Where does this mechanic break down?

[Frank The Pug]

I'm trying to devise the simplest mechanic possible while still playing within a fairly structured ruleset.

The basic of this mechanic is Attribute+Trait+Skill+d10 vs TN.

There are three attributes: Body, Mind and Soul. 12 points can be spent on attributes. No attribute may be lower than one and, conversely, no attribute may be more than 10 (the practical human limit)

3 points can be spent on advantages and 2 on disadvantages.

10 points can be spent on skills.

Skill rolls are made using a d10 at Attribute+Trait+Skill.
Unskilled rolls are made using a d10 at Attributex2+Trait.
Opposed rolls check a character's TN, which is a derrived attribute.

Where does it break down? I'm trying to make it as cinematic as possible.

Thanks!

[Mark D. Eddy]

First place it breaks down: What is a trait? I don't see it defined anywhere.

2) Are maximum for skills also 10?

3) The range of target numbers, assuming Traits and Skills are both a 1-10 range, needs to run from 4 (will work every time, for anyone) to 40 (The best, baddest, and buffest has a 10% chance of success). This is a fine granularity system, with a coarse granularity die function. There will be many  situations where, just by announcing the target number, the players know whether the task will succeed or fail.

4) This system discourages players from buying skills under their strongest attribute -- If thier Body is 10, they get an automatic 20+Traits on rolls where they don't have a skill, so there is no reason to purchase (say) Athletics as a skill. That may be your intent, but it seems counter-intuitive to me.

Those are just my first thoughts.

[Frank The Pug]

Traits are advantages and disadvantages worth no more than +3 and no less than -3 as modifiers on skill rolls. So maybe doubling a character's attribute on unskilled checks wouldn't be the best way to go now that you bring that up.

[Mark D. Eddy]

Are skills 1-10, or open-ended (i.e., 1-infinity)?

If 1-10, you have (1-10)+(1-10)+(-3-+3)+d10, for a TN range of 0 (even the most inept person can do it  100% of the time) to 33 (the best will be able to do it 10% of the time). If 1-infinity, then target numbers can also range to infinity with impunity, and attributes become much less important than skills as the characters become more skilled.

If you drop the "Attribute x 2" rule, you then have the usual formula, but skills run from 0-(either 10 or infinity), which means that, with a target number of 0, the most incompetent has a 10% chance of failure. Which, I suppose, is appropriate for someone who took a -3 trait disadvantage and no skill in something their attribute was already 1 in.

The other thing that happens with this system is that I'm not getting a clear picture of what skills and traits will look like. Will skills be things like "Athletics" or things like "Shot-put"? The former is more cinematic than the latter, especially with only ten points to distribute among skills.

[Frank The Pug]

Skill advancement is gained through experience so, in effect, skills can range from 1 to infinity. Skills are fairly broad, but I'm thinking about adding specialization, such as Swords 1..Bastard Swords 2.

Thanks, by the way, for brining up these points!

[Mark D. Eddy]

No problem, I'm glad to help.

I'd suggest that opposed rolls go to the same A+S+T+d10, and just compare the two totals. It's much simpler than deriving a target number. It also means that there are some fights that the characters can't win, though.

Unless there's some way of teaming up on an opponent -- like multiple opponents count as a trait (-1 for each opponent, for example).

Just one more thought before I go back to my homework.

[TonyLB]

Well, the more player-controlled variables you're summing together the more your system will become a minimaxer's delight.  If you're looking for people to wildly specialized (i.e. roll 20+1d10 in the skill they've decided is "theirs") then you're good to go.  

If you want to leave some room for generalists, however, you may benefit from a mechanic for story structure above and beyond this die-mechanic.  You can craft rules that help the group (especially the GM) to easily maintain the balance between spotlighting Mister-23+1d10-Sword-Skill with intense combat and spotlighting Figgy the Bard, Jack of all Trades, with moderately difficult runes to solve, barmaids to woo, politics to untangle, etc., etc.

[John Uckele]

I think that it breaks down in being what looks like a very gamist/sim roll mechanic in what you seem to envision as a mechanic for nar. gameplay. Cinematic says to me that no mater what the odds, the hero can still try it, and quite likely succed. Cinematic also says that people slip and fall down in the middle of combat. I think that being said you should have a more open system in terms of you can/can't do this (+1d10 for totals that range from 0-20 or more is pretty tight), and I also think you want a 'fumble' mechanic if you're going for cinematic.

[timfire]

Where does it break down? I'm trying to make it as cinematic as possible.

This is where it breaks down. There's nothing in the mechanic you propsed that promotes 'cinematic' play.

You need to reward 'cinematic' play. Either there needs to be a bonus/advantage for doing cinematic stuff, or inversely, there needs to be a penalty for doing non-cinematic stuff.

For example, a common technique is to grant bonus dice for 'cool' narrations or 'cool' ideas from the player.

GM:

The badguy gettin' away, and you're stuck on the balcony!
Player: Well, I jump from the balcony, grab the chandelier, and swing across the room!
GM: Cool! Here's that extra d20.[/list:u]

Also, let me suggest that you're putting the cart before the horse. You need to decide on specific behaviors and elements of play you want from the players. After you know what you want to get out of your system, then you can write mechanics. This is something I struggle with myself. I love writing mechanics, but its so much easier when you know what you want the finish outcome to look like.

[Frank The Pug]

Everyone's right, it's not cinematic enough. I did some thinking and, because the game world somewhat involves cards, I decided to try something new. The game is meant to be quirky where anything and everything can happen. I'd appreciate it if someone could help me refine my idea below:

This game requires the use of a pack of 54 playing cards, including 2 jokers.

CHARACTER CREATION

Attributes
Each character is comprised of 4 Core Attributes: Body, Mind, Spirit and Health. Each attribute is associated with a particular suit:
Body      Clubs
Mind      Spades
Spirit      Diamonds
Health      Hearts

Character creation begins with assigning each core attribute a random value. Shuffle the deck of cards. Continue picking cards from the deck until you have each of one Club, one Spade, one Diamond and one Heart, ignoring picture cards, aces, jokers and duplicate suits already in your hand (discard these into a "junk" pile). On your Character Sheet, mark down the values of your Body (Clubs) attribute, your Mind (Spades) attribute, your Spirit (Diamonds) attribute and your Health (Hearts) attribute. With these four cards still in your hand, recombine the deck and "junk" pile, shuffle it and pull a card. This is your "lucky" card. Every time this card is drawn by you, your character will automatically succeed at anything he's attempting.

Edges and Flaws
3 Edges and 3 Flaws can be chosen from a list. This will produce a modifier pool from between +3 (one serious edge) to -3 (one serious flaw).

Skills
Players have 10 points to spend on Skills. Skill values can range from 1 (moderately proficient) to 10 (expert).

GAMEPLAY

Each player (and the GM) is dealt a hand of 10 cards at the beginning of the game. If more than 2 players (plus the GM) are playing, it is recommended that two decks of cards be used. If more than five players (plus the GM) are playing, it is recommended that three decks be used, and so on.

Task Resolution
The GM assigns a TN to a task. (1..infinity) The player draws a card from the deck. A joker indicates a fumble. An ace or the player's lucky card is a serious automatic success.

The player adds to the number of the card drawn, the base attribute and any applicable skills and edge or flaw and compares it against the TN.

The Twist
If the player doesn't succeed, the player has the option of spending a card he holds in his hand to add to the number. The card he decides to spend must be the same suit as the base attribute of the task, however.

[John Uckele]

That is looking a lot more random and more cinematic. One thing I might suggest: Health seems like a kind of funky (and not very useful) attribue. You might want to consider making hearts into a charisma attribute.

Do you ever refuel on cards, or do you only have one way to change hand size (spending cards)? What are the values of faces? Does a joker in your hand mean that there is one less joker in circulation, or does it mean that you can use it at some point (possibly to make an opponent fumble).

[Precious Villain]

An ace or the player's lucky card is a serious automatic success

Two minor issues.  One: with five cards out of 54, you've got about a 10% chance of a serious success on any task you attempt.  That's cool, if that's what you want, but I thought you should know. . .

Two: wouldn't it suck if your lucky card was the ace of spades?  You get a lot less automatic success that way . . .

Target numbers obviously need to run from 1 to 33 here.  That's no problem.  However, you might want to do something to offset the serious possibility of getting really suckass attributes.  I mean, if you pull out a bunch of 2's and 3's your character is just shafted.  Is that cinematic?

[btrc]

A card mechanic I've been toying with gives each player a deck (or if you're short of cards, a suit) of cards. In the proposed system, "die rolls" are in the 1-6 card range. The GM decides the difficulty of a task (from 1 to say 7), and flips up that number of cards. The player flips up the number of cards appropriate to their skill or attribute.

At this point, you would either compare the totals (which requires math), or see how many of your cards beat the GM's (a number of successes system). I haven't decided yet.

Regardless, the player removes the highest (and maybe lowest) card they played from their deck and shuffles the rest back in. As an encounter winds on, the adventurer "gets tired". Doing stuff that is heroic, in character or otherwise cool lets the GM give the player back 1 or more of their removed cards to shuffle back into their deck. Or, the player can use a "Luck" mechanic to draw one from the removed cards instead of the regular deck.

Greg Porter
BTRC