Mechanics Critique and Setting Question.

[Uccisore]

Do you need to set a maximum?

I think I need a line beyond which is super-human.  Suppose I need to have a bear attack someone in my story. Shouldn't the bear's strength be markedly higher then any PC's could ever be? How would thinks like animals or monsters work if there was no human maximum?

You also should consider if contests against the environment are static (you just need 2 of a kind to succeed, the environment doesn't roll) or dynamic (the environment gets a roll).

  It would be so much easier to determine difficulty if I allowed the environment to get a roll: instead of saying 'You need 3 of a kind!" I could just assign the difficulty at 6 six dice.  It would allow a smoother grade of difficulty, too, since three of a kind is *much* more unlikely than two.
   The idea of that extra dice roll for every task has been what's held me back, but perhaps it shouldn't. I *do* think I'd avoid giving the environment different kinds of dice, though. Calculating the relative odds would be horrible! (What's harder to roll against, 3d4, 5d6 or 6d8?)

You may want to think about what happens if no one rolls a double.

   In a contested challenge, there is no need for a double: one of a kind is an acceptable set. This is especially true in hand to hand combat- the principal here is, if the other person isn't trying to dodge, you cannot miss. The idea of having a 50% chance to punch a stationary target in some other games is foundational gripe that led to me making this system, if you can believe that. :)
   There could be such a thing as a contested challenge with environmental factors, however- in a tug of war, a one-of-a-kind might be allowed. In a race to climb a mountain, the GM could set a minimum set for accomplishment.  Though, your 'environment rolls' idea seems better and better.

[J. Campbell]

What I mean is for both broad and narrow skills to be definable by the player, with the GM basically deciding exactly what the skill is allowed to cover. It could go like this:

Player: "Okay, I'm going to use my Electrician skill to try to hotwire the car."
GM: "Alright, roll your Intelligence + Electrician at d8."
Player: "Wait, I've got Car Wiring as well!"
GM: "Alright, roll for Car Wiring at d6 as well, then."

Basically, the idea is for players to present the idea of using their occupations or specific skills in specific situations, and the GM can either accept, reject, or compromise for each. This puts the onus on players to come up with correct uses for the skills, and leaves less for the GM to worry about.

[Uccisore]

It's an interesting idea- one potential issue is that, because of the way damage works right now, the combat skills can't work this way- they have to be discreet and fixed. Do you think it's a problem to have combat skills work one way, and other sorts of skills work another?

[J. Campbell]

Not at all. Many games do do this.

The thing with having player-defined skills is that it simplifies things greatly for you, the developer. You don't have to think up 30 terms for broad skills and 90 terms for narrow skills, invariably which will offend some of the people who pick up your game. All you have to do is say "THIS is how broadly defined skills work", "THIS is how narrow skills work", and give a rough guideline for how each is defined.

[Uccisore]

All you have to do is say "THIS is how broadly defined skills work", "THIS is how narrow skills work", and give a rough guideline for how each is defined.

   I think I like it! I'll play around with a few concepts and see what happens. I like the idea of broad skills being named after careers or other 'types of people', like 'Fireman' or 'Stamp Collector' or your 'thief'. It borrows from Riddle of Steel in that sense, but the addition of narrow skills make it distinguished. The trick is going to be to make sure these Broad skills aren't too broad- even something that doesn't sound to broad, like 'Spy', could lead to the person using that for everything from sneaking around, to persuasion skills, to setting bombs, to knowing Russian.
   A broad skill would call for the rolling of d8's, a narrow skill for d6, and the Stat determines how many dice total are being rolled.

[J. Campbell]

Yeah, you'd have to limit it somewhat to professions... To borrow your example, a spy isn't a Spy as a profession, he's a Diplomat and a Thief. Make sure that you specify that a profession should have one broad focus... for example, the Thief only has one broad focus: Being where he's not allowed. A Mechanic only has one broad focus: fixing broken equipment. The Thief doesn't get any combat skills as an extra, and the Mechanic doesn't know basket weaving.

Perhaps even have players define their like above. One players Mechanic might be defined as Fixing Car Problems (which would cover the electrician and computer bits), while anothers might be defined as Mechanic: Fixing Mechanical Problems (where he'd be able to fix the engine, a fried electrical system or cpu in a car would be screwed... but he can fix non-car related mechanical problems as well). Include a rule stating that if the player has to include the word "and" in his description, it becomes a seperate skill.

To once again borrow your spy example, the definition of a Spy might be something like: "knows foreign contacts" (which could include lawful and otherwise contacts and the ability to speak a few languages), or it might be "going where he's not allowed" which would be exactly the same as a thief.

[J. Campbell]

Oh, and Uccisore: I'm stealing this player defined Broad and Narrow thing for my own RPG. If I'm going to think up a system this good, I may as well use it. :P

[Uccisore]

The way I have it written up right now, is this:

Characters pick a Profession Pursuit, a Recreational Pursuit, and a Past Pursuit.

  They function the same, except that a Professional Pursuit automatically trains 2 skills in it's category, a Recreational Pursuit trains 1, and a Past Pursuit doesn't train any. Training basically means an extra points towards skill advancement every so often, in addition to those gained through using the skill in play.
   Pursuits are defined by a title and a very short description.  The point of the description is to list two areas the Pursuit relates to. Thus, the way it's set up now, you'd have
Spy- smooth-talking and sneaking around.
or
Spy- multi-lingual impersonator.  

The GM can allow you to use your Pursuit for things other than these if he decides to, but these things are all you have a right to expect from him.  The skills are both for enhancing the things listed in the description, and for  adding new things altogether.  For example, either example of 'spy' above could take Persuasion (something that relates to the description) or Helicopter Piloting (has nothing to do with the description, but still makes sense for a 'Spy'),  as a skill under that persuit.
One final factor- Pursuits don't have levels like skills do. If something falls under your Pursuit, you're rolling d8's instead of d10's, and that's that.