|
"When you miss all targets with an attack, take a token. Spend a token after any future attack roll in the same combat to get +1 to the roll." Better as an optional rule or good enough to go in the main text? It's concise and elegant enough, and works well with enemy Miss Triggers to get rid of the "nothing happens" part of missing. Only downside seems to be that it's one more thing to keep track of along with Strikes and HP.
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 14:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 23:56 |
|
|
Jimbozig posted:"When you miss all targets with an attack, take a token. Spend a token after any future attack roll in the same combat to get +1 to the roll." It's interesting because it could help combat go even faster. Can players share/pool their tokens? Maybe "Recommended Option"? "Option For Faster Combat"? I think it comes down to whether the thing that bugged the 4e player more was combat length, or number of things to track. For me, combat length was twice the issue that tracking was, so I would totally use this.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 15:01
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:"When you miss all targets with an attack, take a token. Spend a token after any future attack roll in the same combat to get +1 to the roll." Do you have a problem with players sharing the bonus? It could be something like the escalation die where it sits in the middle of the table and increases every time a player misses and anyone can pull from it, like a giant take-a-penny leave-a-penny. That way it'd be really easy for everyone to track.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 22:02
|
|
|
Jimbozig, check your email, I sent a request for more info/the full game.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 04:34
|
|
|
30.5 Days posted:Do you have a problem with players sharing the bonus? It could be something like the escalation die where it sits in the middle of the table and increases every time a player misses and anyone can pull from it, like a giant take-a-penny leave-a-penny. That way it'd be really easy for everyone to track. Well... I sort of do. One of the things it's supposed to do is to soften the blow if you miss in the first two rounds: having two tokens saved up for round 3 means you are guaranteed a hit and have a 50% chance of a crit. If you make it shared, then your buddy might use the token to get a crit and you might just miss for the third time in a row. Allowing anyone to use it is also a pretty big boost to the players' team because you can start spending them right away instead of having to wait - being able to guarantee a solid hit or crit in round 1 is a pretty big deal. Optimizers will want to dibs all tokens for certain powers. I'm not dead set against sharing them, but I do see potential problems and I don't think it should be the default.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 05:07
|
|
|
I got a copy of the preview from Jimbozig and I'm enjoying my read. It's clever and concise. I've laughed out loud at the species descriptions and the Something Awful result in the optional skills section. There's the perfect amount of Mouse Guard in the mechanics with a solid helping of crunch in the simplified 4e-style blocks. I'll have more to say later as I get deeper into it, but I had something that was bothering me. Strike! (page 49) posted:It makes sense in the fiction that the searing light would have more utility in that regard than the roundhouse kick so there should be no problem here I don't approve of your pro-wizard agenda, Jimbozig. Not one bit. 
Echophonic fucked around with this message at 07:10 on Dec 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 06:55
|
|
|
I need to reword that then. The intent is for that to be in the players' hands, not the DM's. The player has a responsibility to stay within the tone of the game, but that passage was not intended to give the DM the authority to make that call on his/her own. Edit: just had an idea to make it less wizard-supremacist. I'll change the example so that the wuxia martial artist can do something that the gritty hedge wizard can't. The guy who can summon columns of searing light shouldn't be fighting alongside poo poo-farmers, after all. There is a passage elsewhere specifically on whether or not magic makes you more versatile. The answer is basically yes but so do other skills in their own way. Jimbozig fucked around with this message at 14:52 on Dec 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 14:39
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:I need to reword that then. The intent is for that to be in the players' hands, not the DM's. The player has a responsibility to stay within the tone of the game, but that passage was not intended to give the DM the authority to make that call on his/her own. Well, it's sort of part of the 'Don't Demand Nonsense' principle, which I understand. At the end of the day, the GM's kind of the arbiter of what fits the tone and what doesn't. I suppose it really does come down to everyone being on the same page, which seems to be the intention.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 19:04
|
|
|
Echophonic posted:Well, it's sort of part of the 'Don't Demand Nonsense' principle, which I understand. At the end of the day, the GM's kind of the arbiter of what fits the tone and what doesn't. I suppose it really does come down to everyone being on the same page, which seems to be the intention. Exactly. But your comment was good because I want to make sure it's not coming across in the wrong way.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 20:28
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:"When you miss all targets with an attack, take a token. Spend a token after any future attack roll in the same combat to get +1 to the roll." Is there any way to handle this like Inspiration in 5e D&D? I've had DMs hand out inspiration for things like "you got crit unconscious from full HP in two different battles" so applying something similar to "you missed everything you attacked" seems to hit the same vein to me.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 09:39
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:"When you miss all targets with an attack, take a token. Spend a token after any future attack roll in the same combat to get +1 to the roll." The more I think about this, the more I think that it needs to be an optional rule. We're not talking about +1 to hit on a d20, we're talking +1 on a d6. Maybe it would be better as Spend a token after any future missed attack roll in the same combat to get +1 to the roll, and could live as a regular rule in that context.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 15:52
|
|
|
P.d0t posted:Is there any way to handle this like Inspiration in 5e D&D? What do you mean by this? How would it get handled like 5e? Do you mean that I could broaden it? I don't really know how inspiration is handled in 5e. Right now, it's a very specific and limited thing. There's only one way to get a token, only one way to spend tokens, and they don't carry over between combats. I generally don't like Savage Worlds style bennies where the DM just hands them out whenever she feels like it. As it stands now, it's just a simple optional rule to smooth out the dice luck a bit so you don't get screwed out of contributing by whiffing multiple times.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 17:26
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:"When you miss all targets with an attack, take a token. Spend a token after any future attack roll in the same combat to get +1 to the roll." Can you spend multiple tokens on one attack? Should specify yea or nay.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 04:16
|
|
|
Fuschia tude posted:Can you spend multiple tokens on one attack? Should specify yea or nay. Yep. You might have whiffed both of the first two rounds, but now it's payback time!
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 23:29
|
|
|
Alright, so here's my to-do list: 1. Make a kickstarter page. 2. Solicit comments on the kickstarter. 3. Finish up the sections that need finishing so that I'm ready to release a full pdf preview when the KS goes live. 4. Make adjustments to the KS based on comments and put it up. 5. Promote the KS. (And I'll need everyone else helping me on this one) Is there anything obvious I'm missing here? For instance, do I need to make a website? Here's what I'm thinking for the Kickstarter's pledge levels (based on this one) $10 just the pdf $20 the pdf and an at-cost voucher for the print version from Drivethru (Which will probably cost about $6 plus $5 shipping to the US for the softcover. So you're looking at about $30 total for the physical product at your door) +$5 to either tier for extras. Extras mean the first couple of mini-expansions and the ability to vote on what those will be (First expansion class: the rogue, the barbarian, or the shield-bearer. First expansion rules: vehicles, I think.) I'll also have a more expensive tier or two for people who want to contribute more. Not sure what I should offer there. Thoughts?
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 23:08
|
|
|
Have you got estimates on the cost of the physical book yet from a publisher?
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 23:10
|
|
|
Covok posted:Have you got estimates on the cost of the physical book yet from a publisher? Yeah, Drivethru PoD would be $6.40 per book for standard color softcover, $11.10 per book standard color hardcover, or $22.30 for "premium color" hardcover. Dunno what premium color means or if people think it's worth that much. If I'm using the structure I laid out above, it really doesn't matter to me because I'll be making the same amount of money no matter what kind of book they order or where it's shipping to. That's what's appealing about that structure - it gives buyers the most choice while limiting risk for both me and them. I don't have to worry about getting screwed on shipping or lost deliveries and they don't have to worry about the project failing because of those risks. I'll just get the money, order as much art as I can afford for that money, then wait for the art to get done and get it all laid out, put it up on Drivethru and send out vouchers. Dealing with a proper print run just seems like it'd be a ton of work and a bunch of extra risk for not much gain. I mean, if somehow the kickstarter were to explode beyond all expectations, that might be something I would look at doing. But really, I don't think it bears considering at this point.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 00:22
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:
I think a website, if only a blog, would be good. Having a way to push out beta content to a wider audience after publication, a way to solicit feedback on the product, and a way for people to find you via a search engine would help. And if the game ends up being more successful than you thought, you can always do a second edition.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 01:15
|
|
|
Having read through the preview text and other materials you posted, I am super excited (like super excited) to play the final version, but I do have a couple thoughts: Seriously consider having some of the KS money go towards hiring an editor for the final version. I know a bunch of people in the small press RPG community that I can ask for recommendations if you don't know of anyone, and all of them have said that having an editor is about as close to a must as possible when publishing a game. There are definitely some issues with the text (structure, consistent tone, the same words referring to separate mechanics) that I think a professional outside eye could help polish up. A good editor can turn a really good game (which your game feels like) into a great game. The name has a Google problem. "Strike" is a super common word in both digital and analog RPGs. You've obviously switched the name once already, but it would suck to have a game that was hard to find online without knowing the author's name. A single-word title like "Dread" is Google-able because that word isn't likely to get confused with other games and common game concepts. Edit: This is a great presentation on rulebook organization and writing if you aren't up for getting an outside editor: http://joshuayearsley.com/case/ten-things-you-can-do-to-make-your-rulebook-awesome/ Man Dancer fucked around with this message at 02:12 on Dec 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 01:39
|
|
|
You will want a social media presence. A modern one, not forums-based.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 08:01
|
|
|
Bongo Bill posted:You will want a social media presence. A modern one, not forums-based. Can you go into more detail on this? I'm really not up on my social media. Edit: I know it might seem like a dumb question, but beyond having a facebook and twitter account, what should I be doing with those things? Jimbozig fucked around with this message at 19:17 on Dec 23, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 17:48
|
|
|
Echophonic posted:Well, it's sort of part of the 'Don't Demand Nonsense' principle, which I understand. At the end of the day, the GM's kind of the arbiter of what fits the tone and what doesn't. I suppose it really does come down to everyone being on the same page, which seems to be the intention. Hey, I went back and re-read the "Fiction takes precedence" segment and I totally see what you were saying. I have completely re-written it from top to bottom. Here's what I have now: Strike! posted:Fiction Takes Precedence
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2014 06:14
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:Hey, I went back and re-read the "Fiction takes precedence" segment and I totally see what you were saying. I have completely re-written it from top to bottom. Here's what I have now: Might this lead to every answer being "because MAGIC" ..?
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2014 06:32
|
|
|
P.d0t posted:Might this lead to every answer being "because MAGIC" ..? I'm not sure what you mean by that. If you look at what was there before, there was definitely that sort of implication, though. This re-write removes that. None of the examples involve magic. Before the change it had the martial artist failing to deal damage in a situation where the wizard could deal damage. Now, it is easier to describe your magical blast going around a corner than it is to explain why your flurry of throwing knives can do that. That's just a fact. The text has been changed so that now the emphasis is on "change your description so that we can see why that dude got knifed" where the emphasis used to be "you can't deal damage to that dude if you're throwing knives." Before there was the implication that a martial artist being able to hit a flying creature with her Close 1 power required a over-the-top action tone. In my head, I had the martial artist using her foes as steps from which to launch an awesome kick... but reading it from another point of view, the implication was unfortunate. Now there is an explicitly described a low-key way to hit that flying enemy without any hidden tiger stuff. When I wrote it, I was thinking of all the cool awesome descriptions you could do with a martial artist and didn't realize that it was coming off as nearly the opposite thing until I went back and re-read it from that angle.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2014 07:20
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:Can you go into more detail on this? I'm really not up on my social media. I'm totally not the right person to ask about this, but with this kind of product at this kind of scale, the main idea with Twitter will probably be to tweet in ways consistent with the qualities of the game. If people, especially important people or worth listening to, are talking TTRPG design, the tweets coming out of Strike's account should make clear where Strike stands on the issue being discussed. If the designers of games you like or drew inspiration from are posting things that you have an opinion about, retweet it (with comment if you disagree). If you encounter something - a game, an article, a video - that feeds into the creative process, tweet it with a description and maybe a comment about how it fits into Strike. Tweet about every update or new development in the design process, tweet about things you're thinking about with respect to game design (not even necessarily Strike itself), tweet pithy system-agnostic fun ideas or phrases that Strike supports. A creative work is the culmination of many decisions. Your website will be a relatively static document (blog posts are often read years down the line; even if you're adding new ones, old posts will remain visible and relevant) reflecting the decisions themselves and the resulting product. Social media is dynamic, almost transient, so it should instead reflect the perspective and opinions that guided those decisions. In other words, 1) be yourself 2) acting in your capacity as a game creator 3) only much more gregarious. Also, given the origins of the game, it would be prudent to have a strategy for how you're going to present yourself in relation to the main D&D guys - not only how often you follow their lead in deciding what to talk about (which will reflect how closely related Strike is to D&D), but also your attitude toward it. A lot of your target market is made of people who already have an opinion about D&D, so whether you present yourself as hostile, dissenting, respectful, indebted, etc. towards D&D will influence their inclination not only to look into Strike, but also to talk about Strike.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2014 07:25
|
|
|
Bongo Bill posted:hostile, dissenting, respectful, indebted, etc. towards D&D I'm totally all of the above, including the etc. But I'm also a polite Canadian, so I'm not bad at hiding negative feelings and emphasizing the positive. Also, thanks for that advice - that is helpful.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2014 07:53
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:Hey, I went back and re-read the "Fiction takes precedence" segment and I totally see what you were saying. I have completely re-written it from top to bottom. Here's what I have now: That sounds a lot better to me. It explains the mechanic a lot more clearly and doesn't contrast approaches, which is what I think got stuck in my craw. Now it pairs better with the "what about magic?" sidebar, instead of repeating it. I also think you could leave the fireball+powder kegs example the way it was. I don't see a reason to leave magic entirely out of the section. That way you get a bit of showing off how to describe martial moves to make them fit what you want to do mechanically and how to use magic and tools to get practical, fictionally-appropriate effects.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2014 09:54
|
|
|
I'm having some trouble understanding how Hits work in Team Conflicts. I get that they can be used to disable traits - in the conflict example, the players used a hit to disable the forest's 'Invulnerable' trait as a way of getting past it. However, what would assigning strikes do in this situations? Are strikes only relevant when the Team Conflict involves actual opponents?
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 21:29
|
|
|
IT BEGINS posted:I'm having some trouble understanding how Hits work in Team Conflicts. I get that they can be used to disable traits - in the conflict example, the players used a hit to disable the forest's 'Invulnerable' trait as a way of getting past it. However, what would assigning strikes do in this situations? Are strikes only relevant when the Team Conflict involves actual opponents? The DM will want to assign plenty of Strikes. The players will want to assign at least one - that way if they lose or concede, they get to pick from the list as a consolation. Generally the opposition has more traits than the players, so the players will mostly be disabling traits and the DM will mostly be giving Strikes. Also (and this is not in the rules preview, since it's new) if there is a round limit, the players might want to assign lots of strikes and thereby win when the rounds run out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 16:40
|
|
|
Here's a first draft of the Kickstarter. I'll go through and add pictures to pretty things up, and I need to think up fun names for the backer levels (I like calling backers "A Fine Physical Specimen" but I need the other tier names to live up to that!). I'm just posting it here while I continue to work to see if there is anything you all think I've forgotten or anything I should change. And chime in with fun names for the tiers!
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2014 17:45
|
|
|
This is a non-specific suggestion, but a printer-friendly version of the game would be a nice-to-have if that wasn't already in your eventual plans.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2014 18:03
|
|
|
Hooray, I'm a Famous Game Critic now!
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2014 18:04
|
|
|
I'd make it very clear whether or not the $20+ tiers include a pdf as well. The $25+ levels have pdfs of the expansions which implies they do, but only the preview is explicitly mentioned.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2014 18:20
|
|
|
I'm pretty excited to be on the Kickstarter for a game I've barely thought about since that time I playtested it. I'd provide actual feedback but I can't be assed to type it on my phone. Emong fucked around with this message at 18:27 on Dec 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2014 18:21
|
|
|
Whichever goon gave me the feedback on KS not to include MadRhetoric's "dicksucking" quote, thank you. That is good advice, and I'll take it. It does make me sad to remove it, because that was my favourite quote. But it has to go the way of "dragontitties" and any other crassness. This is a family-friendly game, after all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2014 19:53
|
|
|
This quote:quote:[Strike!] is the perfect game for a bunch of lazy [friends] to play while midly drunk and not worrying too much about versimilitude or themeing. Just a couple of adventurers having some [gosh darn] fun adventures. Also not sure why there's a grid, but I don't care much. The carrotmen were scary as [heck], but since defeat =/= death, I didn't mind at all that my players kept having their [donkeys] served to them on decorative carrot platters. really doesn't work imho. In fact I think the idea of a bunch of reviews from nobodies on the internet doesn't really offer anything at all to the page - who the gently caress is this "Vermain" guy and why do I, the dude who gets their nerd news from Penny Arcade and Wil Wheadon and loves dorky kickstarters/has too much disposable income, care about his opinion? Which is not to say those geek chic people are actually better critics, but they're known ones, and that's what you need. I think if you can't get those folk to look at your game you're better off with nothing at all in that review section, or at the very least you need to link to some goon blogs where they write actual words or have videos or something and not random forum posts from 3 years ago.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2014 20:07
|
|
|
Just include a link to my post history so they can see what sort of cool, radical people with correct opinions and ideas enjoy Strike.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2014 20:10
|
|
|
Countblanc posted:In fact I think the idea of a bunch of reviews from nobodies on the internet doesn't really offer anything at all to the page - who the gently caress is this "Vermain" guy and why do I, the dude who gets their nerd news from Penny Arcade and Wil Wheadon and loves dorky kickstarters/has too much disposable income, care about his opinion? Which is not to say those geek chic people are actually better critics, but they're known ones, and that's what you need. I think if you can't get those folk to look at your game you're better off with nothing at all in that review section, or at the very least you need to link to some goon blogs where they write actual words or have videos or something and not random forum posts from 3 years ago. What do other people think here? Is Countblanc right about this?
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2014 20:48
|
|
|
Yeah, in all seriousness, no one gives a poo poo who I am or what I may think about a certain subject. People with a large following who recommend a product give the product a perception of being more trustworthy and worthwhile to their followers (since you tend to implicitly trust, or at least pay attention to more, the interests of that person). I don't have a large following, and thus my recommendation is about the same as if your brother recommended it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2014 21:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 23:56 |
|
|
Could probably write it up as a "playtester feedback" section, without naming names, since they are not meaningful outside this community, and of very little meaning within it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2014 21:35
|
|