|
quote:there's by no means a guarantee that you will get better stats when you roll than if you choose to distribute a set "safe" number You are much, much more likely to get a (significantly) better result than you are to get a worse one, especially given that the randomized results trend upward (you can't get a -1 rolling randomly, you can get a +3, for example). It sounds like it's working as intended for you, though, and that was all I was asking! Heart Attacks fucked around with this message at 14:36 on Oct 5, 2013 |
#
?
Oct 5, 2013 14:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 02:11 |
|
|
Heart Attacks posted:Is it intentional that rolling is a way better option than taking the predefined stats (average of 7 vs automatic 3)? Edit: That might be how it works in World of Dungeons too, I dunno, never touched the game. PDQ is the lightest system I know and there's been at least one successful Supers game using it on these forums. PDQ# is basically the same thing with a few more fiddly bits. You could also give Fate Accelerated Edition a look.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2013 14:56
|
|
|
Heart Attacks posted:You are much, much more likely to get a (significantly) better result than you are to get a worse one, especially given that the randomized results trend upward (you can't get a -1 rolling randomly, you can get a +3, for example). It sounds like it's working as intended for you, though, and that was all I was asking! Hm, yeah I guess you're right about that. Maybe I should change the roll results to: 2-3 = -1 4-6 = 0 7-9 = 1 10-11 = 2 12 = 3 instead of 2-6=0 7-9=1 10-11=2 12=3 It'll probably balance things out a bit better. Thanks for the suggestion!
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2013 16:16
|
|
|
waqii posted:Hm, yeah I guess you're right about that. Maybe I should change the roll results to: Who loves anydice.com? I love anydice.com a lot. It does probability so I don't have to ever touch Pascal's triangle again. Your new curve, output 6d{-1,-1,-1,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,2,2,2,2,2,3} named "RolledStats" , bellcurves out at about 4. You have a 23% chance to get lower stats than the distribution method, and a 61% chance to do better. The old curve, output 6d{0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,2,2,2,2,2,3}, bellcurved out at 4 to 5 ... not much higher, but with only a 13% chance to drop below 3 total, and a 71% chance of doing better. I guess the question is, do you want the average rolled character to have higher stats than someone who played it safe? The penalty for a higher stat total is a flat 35% chance not to get any 2s or 3s, although the reward is a 15% chance to get at least one 3. Mystic Mongol fucked around with this message at 04:03 on Oct 6, 2013 |
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2013 04:00
|
|
|
Mystic Mongol posted:Who loves anydice.com? I love anydice.com a lot. It does probability so I don't have to ever touch Pascal's triangle again. At this point it's starting to be more about probability (boring) and less about playing a fallout rpg (fun) which is kind of not what I intended. I might just skip one of the ways to stat your character, or make it so that all players either roll, or distribute points so that there won't be any envy at the table. Don't get me wrong, I really appreciate that you guys take the time to look at and review the system, but I feel like your focusing on the wrong thing (or rather not the thing I wanted.)
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2013 08:08
|
|
|
waqii posted:At this point it's starting to be more about probability (boring) and less about playing a fallout rpg (fun) which is kind of not what I intended. Just think of it as a teachable moment about design. A lot of the imbalances and trap options in RPGs come from someone saying, "Oh, player X wants to x-ify, so let's give him that option," and skipping the design phase because coming up with RPG mechanics is fun and doing the probability backwork behind them is boring. So you wind up with trap options and FOO options, and you're punishing players who play a certain way (which may or may not fall in line with the way the game is designed to be played, which can lead to dissonance and arguments at the table) and any attempts to fix it later come across as bolted on whitewashing and chaps the rear end of players who don't like clumsy attempts to mandate balance.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2013 22:08
|
|
|
waqii posted:At this point it's starting to be more about probability (boring) and less about playing a fallout rpg (fun) which is kind of not what I intended. If you're not looking at probability when doing RPG design then you really shouldn't be doing RPG design, or stick to fluff only.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2013 23:41
|
|
|
Mystic Mongol posted:Just think of it as a teachable moment about design. A lot of the imbalances and trap options in RPGs come from someone saying, "Oh, player X wants to x-ify, so let's give him that option," and skipping the design phase because coming up with RPG mechanics is fun and doing the probability backwork behind them is boring. So you wind up with trap options and FOO options, and you're punishing players who play a certain way (which may or may not fall in line with the way the game is designed to be played, which can lead to dissonance and arguments at the table) and any attempts to fix it later come across as bolted on whitewashing and chaps the rear end of players who don't like clumsy attempts to mandate balance. You're right, of course! I hadn't really thought of it that way. I think I'll completely scrap rolling up your stats as I don't like such an important part as player creation being random in that way. I'm more into the idea of giving players full control of this, to really make sure that players get to create a character they want to play, instead of one that they'll have to adapt to. I might even change it to the fallout-way of doing it, where players get a pool of points that they can distribute (adding to a max of 3, subtracting to a minimum of -2) As long as rolling the die (no matter the max/minimum stat) can result in either a failure or a success. Does this make sense? Edit: Actually, the more I think about it, the more I think that the default "distribute these stats" is the way to go here. I don't want players to get to start with a stat of 3, seeing as that is the max stat, as that wouldn't make character progression as interesting. At some tiers when you level up, you get to choose to add +1 to a stat, and I want this to feel special and rewarding, so that players feel like it really makes a difference. waqii fucked around with this message at 08:57 on Oct 7, 2013 |
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2013 07:48
|
|
|
Ruleset: Crunchy Support: User-Generated Chargen: Involved Setting: Universal Demands: Potentially Unreasonable My pipe dream is a game based on the Persona series, where your character's special abilities in combat are derived from an anime monster you summon from the ~sea of your soul~ or whatever. Since Personae are strengthened by interactions with PCs and NPCs the game would seem to work really, really well in a * World hack with all the relationship stats...but * World games are too fiction-based, to the degree such a thing is possible. Ditto FATE I want to take all the crunch that a game like D&D uses for character building, magic item management, etc. and cram it all into in Persona creation and leveling, so that your actual character becomes fairly low-maintenance, leaving you free to dick around investigating until the bad guys show up and you switch to roll-playing. Am I going to have to write this game I want to play from scratch? Is there, at the very minimum, a system to use as a starting point? I see a lot of lovely games on DriveThruRPG that claim to be the next coming of Gygax, only for anime games/JRPG-style games/whatever and they invariably aren't when I pick them up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2013 03:13
|
|
|
Since you've spoken the correct invocation (Crunchy/Involved/Universal), I'll go ahead and mention HERO System 6th Edition, which can handle just about anything, but I do know some people find it to be too crunchy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2013 03:23
|
|
|
InShaneee posted:Since you've spoken the correct invocation (Crunchy/Involved/Universal), I'll go ahead and mention HERO System 6th Edition, which can handle just about anything, but I do know some people find it to be too crunchy. I only have direct experience with 5th Edition, but yeah it's pretty good for this. You'll have to mess with the character creation parameters a bit, but here's what I recommend: Make the player characters all Standard Heroes, and then give them all an additional budget of points that can only be used to build Duplicates (with the "different from character" mod). You could have one powerful or versatile Persona, or you could have several less powerful/versatile ones. The nice thing about Duplicates is that there are built in mechanics for them being a part of the character that spawns them- when they recombine with the host, the host suffers damage proportionate to what the duplicate sustained. You also have the option of applying limitations to them that require them to stay within a certain distance of the host, and that kind of thing. This structure also makes the Persona an autonomous character for gameplay purposes while it is manifested, which meshes better with the anime end of things, compared to the games; the human PC can be doing their own thing during their actions, and the Persona duplicate can do its own thing during its actions. This lets you have scenarios where, for example, your human is spending all of his time trying to pick a tricky lock, and his Persona is fending off enemies for him. For a setting like this, you will probably have to homebrew all your NPCs and monsters, but there are supplements available to help alleviate the pain with like pre-statted Powers in various categories and that sort of thing. You'll also have to come up with your own system for Social Links and Fusion. If you're looking for recommendation on those things, the easiest way I can think of is to assign a list of themes and archetypes to each Arcana, and just cop the Arcana fusion table from P4. For this system, you would have to fudge the rules about Character Points, and say that the Persona Points are only truly fixed and measured at character creation. This is because Duplication, in 5th Ed at least, uses a Doubling Rule which states that you can double the number of duplicates for 5 points per doubling. So, going from 1 Persona to 16 costs 20 Character Points, and they don't really refund in a useful way. Just tell players when they've begun a Social Link, and keep track of it on a chart where everybody can see it. Whenever it seems appropriate, add or subtract points from said Link. If a player wants to do a Fusion, then they can sacrifice 2 of their existing Personas from their pool, and create a new one that has as many character points as the strongest sacrificed Persona, plus additional points proportionate to the Social Link, in that Link's Arcana. So, say a 100-point Persona and a 150-point Persona fuse to form a new Perona under a Social Link with 20 points in it- your net result would be a 170-point Persona in that Link's Arcana. Summoning is kind of a  . I would just assign some arbitrary, low-ish number of Character Points that a player can spend on a new Persona. 5 Points is pretty appropriate, because of the Doubling rule. Since Experience is awarded in the form of raw Character Points, it means that a player has to choose between improving their human PC or expanding their selection of Personas. Maybe being a character who can only ever have one persona at a time is worth some Disadvantage points.I hope somebody at least finds this wall of text useful 
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2013 14:48
|
|
|
Captain Walker posted:Ruleset: Crunchy You could do this with Mutants and Masterminds.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2013 14:58
|
|
|
I'm really tempted to say GURPS. I haven't played the Persona series, but I imagine GURPS can handle it. As regards relationships, you can always lift the *world system for that wholesale.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2013 17:38
|
|
|
THANK YOU PUDDING SENPAI, YOU HAVE SOLVED MY LIFE TROUBLES I really was on the fence about purchasing Hero 6e and it actually seems really good for what I want to do. Now to find 50 bux to spend to buy it! And the time to stat up every drat Persona, Shadow and NPC! And a group that won't immediately pick Mara as every member of the team! 
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2013 18:25
|
|
|
Captain Walker posted:THANK YOU PUDDING SENPAI, YOU HAVE SOLVED MY LIFE TROUBLES  Just make things like Mara prohibitively expensive. Say for example that you only give them enough Persona Points at first to max out at a 200-point Persona (well, 160 after the Duplication cost) if that's the only one they can initially summon. Make all the higher-tier God Personas more like 300 or 400 points so they have to go through several iterations of Fusion before they can pull it off. But yeah, if you want to have all the Atlus Personas available in a way that matches your specific vision, you will have to write a lot of character sheets You may find it more beneficial to just stat several at different tiers to act as benchmarks for the players to use while statting out their own Personas. "This is what Pixie looks like, this is what Izanagi looks like, here is how you should model things like Mudo/Hama..."
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2013 14:35
|
|
|
Definitely planning to let players invent and customize their own Personas, instead of just statting up every single existing one and then watching in horror as the players go straight for Mara, Trumpeter and Yoshitsune. Personally I want to see the drama club nerd whose persona is Enjolras, Spirit of the Revolution, or the Kanji stand-in who uses Leonidas. Considering a system where fusion improves your current Persona, rather than giving you an all-new one that might. It fit your human abilities. Actually, is there a HERO System for Goddamn Idiots tutorial or starter kit somewhere so I can make sense of what I'm looking at? I get the gist of it but I'd rather get hands on experience before I try hacking together something that may or may not work at all.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2013 17:49
|
|
|
Captain Walker posted:Definitely planning to let players invent and customize their own Personas, instead of just statting up every single existing one and then watching in horror as the players go straight for Mara, Trumpeter and Yoshitsune. Personally I want to see the drama club nerd whose persona is Enjolras, Spirit of the Revolution, or the Kanji stand-in who uses Leonidas. Considering a system where fusion improves your current Persona, rather than giving you an all-new one that might. It fit your human abilities. I seem to recall they published a lite rules book to serve as kind of a PHB? It's still like 25bux, though, so you are probably better off getting both volumes of the core rules (character creation, combat & adventuring). I can't give you much else without  , unfortunately. I recommend checking out the forums over at herogames.com. It's my experience that they are entirely ready to fall all over themselves to teach the system to new people.It's my understanding that the 5th Edition and 6th Edition are not incredibly different from each other- it's primarily a balance overhaul. I think they did things like uncouple Offensive and Defensive Combat Values from each other, and that sort of thing. To that end, this incredible grognard's ancient website about 5th Edition may help you get a handle on things. Just keep in mind that a lot of his mathematical analysis is no longer necessarily true.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2013 20:16
|
|
|
LLSix posted:I'm thinking of running a "Zero to Hero" game in I-can't-believe-it's-not-Classical-Greece. I'm having a hard time settling on a system that can span the full range from peasants to army slaughtering super-heroes. Are there any systems that are fun to play through that entire range? This is literally the sort of game Heroquest 2e was designed for, right down to having a not-Classical-setting in the back of the book. It's about as rules-light as they come, though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2013 14:51
|
|
|
Haystack posted:This is literally the sort of game Heroquest 2e was designed for, right down to having a not-Classical-setting in the back of the book. It's about as rules-light as they come, though. This sounds very exciting. The review you linked makes it sound a lot like PDQ with a D20. How is it better? Worse?
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2013 21:55
|
|
|
RULESET: ??? SUPPORT: DIY CHARGEN: Quick SETTING: Neutral So I'm interested in running a game where all the players are fantasy Hernán Cortés exploring a brand new plane of existence. The focus of the campaign is going to be exploring and cataloging new and useful animals and maybe some natives. One thing that I'm particularly interested in is having the characters engage in magical or mundane research. In regular D&D, materials like dragon blood or diamonds are used for spells, ostensibly because of some innate properties. So alchemists discovering unknown ingredients, wizards finding fun magical components, rangers hunting brand new game, that sort of thing. The setting and support are DIY since i'm making everything up. Since 95% of the campaign will take place on a new plane, setting won't really matter too much. What I'm really torn on is the ruleset. The research aspect seems to be begging for a really crunchy system, since I want more than "I rolled a 20! I discover electricity!". On the other hand, exploration and managing a 400+ man expedition seem much more at home in a freeform system. Combat is probably not going to be the focus of the campaign, if that helps. At this point, I'm thinking of running a modified version of PDQ with more specific rules for research. Any suggestions? Finnankainen fucked around with this message at 01:14 on Oct 11, 2013 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2013 22:36
|
|
|
Captain Walker posted:Ruleset: Crunchy I wrote a game designed entirely around balancing anime aesthetics, separating crunchy combat stats from roleplaying light stats, and effect-based character abilities easy to make it easy for the GM to tool around with things. It is designed originally to be about giant robots, but I have been using it to play Persona for the better part of a year, so it works. Your homework would be in refluffing rocket punches and missile massacres to lightning bolts and arrow showers, but it shouldn't take much work. And it is free so you lose nothing by giving it a quick read. I was coincidentally thinking of writing up an adaptation of the arcana + social link mechanic in the blog this month, so I can post that too.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 00:05
|
|
|
Finnankainen posted:What I'm really torn on is the ruleset. The research aspect seems to be begging for a really crunchy system, since I want more than "I rolled a 20! I discover electricity!". On the other hand, exploration and managing a 400+ man expedition seem much more at home in a freeform system. Combat is probably not going to be the focus of the campaign, if that helps. You could steal Reign's Company rules (which are really awesome) for the expedition management portion and some other system for the individual characters (PDQ is nice, could do FATE as well).
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 00:10
|
|
|
LLSix posted:This sounds very exciting. The review you linked makes it sound a lot like PDQ with a D20. How is it better? Worse? One of the guys in our group is a big Heroquest head. I found it like Fate, but with a D20 spread, open skill set, and some of the tags baked in.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 00:34
|
|
|
Captain Walker posted:Ruleset: Crunchy You could also give Tenra bansho Zero a look
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 02:24
|
|
|
LLSix posted:This sounds very exciting. The review you linked makes it sound a lot like PDQ with a D20. How is it better? Worse? I only have a cursory knowledge of PDQ, so I can't make any detailed comparisons. I have, however, played some FATE, so I can compare to that. The biggest mechanical difference would be that Heroquest allows you to represent and resolve both big and small differences in skill level very clearly and concisely. Characters are defined by a list of words or short phrases called attributes. Attributes can be drat near anything, and are rated from 1 to 20 (they can also have something called 'masteries,' which I'll get to in a second). The number represent a target number you want to roll lower than to get a success. Contests are always resolved by two opposing d20 rolls; the player rolls a skill roll and the GM a resistance roll. You compare the opposing rolls to get the final outcome: a success beats a failure, a crit (nat 1) beats a success, etc. If both rolls succeed, the lower roller gets a marginal victory. Otherwise, the outcome can range from complete failure to complete victory (with major, minor, and marginal results in-between). Masteries come in when a skill would be raised over 20: instead of having an attribute like "Worshiper of Hera - 23" the rating ticks over and you get a mastery, ie "Worshiper of Hera - 3W." A mastery automatically bumps up your level of success after you roll: a failure becomes a success, a success becomes a crit, and a crit lets you shift your opponent's level of success down. Really powerful abilities can have multiple masteries (eg W3 means three masteries). In this way, you can have gods and peons represented in the same system without any trouble: the gods just have a ton of masteries. So: I like the core mechanics, I like the character creation and advancement, and I like that the book is full of clear and interesting examples from a ton of genres. I love rules for community resources. I appreciate that the book has a ton of sage advice on how to build an interesting and collaborative narratives. On other other hand: I'm not wild that the mechanics superficially favor players using their highest rated skill for everything. I'm a little iffy about the fact that there's no initiative system provided. I think the book mentions the pass/fail cycle too much.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2013 04:33
|
|
|
waqii posted:I love Apocalypse World and Dungeon World, as was pretty excited after reading the mini-version of it called World of Dungeons which is basically Dungeon World without the moves, and with Defying Danger for doing mostly everything. (Read it! It's awesome!)
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2013 09:47
|
|
|
Basic Chunnel posted:Very interesting stuff, I'll run it by the group. Thanks!! Cool! Let me know what you guys think!
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2013 12:22
|
|
|
I'm looking at putting together a campaign in the XCrawl setting, but I don't like d20! What would be a good system to transplant it into? Ideally something that makes for decently fast gameplay, can be pretty lethal for PCs, and has enough crunch to it to make dungeon crawling feel nice and tactical. Not choking when modern tech is added to the setting is a plus as well.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2013 18:51
|
|
|
ProfessorProf posted:I'm looking at putting together a campaign in the XCrawl setting, but I don't like d20! What would be a good system to transplant it into? Ideally something that makes for decently fast gameplay, can be pretty lethal for PCs, and has enough crunch to it to make dungeon crawling feel nice and tactical. Not choking when modern tech is added to the setting is a plus as well. Gamma World.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2013 19:52
|
|
|
Alright, you guys are so smart. I got one for you. Pokemon. What system do I run Pokemon in.  ( Please and thank you  )
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2013 00:53
|
|
|
A guy doesn't like d20 so you point him to D&D 4e only more rules light? GURPS is pretty fast in play, though its character creation is pretty lengthy. BRP is quicker, and does dungeon crawling rather well as I understand. Savage Worlds is also a possibility; it's not huge on crunch, but it does various settings pretty well, and the combat runs quite well too, as I recall. For Pokemon - Pathfinder. Sure, every character would have to be a summoner, and the pokemon would have to be statted up as Eidelons, but it's doable. Otherwise, GURPS.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2013 01:28
|
|
|
ProfessorProf posted:I'm looking at putting together a campaign in the XCrawl setting, but I don't like d20! What would be a good system to transplant it into? Ideally something that makes for decently fast gameplay, can be pretty lethal for PCs, and has enough crunch to it to make dungeon crawling feel nice and tactical. Not choking when modern tech is added to the setting is a plus as well. Piell fucked around with this message at 03:19 on Oct 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2013 02:00
|
|
|
ProfessorProf posted:I'm looking at putting together a campaign in the XCrawl setting, but I don't like d20! What would be a good system to transplant it into? Ideally something that makes for decently fast gameplay, can be pretty lethal for PCs, and has enough crunch to it to make dungeon crawling feel nice and tactical. Not choking when modern tech is added to the setting is a plus as well. Apocalypse World or WFRP 3e would be my suggestions. And Reckless and Conservative Dice should work really well with X-Crawl.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2013 02:04
|
|
|
hectorgrey posted:A guy doesn't like d20 so you point him to D&D 4e only more rules light? Haha wow. Uh, so, yeah. XCOM and XCrawl, not the same. Edit: By which I mean I am dumb. I stand by Gamma World for a lethal XCOM though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2013 03:14
|
|
|
For XCOM you could also use 3:16, tone down the alien-killing numbers and let the players vote between missions on engineering/scientific advances that give them better weapons, vehicles and equipment over time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2013 07:22
|
|
|
Evil Sagan posted:Alright, you guys are so smart. I got one for you. Pokemon. What system do I run Pokemon in. Fate Core I tried doing it with Hero System a couple years ago, ran the concept by my group and everything to do like Oregon Trail, but in Pokemon World, but ended up choking when it came time to start statting out pokemon. Like, for real, use Fate, or some other game like it, where all the crunch is in the "storytelling" end of things, rather than the "simulation" end. You will save yourself a world of trouble. The less crunchy the character sheet can be, the better off you will be. If a PC captures a pokemon, and you can just hand them an index card that contains everything there is to know about that individual Bidoof or whatever, then that is probably the best outcome you can hope for. Alternatively, you could homebrew something  .
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2013 13:18
|
|
|
Evil Sagan posted:Alright, you guys are so smart. I got one for you. Pokemon. What system do I run Pokemon in. Gamma World could work for this too, with each trainer controlling a PC for each monster. The X + Y character creation makes making things like Pokemon a breeze. Edit for Comedy Option: http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/1625/pokemon-jr-adventure-game-pokemon-emergency UrbanLabyrinth fucked around with this message at 14:47 on Oct 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2013 14:45
|
|
|
Make an Apocoworld hack for pokemon. You have 6 stats, you can easily roll each pokemon on the spot, and moves would just be generic powers. IE: Pikachu can shoot lightning, Charmander can shoot fire, Bulbasaur can shoot leaves, etc. etc.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2013 15:25
|
|
|
Evil Sagan posted:Alright, you guys are so smart. I got one for you. Pokemon. What system do I run Pokemon in. If you'd rather go d20, there actually is a homebrew some fans made called Pokemon Tabletop Adventures. I have heard some very sketchy things about its math and like... trainer class balance, but a friend of mine has run a couple games with it, so it's probably at least playable. At any rate it's got to be a better option for running a Pokemon game than loving Pathfinder. Here is its wiki. Gazetteer fucked around with this message at 16:46 on Oct 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2013 16:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 02:11 |
|
|
Sounds like what you need is Pokethulhu.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2013 17:04
|
|