idea. I'll probably just steal that wholesale - at least the bit about the swing points. For parts, I want people to have a bunch to choose from for less creative types - but on the other hand, directly voting on parts means the overall quality will probably be higher! Good input!
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 20:41
|
|
|
working on my game still, but putting this link up. i'll just copy-paste it to another doc and do further work on that copy after the deadline man i haven't gotten nearly enough done on this 
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2015 01:21
|
|
|
yeah mine is horribly incomplete but i hope the general idea shone through at least
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2015 05:54
|
|
|
Oh yeah, Sundown Run is pretty much good to go - I'm still prettifying things a bit and setting up an aesthetically pleasing Google Spreadsheet document for Part creation, but even taken by itself you can play the game. Also has a printable Character Sheet, if you're playing the home game! Stuff that didn't make it in (just started it too late, I guess - didn't even see the thread till the 28th!) - Sample play session: Woulda been convenient to have, but 'twasn't to be! I'll add it in later on - FAQ: Always nice to have to answer some questions that people might have that aren't immediately obvious - Better, more interactive .PDF Character Sheet with proper forms and whatnot: Fell by the wayside since most of this will be played on a forum directly and people will just post their details in their posts anyhow. I still like having the options for things to LOOK nice if you wanted to play it offline or on Roll20 or somesuch. Overall, I like how it turned out, and I'm anxious to put it into play in a few months.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2015 06:07
|
|
|
Well, this is what I have so far. It's still very much in progress and full of placeholder stuff that makes it unusable. My goal is to have it good enough that someone could use it as a module/GM screen type thing by Valentine's Day. I also decided that figuring out stuff like how much data I can realistically display on the screen before poo poo gets hard to use should take priority over any sort of networking logic, since usability needs are probably going to end up demanding pretty radical redesigns to the project, so this doesn't really fit the contest at all.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2015 06:52
|
|
|
Hey guys, due to personal things, I didn't even realize it was Feburary till just now. As you might imagine, the contest is over. All entries are to be judged as they were before the deadline. Sorry Tollymain, but I don't think it's fair for contestants to continue working after the deadline has passed. I would have said this earlier, but, as I mentioned, I didn't notice the change in month. The are entries are as follows: Dogkisser with --Sundown Run-- Tollymain with Kuiper Crisis Otspll with APRG WhyBird with Waystation Paradiso I apologize if I missed any entires. Judging will begin ASAP. I plan to have all entries judged by the end of the month.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2015 03:47
|
|
|
nah, i think you misunderstood. i'm leaving this version as it is, any refinements go into a new noncontest doc
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2015 06:20
|
|
|
We wait with bated breath!
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 10:47
|
|
|
Sorry, some bad poo poo happened, college started, and a bunch of other crap that made me sort of lose track of this. Midterms are over by the end of the week. I can probably get the contest the prize out the week after next. I'm really sorry, but the first part of this year was not ideal, as it turned out.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 14:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2024 15:14 |
|
|
Covok posted:Sorry, some bad poo poo happened, college started, and a bunch of other crap that made me sort of lose track of this. Midterms are over by the end of the week. I can probably get the contest the prize out the week after next. Nah, now I feel bad for pressuring you! I just like entering contests and seeing what people think of my entries. There's certainly no rush - life comes first, always.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 16:20
|
|