My new (very rough) game idea

[Revolution]

So, I'm working on an RPG. I hope that much should be obvious.

Basically, I want to have something with a fantastical feeling that seems realistic. I'll admit that I'm leaning towards a more rules heavy system even though it doesn't seem all that popular just. That's because I'm one of the people that more enjoys setting up a bunch of armies and seeing how they clash than actually taking control of an army. Or people or whatever. I think you know what I mean.

Attention: This is largely a gripe paragraph, feel free to skip it, I won't be hurt.
Anyway, the system that i most enjoyed and that inspired me was something called quest frp. At least, that's what I always called it. It's available online for free, just google it. It focused on the development of skills in a very open ended way which i greatly appreciated. From what I've seen in RPGs, which admittedly isn't much, is that there is a push towards that but they still incude certain aspects which seem unrealistic. The armor class thing. It's almost like saying that getting shot while wearing kevlar doesn't hurt, but that's ridiculous. The level system with very concrete definitions of what you get after acomplishing a certain number of tasks or accumulating so many points, and don't get me started on the crazy theories that I came up with to justify HP growth. Finally class or job systems are way too confining. Obviously, most of my experience comes from AD&D. Thankfully, Quest frp answered these items pretty well. But this system was slightly underdeveloped for my tastes, so I set out to take what i liked from it and run. Now we proceed.

Admittedly, the vast majority of my development of this game has come in the form of campaign development, which, if it's okay, i'll ask for some feedback and advice upon. I bring this up because it allows me to explain one of the items which i think make my game (campaign) different. It's actually the materials that will be used. By materials i mean in-game items and equipment. For instance there's the mundane gold, iron, or horses, or spices. Then there are the fantastical items. There's one that inhibits all magical use. One that is an extremely durable and hard metal, but difficult to work. A violently explosive element. And one that I like with a working title of octinium which has unknown magical powers is extremely rare and seems to have something like a will of its own. Of course it's name is too close to that favorite Terry Pratchett metal, octiron. The reason why i reall y enjoy all this is it's my intention to have a fair number of these items, mundane and fantastical, and see what happens when they are unleashed upon a world of, I hope, realistic nations with their own agendas. Will countries peaceably trade their precious resources? Or will they, having nothing to offer in return, need to go to war? It seems simple but it's my hope to play out a fairly intricate economic and international system between several (I'm working with 16 right now) nations, each with their own governments, cultures, values, histories, and so on. The reason for all this of course is to see also how it will affect the players when suddenly they are in a land that now hates one their party members because war was declared three days ago and they don't know 'cause they were off in the wilderness treasure hunting. Hmm... this actually probably seems fairly bland so far, but that's why i'm looking for feedback.

As for actual gameplay, as i said it's pretty early in the production, but i hope to set it up with skill trees and a very open ended realistic character development system that would allow for a wizard who's dumb as a stick but very powerful charismatic and wields a pretty mean spear, or a ranger with absolutely no ranged weapon ability but is nearly unstoppable if given a knife and a place to hide. A cleric who steals. A warrior who fights with no armor and no weapon. As for what system i'll use for combat and character generation and all that, well i said it was very rough, right?

[Incendiary]

Greetings from a fellow newbie,

Sounds like an intriguing premise. Looking round the forums here, the mantra seems to be: there is no right or wrong way to design a rules system, it all depends on the sort of game experience you want. A complicated political/sociological/economic system such as you describe lends itself well to detailed rules, IMO. I feel a GM should be empowered by the rules, not restricted - and that depends on what scenario is presented - I feel that a GM trying to keep track of multiple conflicting political interests WITHOUT detailed rules would come severely unstuck.

Neat idea, dropping a limited range of magical things into a realistic situation. A movie called Shadow of the Vampire springs to mind - the premise is, FW Murnau is filming his expressionist classic, Nosferatu the Vampyre - he is renowned for his auteur nature and attention to detail (this much is valid history); so, to have Nosferatu portrayed onscreen as accurately as possible - he hires an actual vampire! And it works precisely because of that realistic grounding. The scenes are filmed, actors are bitten and strangely affected, the crew start to get worried...

It's modern and relevant too, what with the nature of oil supplies around the world and the tensions and political shenanigans it causes.

Maybe the USA would gain the ability to change the weather and make it rain anywhere in the world, and would ask Europe to shut the hell up about the Kyoto protocol before they agreed to help famine-hit nations. (No anti-US sentiment intended, Forgers, feel free to substitute another nation; I just thought it would put an interesting slant on a current ongoing political situation!)

It also gives two levels for players to roleplay at: individuals caught up in the chaos, or actual power players, trading resources and making alliances (though we're getting into territory more usually covered by PC-based resource management games and board games here). Actually a board game might be a good way of keeping track of the game world, since you're looking at a fair amount of book-keeping...

And playing characters in the middle of an ever-shifting situation always makes for great story hooks, shifting alliances and plot development...

Go for it, say I!

[ODDin]

It sounds really interesting, although it's a bit hard for me to get just how individual characters are connected to the global resource management issues. There's an abundance of plot twists and interesting situations available, of course, but I believe you want all those resources to be available on the mechanical level of actually playing, and not act as plot-drivers behind the scenes.
As a matter of fact, it does sound more appropriate for a strategy game (I'd even say 4x strategy game) - unless the demand is that every PC is in a position of power in one of the nations, rather than just your ordinary adventurer (as much of an oxymoron as this is), but that didn't seem to be the trick.

Another thing that many materials have to offer, however, is in the area of equipment, as you said. It's very interesting if you don't simply buy "armour" or "a sword", but you also indicate what metal is being used - magical or not. It's not completely innovative (it's been used in D&D to some extent), but I'm not familiar with an RPG that actually focuses on the issue and provides a really large variety of materials (albeit I'm not familiar with that many RPGs).
In a similar idea I've been once thinking of (although I didn't really develop it), there were "alchemists" - people who are working on developing new kinds of materials, and may send you on quests to bring things they need; then, they would give you a chunk of the new metal they've developed, and you would go to the blacksmith and have him make a sword of this new metal.

[daMoose_Neo]

What I would say, with you rallying against D&D and a-typical role-playing systems at the get-go, is stop and take a look around the site, the Ronnies entries (more information found under the Publishing forum and the Actual Play forum), the 24 Hour titles and the Iron Chef competitions. There is a LOT more out there, and within here, than what you cite. Its a good thing to know where everyone else has been as well. Who knows, maybe some one's beaten a path down a road you like~

As for other aspects: personally, making a fantastical world real involves a level of personalization, making the world, people, and your character mean something to you. Looking at what you're saying, your concept of development would put it at odds for someone like myself: making a fantastical world seem real, but doing it in a detached and lordly manner. (managing a whole army and watching it clash v. commanding an army through the eyes and experiance of a veteran knight). If you're looking more at physics (clashing of the armies), policital mechaniations of nations vs. individuals, etc. as your measure of realistic that is a different story.

Finally, regarding your last paragraph...I dunno, I'm kind of stumped. You can actually do that kind of thing with a lot of systems, even D&D, if you sit down and map it out yourself. Granted, the characters they ship with in the textbooks aren't capable of doing some of the things you mention, but you can write your own material for these. Some kind of Barbarian/Beserker class would accomodate your warrior without armor or weapons, your Ranger is actually akin to a typical Assassin, which would be a simple matter: just hack up the two classes and pick the features you like of each. As for your others, those are simple adjustments to base classes as well.

So...yea. I'm seeing several seperate, and occasionally competing, goals on this one that have me scratching my head. You want complex political situations between nations and managing armies on a vast scale, yet you want a sence of awe and realism. You're talking managing things on a large scale, and writing a lot of material for day to day items and life. And the character options you present really seem...out of place given all of this. Last suggestion would be to pick one, primary, feature, and develop that fully and use that as your framework to build in the other pieces.

[Caldis]

Basically, I want to have something with a fantastical feeling that seems realistic. I'll admit that I'm leaning towards a more rules heavy system even though it doesn't seem all that popular just. That's because I'm one of the people that more enjoys setting up a bunch of armies and seeing how they clash than actually taking control of an army. Or people or whatever. I think you know what I mean.

I think Runequest, Gurps, Hero or RoleMaster could all easily do the game you've described.  All of these systems are rules heavy, capable of a realistic fantasy setting.  Have you checked any of them out because I think if you could settle on one of them as the rule system you are using then you could better spend your time developing the setting that really seems to interest you and not bother working up a hole system for resolution.

[Callan S.]

The reason for all this of course is to see also how it will affect the players when suddenly they are in a land that now hates one their party members because war was declared three days ago and they don't know 'cause they were off in the wilderness treasure hunting.

Is this the important part of play?

Do players have to use your system for hours to get to this point? Do you like the idea of getting to a juicy point like this in say, 20 minutes?

[Ron Edwards]

Hello,

I have a suggestion for you. The problem you are running into is that "fantastical" and "realistic" are totally undefined terms.

My suggestion, which will fix this problem and help you with your game design, is to sit down and write about two role-playing experiences that you, personally, have actually had, with a real game with real other people.

The first one should include events in the game, and among the people, which perfectly demonstrate the kind of fantastical elements you want in your game.

The second one should include events in the game, and among the people, which perfectly demonstrate the kind of realistic elements you want in your game.

Both should also include descriptions of how people reacted to and used these elements during the game.

Your next step is to post these as a thread in the Actual Play forum. That way we can all understand what you mean by these terms, and then, helping you design the game exactly as you want will be much easier and more constructive.

Best, Ron

[Call Me Curly]

Revolution,

I think that you're on the right track-- pinpointing the strange geology as the distinguishing feature of your game idea.

I was reminded of Superman-- weakened by green Kryptonite, drawing his strength from yellow sunlight.
What are his basic 'stats' anyway, when you take those things away?!   It doesn't matter, does it?

And that's how I'd handle your game idea: any character's Strength is -entirely- determined by how many strength-metal coins he's carrying.  Intelligence determined by the number of smart-gems he's got, etc.   Buying ale with an 10 carat octViagra ring lowers your sexiness 10 points.   Limit the powers of the elements by having them interact in penalizing ways, if you carry certain combinations of metal.  Lose all your freaky coins-- and you die.  Nobody can live without 'em.

Such a system would focus play around the freaky elements and suggest all sorts of adventures.

If done right, such a system would even fit my idea of "realism"-- which is Internal Consistancy.   I don't care if something makes sense in terms of our world.  I only care if it makes sense within the world being played.  Maybe that's what you mean by realism, too-- or maybe not.

And while I'm at it... let me add that I don't really care about things like how much strongness a character has.  But I do care about greed and folly and the personal implications of suddenly losing one's power.  So I think your idea might rule.