'Navigator' Generic SCI-FI RPG

[DevP]

Talk about a combat monster. <g> So I looked over that example, and read a PDF of the char-gen as you mentioned. So...

On one hand, the char-gen is sort of a series of shopping lists with their own benefits/modifications; then again, shopping lists are very straightforward, and that sort of specific choice can be helpful, and I can see the appeal of mixing and matching all these evolutionary traits to create a personal combat. Like mixing feats and classes in d20 except, y'know, interesting. (Kidding.)

You should be aware that the options you have are limited. You cover many things that someone would want, but you probably can't generate my space-amoeba, or my being-of-pure-energy, or my roleplaying of a meme, or something. That can be fine; looks like you're going for slightly anthropomorphic science fiction.

From your sample, and from your rule selection, it does look like fighting IS a focus of your playstyle, which is fine. So you have odd characters, major fightin' potential, and *maybe* some unifying aspect of the Navigator or such. Why do your mechanics choose to emphasize these parts / these details?

[Strams]

I wouldnt say the game 'focuses' on combat, but most epic sc-fi adventures or stories have some sort of shoot'em up theme.  And again the char gen may have focused around combat or the natural evolution of defenses...but just as in nature it is a battle of survival.  Most creatures have some sort of natural defense or attack ability (pray or predator).

Its hard to judge a game just by the char gen.  The skill set allow for all sorts of other solutions other then 'combat'.  Yes we didnt go as heavily on skills (D&D third ed.) Because this is supposed to be simple game to play.  Having every possible skill set down to being a 6th level toe clipper.  I cant see the benefit.  The skill set we have is adequate for amost any situation.  And others can and should be added when the need arises.

I'm not very familiar with d20 ( again I play old school rules AD&D).  Is the char gen similar in mechanics?  If it is, perhaps I should read over a set of d20 rules and familiarize myself.  

The adventure we had the other night was an interesting one..we were on a distant frontier moon in a mining system that was much like a stellar Las Vegas.  All forms of decedence were set up for traders and miners.

Anyway...A race of slamander type creatures which were part of a universal cult that 'needs' to cleanse the universe set off a viral agent..that turned everyone exposed into zombie like creatures that killed and destroyed haphazardly.  The viral agent spreads quickly through contact...so a place like vegas is an excellent place to start off the maddness.  Our characters were in this casino buying fake gaming commision papers to try and pull off an 'oceans eleven' type hiest..when this 'other plot' happened.

Now besides a bit of combat escaping the casino..and fighting off zombies...the rest of the adventure was us trying to stay ahead of the viral agent..and actually still rob the starport casino before abandoning the planet.  

Our plan was to pose as the gaming authority and use the emergency as an excuse to get access to the accounts.  We told the managers (as panic was ensuing because of news casts about the zombies) that we were from the corporate headquaters and were here to close the accounts and see to the abandonment of the casino personal.

Ill spare all the other details, but computer skills...negotiation...combat...stealth...ect were all used in this mission.  Combat was there fro the entertainment value (everyone likes to shoot stuff), but it wasnt the focus of the adventure.

[DevP]

I'm not very familiar with d20 ( again I play old school rules AD&D).  Is the char gen similar in mechanics?

Not really. I think I meant to say, that they were similar in depth and seeming handling time (again, I saw but an excerpt but I think I can see where its going); there were a few modifiers, derived from stats, point-buy of gimmicks and core attributes. This amounts to a certain amount of "crunch", which is really fine. I like Jeph's Exemplar alot because it's light, yet it has a decent bit of crunchability as you max your asskicking potential between Techniques, Abilities, etc.

I wouldnt say the game 'focuses' on combat, but most epic sc-fi adventures or stories have some sort of shoot'em up theme...

...The skill set allow for all sorts of other solutions other then 'combat'.  Yes we didnt go as heavily on skills (D&D third ed.) Because this is supposed to be simple game to play.  Having every possible skill set down to being a 6th level toe clipper.  I cant see the benefit.  The skill set we have is adequate for amost any situation.  And others can and should be added when the need arises.

Certainly, I'm not saying you need a wide skill list just to not "focus" on combat! Action and fighting is really cool, and even if you didn't want that as a focus, adding non-combat skills wouldn't fix that anyway (I'm remembering "non-weapon proficiences" from AD&D).

Mike Holmes has a rant around here about Combat Systems, the gist of which is roughly: why are the rules more complex about combat rather than other aspects? What I meant by that question was, why is there the attention to your base movement value, attacks per round, and other details? But you've given an answer: combat is part of the entertainment value, and you find the entertaining combat to have these details. Am I right?

[Strams]

Ahh Dev I understand your question now...Yes, one of the aspects of other games like D&D and similar games are that the combat , though functioning well, leaves a little to the assumption aspect of things.  In other words unless your playing with minitures, or have a detailed map combat is about I won int..I swing..I hit or miss.  Now dont get me wrong, I know its a bit more detailed then that, and with some creative thinking you can add a lot of flavor to a system like that, but I think in general..its a bit stagnent.

Shadowrun on the other hand has a very detailed combat sys...this is what we were going for minus the difficulty.  

The reason I like a system like this..and I think it shows in our combat rules (which I will explain in a second) is that it slows the combat down and leaves nothing to chance..you have more time to think up neat things to do..that may have nothing to do with pulling a trigger, or swinging a sword.  This is where Im going with that.

So yes your right..a lot of emphasis has been placed in that part of the rules, because a combat phase is where everything happens.  Even if you dont want to kill someone you still have to make some sort of 'roll' against them to have some effect happen.  The detailed combat keeps all that linear and flowing.

Movement, wether in gun play or in vehicle combat is important, because in a slowed down segment to segment combat phase its important to know where everyone is..and how far they can move for ranges and modifiers in combat.

A combat segment would look like this...

All combat rounds are made up of three segments each segment lasting 2 seconds approximatly.  A players actions per turn is what determines which segment they get to react in.

Players that react in the first segment roll int (reaction score + a d6) high score wins...down the line..in the case of ties, base reaction is compared..if that doesnt do it..AGI is looked at.  In the following example im only going to explain the actions of one of the characters.

The player with the higest score goes first...he has the ability to do two simple actions or one complex action in that segment (yes, here is where the SR influence comes in..i just find it very logical).  lets say she pulls her gun and aims at one of the bad guys.  that would be her segment..one simple action pulling the gun..the other picking a target and taking aim.  

Everyone else goes in turn till the segment is done.  Next segment (were still in the first round) Our heroine takes a shot at the now running target (well say he ran for cover last segment).  She takes her BPV (base projectile value) and subtracts her level in firearms to get  a base to-hit number (there is a space on the char sheet that already has these values im just explaing how we got them).  She then asks the GM the TS of her target.  

The TS is the target signature of the intended victim.  TS is a number aquired through Size, speed, evolutionary abilities ect.  It is not your armor, that comes in later.  Nothing bothers me more then saying well Im wearing plate mail..so Im hard to hit..no your hard to hurt..but not hard to hit.  Armor has nothing to do with our TS score unless it has built in camoflage or something to make you a more difficult target.

Anyway the GM gives the player the TS and she add that to her modified BPV (base projectile value).  This is now the new to-hit number.  

Anyother modifiers Mr. GM?  This would include low light..partial cover...being fired at...consecutive shots...movement of target..ect.

Our target is moving so the GM give her a mod of +3 for the targets Speed modifier when running..and -1 for low light conditions.

Add all this up and there is the number our heroine needs to hit the bad guy.

No charts...and once you get going..and know the situational modifiers..its actually quite easy.

If she manages to hit the target damage is done by using the DR (damage rating ) of the weapon +a d6 for severity.  This total gets reduced if the target has armor vs the specific type of attack Balistic, impact, energy.  

Thats about it.  Thats a very simplified version of combat...but hopefully you get the idea.

So yes combat has been paid attention to in particular..but its just because its a colorful aspect of the game...and I wanted to bring out the flavor in combat instead of just I hit...or I miss...next.

[Mike Holmes]

First off, I just recently found this board and I am delighted to find that there are this many people into this aspect of RPG.  I guess almost all folks who play or GM for any length of time have done some sort of revision or adaptation to the core rules of their chosen game, but this is awesome that so many people take on the 'labor' of love that is writing thier own set of rules.

Are you familiar with just how many RPGs exist? Would you be shocked to discover that there are hundreds and hundreds of them? Here's a list of nearly one-thousand:
http://www.darkshire.net/~jhkim/rpg/encyclopedia/

It's probably not complete, despite the fact that John does an incredible job of keeping it up to date. For every one of these there are probably ten games that somebody starts but never gets close enough to finish to even be included in the list.

Just for a little perspective to welcome you to The Forge. Game design is performed a ton. I'd say it was a well-developed art, but in fact, most designers make their game's in a vaccum, knowing only a few RPGs.

Anyway, hope fully I can fit in here and benefit from the excellent experience everyone here seems to share.

I hope we can help. I don't know if you've noticed, but we have a lot of jargon around here, so beware. You may want to peruse the "articles" link at the top of the page and do some reading to get used to the language that flies around here.

One other thing, Im an artist/illustrator by heart, and a graphic designer by trade.

Have you looked into working with anyone here on layouts or such? It's a great way for a person with your skills to get involved.

BATTLETECH (yes there is a RPG element).

Heh, played a ton of Mechwarrior back in the day...

So this brings me to my Question (took awhile eh?).  Does a Generic Sci-Fi rule base where the GM and players populate the cosmos, making the different races and species, sound like an apealing system to you the player?

Yep, sounds cool. OTOH, I say that about everything. Doesn't matter what I think, it only matters what you think. If you make a good game people will play.

That said, what are your publication intentions?

This would include a system with no base class or race, just skill sets that would allow a player to specialize in the direction he or she wishes.  Wether it be a bio-engineer rat like creature with 4 arms..or a 14' rhino type that can crush a car with its bare fists.  A unique form of mental/magical manipulation of the universe (esoteric arts) would round out the mystical aspect of the game.

Are you familiar with any of the many generic games that might handle this sort of thing (Hero, GURPS, etc)? How does your game compare?

Iv'e just always taken the base ideas of a game and made my own universe, and it looks like thats what others here have done as well..it seems to me that a base set of rules with a unique character creation would give players and GM the chance to let their own unique vision run free intead of following scenario guidelines created by the writer.

A lot of people here agree with this idea. Ron Edwards', the moderator of the site, has a game called Sorcerer which has the same sort of concept. Create a cool character, and let the GM and players decide on the setting.

That said, the big question that we ask people here is "what do the characters do?" That is, OK, I can make up a cool character - but does the system inform me about what sort of action is appropriate, or will be fun?

In other words Do you like games where the plot and background of the game is already layed out or presented as a basis?  Or would you enjoy having the ability to make your own history and background and denizens of the universe?

One of the things we espuse here is that, as long as people are having fun, the mode of play is functional. There are those who like all manner of methods of play who would enjoy what you suggest, and it's opposite. So, again, the question is not whether we'd like it, but whether you are enthusiastic enough about your vision for the game to make it come to life.

So, going ahead with the idea that the game should be published, what questions do you have about it? What are we discussing here?

The one subject that's come up so far is combat. Someone mentioned my post Mike's Standard Rant #3: Combat Systems. The point that Dev is getting at is that in making combat so prominent in your rules, players are informed that this is what they should do.

This has been a big problem ever since Traveller. Do you find that combat is very lethal? I mean, given advanced technology, one can imagine that combat becomes very lethal, very quickly. So, does your combat system represent that, or does it dodge it somehow. I remember from the earliest editions of Gamma World that the worst energy weapons available (outside of the death ray, which was save vs. death, no?) often couldn't do enough damage to kill a creature in one shot.

The point is that close combat where people take hits really isn't in genre for most Sci-fi. In fact, combat, where it does happen, is all about either ritualized combat (jedi with light sabres, or shield combat in Dune), or it's about running for you life. Or just being faster than the opponent.

Basically there is no "combat" as we'd recognize it from fantasy play. That is "plot immunity" in the form of Hit Points just isn't viable, really. What difference does it make to a phaser how many HP you have? You'll be just as vaporised on kill.

If that's true, then your "combat monster" character makes even less sense. In fact, why should we bother with stats like that at all?

What I'm saying is that you're coming to all this with a rather large amount of pre-conceptions that might, from one POV, be interfering with your ability to design a good game. OTOH, maybe the game is precisely what you want, in which case who am I to say that you need to challenge your pre-conceptions.

But some games don't have combat systems at all these days, and have far superior combat in play to some player's thinking. As an example, what do you think of that fact?

Mike

[Strams]

Thanks for the welcome Mike.

Hmm you made some interesting points so Ill address them as best I can.

Are you familiar with just how many RPGs exist? Would you be shocked to discover that there are hundreds and hundreds of them? Here's a list of nearly one-thousand:
http://www.darkshire.net/~jhkim/rpg/encyclopedia/

Actually no not to that degree..however just spending anytime in a hobby store and you get the idea of how many there 'can' be.  And through the years the comming and goings of it all..not to mention all the table top simulations with rpg overtones..and yes I can imagine that there are a really really really lot! :)

I hope we can help. I don't know if you've noticed, but we have a lot of jargon around here, so beware. You may want to peruse the "articles" link at the top of the page and do some reading to get used to the language that flies around here.

You already have by leaps and bounds...two heads are better then one..a hundred..well you get the idea.  I will look that over thank you.

Yep, sounds cool. OTOH, I say that about everything. Doesn't matter what I think, it only matters what you think. If you make a good game people will play.

That said, what are your publication intentions?

Well I suppose we all invision a bunch of folks sitting around playing our game..but do i honestly think to make a business or a living out of it ...no.  I would like to maybe put the game up in a pdf formatt and see what happens.

Are you familiar with any of the many generic games that might handle this sort of thing (Hero, GURPS, etc)? How does your game compare?

Yes and no..I have played heroes...gurps Ive heard about and looked over some rules...ringworld is another example..of open character gen.  I can say that directly Ive taken nothing from those...I suppose the same could be said about any Dungeon crawling game..being like D&D.  Ive just tried to make a character gen system that fits our set of rules and vision.  And so far they have matched up quite well.

A lot of people here agree with this idea. Ron Edwards', the moderator of the site, has a game called Sorcerer which has the same sort of concept. Create a cool character, and let the GM and players decide on the setting.

That said, the big question that we ask people here is "what do the characters do?" That is, OK, I can make up a cool character - but does the system inform me about what sort of action is appropriate, or will be fun?

Well again, this is sort of the direction of the game...that the players and GM make up the universe.  I would expect anyone that wants to GM a game like Navigator..or even Ad&D for that matter would have some pre-understanding or interest in SCi-FI or fantasy.  They owuld therefore have thier own ideas on how they would like thier universe to play out.  Those that dont..like I mentioned before will havea Rouges gallery per say...some vehicles..and maps..and a sample adventure to get them started.  Im not discouriging anyone that doesnt have the motivation to make up a story line (use the starwars one).  Its just why would they want to play in the first place.

This has been a big problem ever since Traveller. Do you find that combat is very lethal? I mean, given advanced technology, one can imagine that combat becomes very lethal, very quickly. So, does your combat system represent that, or does it dodge it somehow. I remember from the earliest editions of Gamma World that the worst energy weapons available (outside of the death ray, which was save vs. death, no?) often couldn't do enough damage to kill a creature in one shot.

Yes the dreaded Black Ray gun.  And yes D&D or Gamma world for that matter all have the 'flaw' of being a system that the higher you get the harder you are to die by filling the char with HP.  Gamma used it by giving you mass hp up front..because the weapons did more then lets say a sword would.

Navigator is very leathal.  An example would be..a heavy pistol has a DR of 3(will finish this in another post)

[Strams]

Ok sorry about that..had to leave suddenly yesterday..anyway..where was I?

I was responding to Mike

he said...

This has been a big problem ever since Traveller. Do you find that combat is very lethal? I mean, given advanced technology, one can imagine that combat becomes very lethal, very quickly. So, does your combat system represent that, or does it dodge it somehow. I remember from the earliest editions of Gamma World that the worst energy weapons available (outside of the death ray, which was save vs. death, no?) often couldn't do enough damage to kill a creature in one shot.

I was explaining that Navigator is very lethal and therefore premotes intelligent combat.  Flying in swinging swords just because you have the safty of 100 hps is not realistic..nor is it really anyfun IMO.

So in the example I started, a Heavy Pistol has a DR of 3.  Which mean that it does 3 base damage (a bullet is a bullet is a bullet).  A d6 is rolled  for the severity of the shot and then added to the bae 3.  This is the damage done to the target and subtracted from the players health rating (HR).

A players HR is determined as their END score plus a PS bonus.  So an average player (based on the scale of 1-20 for attributes) will have a 10 HR.  The medium pistol cant kill them with one shot...but will leave them with 1 HR left..and sever negatives to anything they try and do after that.  Actually they will have difficulty even remaining concious.  

Now most all weapons allow for more then one shot per segment..so you can see that a couple of medium pistol rnds into an unarmored opponent will kill them.

I agree with the fact that the Combat monster My friend created is a little extreme.  I suppose that that was the outer edge of what can be acomplished within the rules...but lets say you say..ok no-one can havea str over 20 and you can be no taller then lets say 10 ft.  Ok that will eliminate his monster char..but now you still have an outer edge..its not as extreme..but its still there.  Keep brininging it in and soon you have a number of characters that are all the same height/weight/Strength...ect.  Its an even balance but not much variety.  Where do you draw the line?

I think I showed how this extreme char has just as many liabilities as he does assets.

So would I want to play a char like him...no.  But someone might enjoy that challenge.  Whay should a game force people to experience other realms of RPG when all they like and want is combat.  Certainly all those other rules are there for those that enjoy that..but you will always have the proverbial 'slasher' in the party.  Im trying to reach a balance here of good  detailed game play without complex rules.

A

[Strams]

Hmmm,

I just went through and read some of Mikes Rants...and The 'Heartbreaker' piece by Ron Edwards.  Both have the affect of opening ones eyes.  

Maybe I should explain that Navigator is almost exactly what Ron described as GM and players unsatisfied with their 'game of choice'.

Navigator is by no means supposed to be some great fix all for all things wrong with Sci-fi RPG nor do I wish to take on that role.  I have a wife and daughter..a career..other hobbies and the time and devotion to such an undertaking would be unrealistic at this point in my life.  Maybe when Im 60 and retired..all take on that task.

Navigator is Just 'our' Idea of what a RPG should be if it could combine ease of play with a level of realism acceptable to us..after all we are talking about Sci-Fic here.  A reality based fantasy/SCi-Fi  RPG is sort of an oximoron (sp?).  

Now if for some reason a few people get there hands on it, and enjoy it for what it is..then thats wonderful.

I'm just here for feedback and help in making it better.  If only for me and my group of players.

Thanks,

Mitch Page

[DevP]

Now most all weapons allow for more then one shot per segment..so you can see that a couple of medium pistol rnds into an unarmored opponent will kill them.

I agree with the fact that the Combat monster My friend created is a little extreme.  I suppose that that was the outer edge of what can be acomplished within the rules...but lets say you say..ok no-one can havea str over 20 and you can be no taller then lets say 10 ft.  Ok that will eliminate his monster char..but now you still have an outer edge..its not as extreme..but its still there.  Keep brininging it in and soon you have a number of characters that are all the same height/weight/Strength...ect.  Its an even balance but not much variety.  Where do you draw the line?

I think an important note about guns: even Huang Fei Hong (in the movies) admitted "you can't fight guns with Kung Fu". Even with your system as is - considering especially that aggressive players will take higher END and Armor - you're slightly generous with the damage, and you're going to get different gameplay from scenarios where one shot = usually one kill. But that's fine. If Combat Monster lurches slowly accross the firefight, he's still dead.

If the richness of char-gen is a feature, then I think you shouldn't put on those limits (i.e. maximum strength or size or whatnot). You could put in those limits ONLY for player characters, for arguments of maximum playability (this is why adventuring with a living planet is perhaps less fun). But I think you have a lot of reason NOT to limit character design, and you have to deal with the imbalances that will come out. I'll tell you right now: you're going to have some characters who are going to do better (relative to the scenario) that others, bar none. Indeed, it's likely my 8-armed octupi jazzman will have less plot influence then the moderately buff reptilian merc, chances are. True "balance" will almost never come about. You have to just deal with that outcome, and make it a "feature" and not a bug. Do you feel your game does enough to be inclusive of odd character types, or is that the players or GM's responsibility? (And if its the latter case, you should make that explicit in the rules.)

So back to the key questions:

Well again, this is sort of the direction of the game...that the players and GM make up the universe. I would expect anyone that wants to GM a game like Navigator..or even Ad&D for that matter would have some pre-understanding or interest in SCi-FI or fantasy. They would therefore have thier own ideas on how they would like thier universe to play out. Those that dont..like I mentioned before will have a Rouges gallery per say...some vehicles..and maps..and a sample adventure to get them started. Im not discouriging anyone that doesnt have the motivation to make up a story line (use the starwars one). Its just why would they want to play in the first place.

Mike's question was about being clear on "what characters do", and moreover, "what players do" relative to the game. This is usually implicit, but it's always there. First, the question of the players.

If I'm playing D&D, I know I want to be effective. Not necessarily a crazy fighter, but I want the skills and opportunities to perform my key tasks (such as healing or magic) often enough to feel like I'm playing an important part. The way D&D plays out with its rules encourages me to think this way, and if I'm in a dungeon-crawly tradition, then I'm going to pay attention to effectiveness within the dungeon.

So I'm creating characters in Navigator, but I wan't my choices to count. (As an example, I wouldn't spend 50 points to boost my DUH stat, if I kne wthat the DUH stat was never going to come into play. I don't want to cheat myself out of effectiveness to play the game.)

I think I'm about to lose track, so let me jump to the point: what do characters and players do? It looks like the specific sci-fi thign you're going for is a team of star-hopping freelancers, out to make specific missions (not to different from an equivalent "party" in D&D), and I think that's a fine hook, since it's a very clear starting point in my own space-opera games. If I'm right, than THIS is what the players do ("make a cool character who will do cool freelance adventures for a buck. or maybe even honor"), and what the players are thinking about in Char-Gen is making a character who can be effective in this way. Given that the "adventure" will frequently have some combat, attention will be paid so all participants can feel included.

You suggest that everyone will have their own idea on how things will work out, but that can be limited. The choices you make will affect which GM ideas will pan out. (Like I said, my insubstantial-energy-being PC probably would break the ruleset.)

Back to the original-original question:

In other words Do you like games where the plot and background of the game is already layed out or presented as a basis? Or would you enjoy having the ability to make your own history and background and denizens of the universe?

What conclusion are you coming to on this issue? Which of these options would you rather write about?

[Strams]

Hey Dev,

Well If People only enjoyed having a game that let them participate in a pre-existing or evolving story line or universe as written per the rules..ie GAMMA WORLD...post holocaust mutant world.  Or shadowrun with the re dawning of magic then I would try and add a background 'universe' with a key set of events and storyline to start with and expand on.  Those that enjoy just winging it on the fly can disregard this 'basis'.

I guess thats what I was asking.  And the more I read, the more I think it would be a good idea.  It certainly will be fun to come up with all that.  At first I didnt think it was neccessary for the game..and again its not.  But it might make it more enjoyable for some..or easier for that matter.


As to you other point.  some characters will be more imprtant at times then others...but its that way with any game. Some characters will shine at different times.  When you really need to get those off world quaranteen cargo papers forged..your pilot isnt going to help much.  But the decker/fixer/computer guy will help immensly.  Once you get them though..your not going to walk there..:)  You need the pilot.

As to H-T-H vs ranged..I agree that in a world of blasters the sword weilding monk or the 14' killing elephant does seem at a disadvantage..exept that we arnt talking about creatures that are average or even above average terrans...evolutionary abilities and esoteric arts all allow for interesting melee combat solutions.   I even have been toying with a sort of body alteration aspect of paranormal arts that allows for spending essence on altering dice rolls in combat.

[Juicetyger]

Interesting!  Would you consider publishing it on 1KM1KT?