System to Ctiticise - Have fun!

[Autocrat]

Well, I read the post about posting for responses about rules/games/systems etc., so hopefully this should be about right…..

OK, rough synopsis of game system……… so far.

Note:  This is game system – Mechanics and rules… no setting/genre/flavour etc.


Game System:-
*  I.N.I.


Purpose:-
*   A generic game system that is flexible and can be applied to a large degree of already available setting materials, covering a large range of genre’s, settings, periods and tech’ levels.
*   A game system that offers different degree’s of depth, detail and complexity throughout the mechanics/rule, or for specific cases, aspects or parts.  
*   A game system that offers not only optional methods, but alternatives to the normal methods as well, provisioning for those with set preferences.


Mechanics:-
*   Simple, single resolution mechanic that applies to all things,
“ Stat + Skill + Difficulty = Target Number.  Roll < or = for success “.
*   Optional Modifiers for more detail.
“ Situation, Quality, Assistance, Time spent Modifiers etc. “.
*   Additional resolution mechanics for those that prefer more detail,
“ Criticals and Degrees of Success & failure “.
*   Alternative Resolution mechanics for those that want to do it differently,
“ Auto’ Success & Failure and Multiple Die resolution mechanics “.
*   Action Point system for perfoming tasks.
" all actions have time units or Action point costs, offering a degree of realism with simple management.  Can be altered for more or less flexibility/detail ".

Character Creation:-
*   Character Point base, pick and mix, no restrictions or requisites.
“ You have X points, spend them how you want “.
*  Character Species are templated/packaged.“ Provide Base Stats that can be altered/purchased/sold to alter.  Also includes Cultural & Natural Skills or Traits “.
*   Options for Guides, Templates and Packages for Skills.“ The Guide says you might want those, these would cost you less if you had this bought this Template, and you can buy these for less, yet those will cost you more if you buy this package “ .
*   Alternate Priority based Creation method.“ Do you want to spend more points on Species, Skills, Traits, Resources?  .
*   Alternate choice of Statistic Details, numbering at 9, 12, 19, 21, 30 etc.
“ Just 3 Main Stats, or the full 21 Main Stats, alternatively, how about all the Physical Stats as its action based, yet only the general Mental and Soul Stats as we aren’t going to use them?”.*   Aspected Character Creation.“ Magic, Psionics, Mutation, Cybernetics, Netware, Bionics, Bio-genetics etc.”.


System:-
*   Variant levels of detail for Skills and Items.
“ Skills and Items are grouped as Main, (Swords) – Sub-group, (Small Swords) – Individual, (Short Sword), with differing Stats depending on degree of generalization or detail“.
*   Optional Details and Stats for Skills and Items.“Difficulty to apply, Attack & Defense Modifiers, Recoil, Concealment, Handling etc. ”.
*   Optional Rules for playing detail.“ 3 types of Encumbrance, Reach and Range, Size and Item usage, 3 types of Critical Hit results, 2 Hit Location systems, piecemeal armour rules, 4 levels of Weapon vs. Armour rules etc. “.



  So, please, what parts do you find of personal interest, why?
Anything in particular you feel/think inappropriate or pointless?
Any aspect you want to know more of?

[Andrew Martin]

Note:  This is game system – Mechanics and rules... no setting/genre/flavour etc.
...
" Stat + Skill + Difficulty = Target Number.  Roll < or = for success ".
...
Anything in particular you feel/think inappropriate or pointless?

All mechanics produce behaviour in the players that use those rules, therefore all mechanics that are used do produce a genre/flavour as shown by the players actions. For example, Stat + Skill systems imply that characters with high attributes and low skills are more effective than characters with low attributes and high skills; that's because there's only a low number of attributes, but a higher number of skills.

With some research it's easy to see that this behaviour generated by rules of Stat + Skill doesn't match the real world. Consider the impressive skills of "Idiot Savants", who suddenly have extremely high skill in art, mathematics, general recall, playing music and in many other areas, yet, have low intelligence and are usually disabled in other ways. These people in the real world have high levels of skill, which suddenly appears, and very low attributes.

* Character Point base, pick and mix, no restrictions or requisites.
" You have X points, spend them how you want ".

Have you looked at HeroQuest where character generation can be deferred, and can be done as the game is played?

Have you looked at other game systems which don't need "points" to "balance" character power?

Have you checked out Fuzion, Action System or TriStat DX? These systems seem to be equivalent to what you're trying to recreate? Plus they come with optional settings, like BubbleGum crisis, CyberPunk, Usagi Yojimbo

What does your system do, that Fuzion or TriStat DX won't do for you?

[Autocrat]

OK, I'll bite.......

(thought I'd try a new forum to get different views from different people, yet managed to find at least one person from an alternate site who refuses to change!)

......
Andrew Martin wrote......

"...All mechanics produce behaviour in the players that use those rules, therefore all mechanics that are used do produce a genre/flavour as shown by the players actions. For example, Stat + Skill systems imply that characters with high attributes and low skills are more effective than characters with low attributes and high skills; that's because there's only a low number of attributes, but a higher number of skills. ..."


  Lovely.... yet you assumed.... which can be a very bad thing, that a Character with High Stats and Low Skills will be superior to one with Low Stats and High Skill.  WHY?

Character A has Stat of X, Skill of Y, TN of Z
Character B has Stat of Y, Skill of X, TN of Z

oh my, the result is the same.

  Now, sitting back and giving a little leeway, I'll grant you that Stats have more influence than skills due to the multiple cascade affect, a single Stat may be the base for over 20 Skill Groups, or 90 Individual Skills....fine!  
Did you not think that maybe increasing a Stat would be more costly/difficult/unlikely than improving a skill?


Andrew Martin also wrote......

"...With some research it's easy to see that this behaviour generated by rules of Stat + Skill doesn't match the real world. Consider the impressive skills of "Idiot Savants", who suddenly have extremely high skill in art, mathematics, general recall, playing music and in many other areas, yet, have low intelligence and are usually disabled in other ways. These people in the real world have high levels of skill, which suddenly appears, and very low attributes. ..."


  Yes, and to play a Character as such you just lower the Species Stat Base, accrueing more Character points for doing so, and spend them on skills!
  Alternatively, you use the Optional Rules for Traits, and low and behold, there are Traits for "Excpetional Skills", "Exceptional Abilities", "talented", "gifted" etc. etc. etc.
  Also, whats your definition of Idiot and Savant?  I ask because it sounds like your'e comparing peoples intelligence levels....by what system, as they have proven that in most cases, things like IQ tests are incorrect, inconclusive and generate misleading quantifiable data..... thats why they prefer to use things like Apptitude tests as well as Intellect tests, so as to realise peoples potentials, not just there recal and general knowledge skills!


  As for the last part of your posting... yes, I looked at alot of over systems;
Fuzion 5, Gurps, Murps, D&D, AD&D (2nd + 3rd Ed), Alternacy, the WOD range, Shadowrun, BESM and other Tris-Stat systems... in total I looked at a range of over 30 System Products, by 12 Publishers, over a 12 year period of print, noticing about 9 very different gaming systems and resolution mechanics.... and found things I liked and disliked in most of them.

  What I didn't find, what I want in most of the RPG's I play, and what I stated at the start of my post as to what my wants/purpose is......

Purpose:-
* A generic game system that is flexible and can be applied to a large degree of already available setting materials, covering a large range of genre’s, settings, periods and tech’ levels.
* A game system that offers different degree’s of depth, detail and complexity throughout the mechanics/rule, or for specific cases, aspects or parts.
* A game system that offers not only optional methods, but alternatives to the normal methods as well, provisioning for those with set preferences.



Andrew MArtin.....
Please, don't try to be clever or cutting!

Ask questions, make points.... don't attack
If you can't read, absorb, think then reply..... don't post to my responses in future, is that clear?
  You made my life unpleasant in another forum, please refrain from doing so here!

To every one else, I apologise for my resposes if they seem a little heavy handed and cutting!

Other posts welcome!

[Jasper]

Hi Autocrat, welcome to the Forge.  

I'm not sure how much you've poked around here, but The Forge is a pretty unique place, and operates differently than many other online forum.  It has its own jargon and a history of ideas that continue to be referenced. Check out the stickies in each forum, and I'd also advise perusing the articles section.  People take discussion of games seriously, and civility is a must.  I don't know what has passed between you and Andrew in the past (nor do I wish to) but I didn't see anything in his post that was rude or out of line.  It's standard Forge practice to ask "What does your game do that game X doesn't?" as a way to make ourselves examine what it is we hope to accomplish in designing a game.  In general, the Forge is a very pleasant, and intellectually serious place -- so try to give the benefit of the doubt.

Okay, with that out of the way....

*A generic game system that is flexible and can be applied to a large degree of already available setting materials, covering a large range of genre?s, settings, periods and tech? levels.
* A game system that offers different degree?s of depth, detail and complexity throughout the mechanics/rule, or for specific cases, aspects or parts.
* A game system that offers not only optional methods, but alternatives to the normal methods as well, provisioning for those with set preferences.

First, it's great to have a purpose to work from, even though these are prettty vague.  Beyond vague though, they're extremely broad and ambitious.  It seems to me that you're basically setting out to make a game that can do anything and everything: the Ultimate Game.  This is pretty impossible IMHO, and what's more, not desirable.  Just like no one car is good at everything (gas mileage, speed, cost, survivability), no game can be good at everything.  This isn't to say that many of your goals can't be achieved, but that it may not be a good game afterwards.  As far as each one goes:

A system for different settings.  Sure.  Great.  But what will it be good at doing?  If you're not focusing on doing some kind of setting well, you'll probably need to pick something: some theme or flavor.  For instance, you could focus on doing epic war stories, be they in ancient China or the Orian Nebula.  You may already have such a focus, but not have labelled it as such yet.

Different layers of depth.  Do you mean variable depth depending on the desires of the GM/players?  Or just rules with different levels of detail?  (Don't all games do this?)  If the former, to what end?  I'd again advise choosing one thing and doing it well.  I personally never want to look at a game that has three different resolution mechanics -- 'cause that's really three different games, and it's hard enough to get a game to work well with one mechanic.

Same deal for different options I think.  What's the purpose in having many options?  Appealing to many people so you can move a lot of copies?  GURPS has a lot of options -- (here it is again:) what will your game do that GURPS doesn't?

[Andrew Martin]

Did you not think that maybe increasing a Stat would be more costly/difficult/unlikely than improving a skill?

Of course. Most games that link attribute and skill all ready have this as a "solution". Unfortunately, it doesn't work in most of those games. It merely generates a "sweet spot", where players are encouraged by the game system to find the optimal combination of skill level and attribute level for the least cost in "points". This kind of player and their character behaviour doesn't seem to match most settings that I see in literature, movies, TV shows or other media. Is this the kind of behaviour you want players to exhibit?

Also, whats your definition of Idiot and Savant?  I ask because it sounds like your'e comparing peoples intelligence levels....by what system, as they have proven that in most cases, things like IQ tests are incorrect, inconclusive and generate misleading quantifiable data..... thats why they prefer to use things like Apptitude tests as well as Intellect tests, so as to realise peoples potentials, not just there recal and general knowledge skills!

A very good article on "Idiot Savants" is in the Scientific American magazine from last year. It should be available in your local library. I recommend reading, with an open mind, this article and others about savantism as it will change your thoughts about skill and attribute linking, as it did mine.

[Autocrat]

... Jasper ...

  Thank you for your post.  
  It's merely a case of superiorism, which I find abhorent, yet I will take onbaord your points and refrain from such outburst in future.

  As to your suggestions and questions....

"... First, it's great to have a purpose to work from, even though these are prettty vague. Beyond vague though, they're extremely broad and ambitious. It seems to me that you're basically setting out to make a game that can do anything and everything: the Ultimate Game. This is pretty impossible IMHO, and what's more, not desirable. Just like no one car is good at everything (gas mileage, speed, cost, survivability), no game can be good at everything. This isn't to say that many of your goals can't be achieved, but that it may not be a good game afterwards.  ..."

  No, not the Ultimate game, (maybe the third or fourth? :) )
  How can you say not desirable?  THe ultimate intent of most designers, engineers, electricians, artists etc. is to create the "perfect", the "muse" the "ultimate".....  though not my goal, I do have the intent of covering as much as possible without leaving the gaps that appear in so many other systems out there!

"... A system for different settings. Sure. Great. But what will it be good at doing? If you're not focusing on doing some kind of setting well, you'll probably need to pick something: some theme or flavor. For instance, you could focus on doing epic war stories, be they in ancient China or the Orian Nebula. You may already have such a focus, but not have labelled it as such yet. ..."


  This is an area that we have covered before else where, and it fell into three or so groups... those that think setting has little do to with the actual system, those that think it has everything to do with the system, and those that feel it is a fair mix of both.
  I'm of the opinion that the system and the setting do not have to be married to each other.  I agree that there are systems out there that seemed designed for the setting they accompany and work incrediably well and compliment that setting.  
  My problem with this is that it is neither flexible or expandable in any alternate direction without altering the rules.
  Where as if the system is designed to be flexible and broad in scope, encompassing such things from the beggining, then it "should" work with any tech period, different armours, different weapons, alternate skills, and more importantly, there should be a comparable way for two vastly different tech cultures to interact physically etc., where some games have failed, (i.e. even AD&D and Alternacy didn't mesh, and they were very similar.... you couldn't transpose their items or skills readily due to them being designed for a specific system!).

"... Different layers of depth. Do you mean variable depth depending on the desires of the GM/players? Or just rules with different levels of detail? (Don't all games do this?) If the former, to what end? I'd again advise choosing one thing and doing it well. I personally never want to look at a game that has three different resolution mechanics -- 'cause that's really three different games, and it's hard enough to get a game to work well with one mechanic. ..."


  To deal with the first part, the system offers differing levels of Stats... such as the Primary Skills/Attributes, (Str, Dex Int, or Body, Speed, IQ etc.), those that are very general (3), those that are standardised (8), then those that are fairly detailed (12), and finally very detailed (21).  The system also provides similar options for things like Skills, again going from General (Swords), to sub-groups (Small swords), to specific (Short Sword).
  The reasons for this are;
1) Detail preference... if you don't want/need detail, and are happy to generalise, then do so.  If you prefer detail and individualism, then do so!
2) Play preference... some people have played particular styles of RPG's and have either a prefence for those systems, or are unfamilar with alternate systems.  This system permits a close simily to previous systems, whilst permitting the expansion and exploration of differing detail levels.
3) How often have you played a RPG that concentrates in one area, as that is what the game is about... for example... epic battles.. (LOL).  Now, there may be a point when the playes want to do something a little different, like talk, perform reconisance?, steal something, learn to drive wagons so as to use them tactically etc., yet the game doesn't really cover these things.  Now view the alternrate RPG, that seems to cover in detail a whole load of stuff that you don't use, need nor want.  Well heres an answer... a system that could let you have detail on those aspects of stats, Skills, Items etc. that you want, yet only have general in everything else.  Whats more, if you change your mind, you can increase or decrease those levels... so from epic battle with combat and tactical skills only, you could offer them general/broad skills in social interaction, grnate them general stats like social magnetism or get really detailed and include mental and spiritual versions for different events...(the orient setting would perhaps use the spiritual, where sa the renaissance would prefer mental?).  Whats this.... a part of the seesion where combat is needed yet stealth is ... why not teach your troops the arts of trail blazing, scalling walls, breaching fences, remaining undetected etc.
  With this one, you can go where you need to, how you want to, with little bother... within reason of course.  Yet the amount of reason is so much broader than in most other RPG's!
  As for the resolution mechanics, its the same answer as above.  Why have a set of resolution mechanics that people HAVE to use, that may detract from their pleasure if they prefer an alternate method when you can provide such an alternate... particularly if the rest of the game system remains exactly the same....and there are options to increase the detail level of results and accelerate the speed of play... such as DOS/F and AutoS/F.

  It's not three different games.... introducing Criticals, auto success/fail, Degrees of s/f etc. are just advancing the rules and providing alternates.
  Admittedly that having alternate resolution methods such as making it multiple die is a little greedy... yet solely because several of my gaming group loved the Shadrun method using multiple die... for some it's aesthetic... as some games can be tweaked for alternated resoloution without altering the game results.... just a different route for the same probability.


"... Same deal for different options I think. What's the purpose in having many options? Appealing to many people so you can move a lot of copies? GURPS has a lot of options -- (here it is again:) what will your game do that GURPS doesn't? ..."

  Ah, I liked Gurps... yet it was far to heavy handed and involved some deep X + S + T stuff that was not necessary... in short, as you went through the levels of detail, you accumulated the processes involved... where as my system just substitutes the detail past for the detail present.
  Also, Gurps tended to be tweaked for each alternate setting.  That shouldn't be necessary.  Provide different lists of skills, new weapons, different species... yet the mechanics should remain the same, no need to learn something new... if you want somethign different, then use a different resolution mechanics or a different level of detail!
  Whats more, my pages will be even divided into two!  :)



 In short, few RPG' games have systems that suit my groups needs.  Whats more, when discussing it with others, I get a fair amount of response that suggests that they'd like alternates, they'd like something that they can tailor with minimal effort, and that doesn't require the relearning of a system!
  Not every RPG'r is experienced in tweaking, formatting or tailoring game systems or settings.... this is primarily for them... the majority.
  For those that believe setting and system are conjoined, then it's their choice whether they let bias prevent the experience and possible enjoyment, or whether they have a go, find the faults and remove them as they wish!


 After that ramble, I'd like to thank you again Jasper.


... Andrew Martin ...

  Firstly, I'd like to apologise for my previous post.  It was unseemly and potentially uncalled for.  It may be best to just admit that we are not ever likely to agree.  Shame, as you are obviously stalwart in your beliefs and views, and feel justified in your statements.  I respect that, though it may appear that I don't.

  As to your second post.... why don't you just@@@   KIDDING.... sorry, couldn't resist!

  1) Yes, it is a recurent problem in some systems.  Yet almost all systems can be abused.  I feel the key is to test it out and try to abuse it.  Then get others to do the same.  If fixable, great, if not, point it out and find a sub-set to limit the damage.
  Further, as far as I know, the fact that my system uses points for character creation means it should be wide open to abuse.  Yet so far, without intent, it has proven difficult!  By merely making the cost for increasing attributes/stats moderately high, it reduces the potential.  By making Skills increase in cost as they increase in level means that at a certain point it becomes cheaper to increase the stat...... yet the result is 1/10.... you can spend X to increase the Stat by 1, or spend the X to increse a skill by 10.... what would you go for?
  Further, depending on your view point, the comparison of media such sa films, TV or literature is a little odd..... what style of media... action, drama, realistic, fantastic etc.?  I feel that the system is fairly realistic... people have characteristics that grant them advantages or disadvantages in different areas, (from slight to great!).  These can be improved upon to mean that two chess players with the same level of skill may not be equal as one may be as perceptive and quick thinking as a stone, whilst the other has higher than average scores in those attributes/stats, (make sense?)... I feel this is fairly realistic.  Further, their is an apex point, a level point and a decline point in learning and physical developement where it requires more and more to get less and less, (as far as I see it - you may see it differently, and quite rightly so!).

  As for the last part, I currently work with individuals that are deemed as special and that require certain attentions that the majority doesn't!  Some of these people have so much talent or are so observant, I wonder who is lacking, the majority or these wonderful minorities... I think it's more a case of social injustice in most parts.  There are those that are , to be blunt, useless at almost everything, yet this seems to be comparatively compensated by something else... including a particular one who seems able to find my keys, cigarettes, lighter or wallet, no matter where I hide them!
  Life produces some very odd equations in anture, humans being one of them!