Night's Dark Heroes

[signoftheserpent]

I am currently working on a pulp horror superhero rpg called Night's Dark Heroes (I preferred Midnight Men but it's being used by another comic). To that end http://nightsdarkheroes.blogspot.com/ is a blog outlining the work, mechanics and ideas thus far. Comments and feedback is invited. Thanks for looking.

[chance.thirteen]

It appears someone with a max base stat cannot critically succeed. (3 stats, 5d cannot get 6 successes). if you mean the dice roll as many successes as the base stat your low stat types are seriously going to critical often.

What does a critical do anyhow?

Have you looked up the probability spreads for your system? (2-5 dice, even=+1 succ, odd=-1 succ, Stats 1-3 are base successes to start). They should be out there for coin flips.

It seems that more dice just means more chaos in the result range, not a greater chance of failure.

You also have a quirk where difficulty of 3 dice and 5 dice MUST be a positive or negative result, it cannot be even. If your numbers were larger, I might suggest having all routine difficulties be multiples of 2, and anything where chance might really throw you a curve alwayts be an odd number, so there is never safety in your base score's value.

Thge soul points seem to be innately linking power to less moral hit points, like Humanity being lost to Cyberware in some games, or like Spawns problem with using up his lifespan via using his infernal powers. You could expand the options to actually be like that, one person dies sooner, another is lost to madness, another ro their dark side.

[signoftheserpent]

The dice mechanic needs to be changed anyway. I intend to use a 3d6 system and steal the name (d666) from in nomine (don'tknow if the idea is copyright/trademarked). The idea is that one die will let you automatically succeed any challenge at a cost of X soul points, where X is the result. However thinking of a 2d6 regular mechanic is rather difficult.

The essence of hte Soul point mechanic must be kept simple: characters trade their soul, their human spirit, to access their dark powers. The more powers they have the fewer Soul points they have and can have. I don't really intend to introduce large complexities beyond the fact that you lose your character on zero points. Characters are also able to to heal themselves supernaturally through soul points as well. Soul points and health are otherwise completely separate.

[David Berg]

I am curious -- what do you envision happening in play as a character approaches zero Soul points? 

I've played a few games that used Humanity or Sanity scores in a similar way.  Two scenarios usually played out:

1) Players got as much bang for their bucks as possible, trading away points to the allowable limit and being thoroughly comfortable with that.  Supposed effects to the character were sometimes portrayed, sometimes not.

2) Players focused on the character's transformation, and worked in some fun portrayals; but without mechanics to enforce said transformations, they kind of guiltily defaulted to "max bang for their bucks" as well.

In both cases, it's kind of been understood that the choice to burn your last point, thus giving up control of your character, was never going to happen.

I apologize if you've already addressed this on your blog.  I haven't read it yet.

Ps,
-David

[signoftheserpent]

I am curious -- what do you envision happening in play as a character approaches zero Soul points? 

I've played a few games that used Humanity or Sanity scores in a similar way.  Two scenarios usually played out:

1) Players got as much bang for their bucks as possible, trading away points to the allowable limit and being thoroughly comfortable with that.  Supposed effects to the character were sometimes portrayed, sometimes not.

2) Players focused on the character's transformation, and worked in some fun portrayals; but without mechanics to enforce said transformations, they kind of guiltily defaulted to "max bang for their bucks" as well.

In both cases, it's kind of been understood that the choice to burn your last point, thus giving up control of your character, was never going to happen.

I apologize if you've already addressed this on your blog.  I haven't read it yet.

Ps,
-David

When the character is reduced to 3 or fewer points it will be understood that people around him will be more uncomfortable in his presence and will find him alienating and potentially sociopathic. He isn't supposed to become a murderer or a psycho and the system isn't designed to emulate real life mental and social health problems or simulate feelings of alienation. It's a simple system intended to represent the depth of characters like Johnny Blaze or even Batman. It is intentionally simplistic because the iconography is more important than realistic simulation of mental degradation. So it is quite likely that the expenditure of the final point will never happen as players aren't likely to choose to sacrifice themselves, although the choice is always theirs.

It isn't intended to be as 'realistic' as vampire humanity. Neither is the game. It's a totally different thing and nowhere near as dour or introverted, nor should it be. the loss of Soul is merely a guideline and I'm not sure adding anything to represent decreasing depth of humanity would enhance it.

[signoftheserpent]

Here is an alternative resolution system, based around the number 13 (spooky!):
At the start of play, each character holds 4 cards. To perform an action the player must play cards to total exactly 13. The number of cards he uses is the number of successes he generates. Characters can't play more cards than the stat score. If they succeed they draw a number of cards equal to their Stat score; if they fail they draw this same amount – the difficulty factor (0, -1, or -2). That same factor, depending on the difficulty of the task, is applied to the value of every card when played. It is therefore possible for players to voluntarily fail actions, this is permissible.

[David Berg]

Sounds perfectly functional, I just was wondering if you were cool with the lack of incentives to NOT just trade in nearly all your soul points for cool powers.  It sounds like you are.

Personally, when introducing this kind of set-up to players, I'd probably say, "Okay, now I assume you'll all want to be creepy badasses; but let me just mention that it might be fun for one of you to play a character who is less badass but more accepted by society."

Sorry if this isn't the kind of feedback you were looking for; feel free to make a more specific request!

As for your card system, I've never seen something like that, so I'd be curious to see how it plays.  I worry that it'd be just like rolling dice but slower, but perhaps you could find ways to connect specific cards to the game's fiction that'd make the process itself more interesting.  Like, if using the 8 of clubs to succeed at an action meant you achieved or sacrificed soemthing different than if you used a 5 of diamonds.  Just a thought.

[signoftheserpent]

If you are referring to the process of trading Soul points for powers during character creation, then thats easily remedied by limiting the amount players can trade. The more powers they have the less Soul points they will ever have since it's the maximum Soul points they are trading. This of course means that they will have fewer points to spend in the game.
Soul points are really there to be spent, since that's how they get to use their powers. That comes with a risk: they can't spend them all at once because they will lose their character, but if they gradually decrease them they will become 'darker'.
Ultiately if players want to take a muchkin approach and play the system, as it were, then that's up to them. If they enjoy that then good luck to them. They will likely  miss the point, but ultimately you can't legislate for the way everyone plays and the system isn't intended to be complicated or realistic; it serves the style of the piece and, so long as players know that the darker they become the more the world will revile them, that's up to them. There's a consequence to their actions in keeping with the concept and that's all that matters. You can't really abuse the system and it doesn't matter to me if you try.

[signoftheserpent]

I worry that it'd be just like rolling dice but slower,

Tha's always been the worry of card based systems. Ultimately it's a nonsense, but persuading people past that perception, even prejudice , is the key issue.

[signoftheserpent]

I think, upon relfection, that dice is probably easier, more appealing and a better mechanic. To that end, I've come up with this:

To resolve a character's action, you need to roll the bones: three six sided dice known as 666 dice (d666) to be exact. Calculate the result thus:
(Number of evens + stat score)  – (number of odds + difficulty factor) = result.
The character succeeds if the outcome is anything other than negative. The degree of success (the number of successes achieved) is always at least 1; the player adds the result to this (i.e. the difference between evens +stat and difficulty +odds).
However if the bones produce three sixes then the action is an automatic success accompanied by powerful an appropriate dramatic effect transcending mere degrees of success.

stats are rated in three levels with a commensurate modifier:
Novice (+0)
Competent (+1)
Skilled. (+2)

Difficulty also:
Average difficulty (+0)
Challenging activity (+1)
Daunting effort (+2)

My concern is: does this kind of system work with an odd number of dice? In this case, three.

[Vulpinoid]

This is pretty simple math.

If you're focusing on only the odds-and-evens, you've got 8 different options for die rolls with three dice.

(O-Odd, E-Even)

OOO, OOE, OEO, OEE, EOO, EOE, EEO, EEE

As you see, scattered across the die results, you've got one chance in 8 of getting either 3 Odds or 3 Evens.

You've got three chances each of getting 2 Odds and an Even, or 2 Evens and an Odd.

You'll never end up with an equal number of odds and evens. This means that a novice has a 50-50 chance of succeeding at an average task, because they'll have a 50% chance of scoring higher (37.5% chance of 1pt bonus, 12.5% chance of 3pt bonus) and a 50% chance of scoring lower (37.5% chance of 1pt penalty, 12.5% chance of 3pt penalty).

If a tie counts as a win to the player, then the novice also has a 50-50 chance of succeeding at a challenging activity, because they'll have a 50% chance of scoring equal or higher (37.5% chance of 1pt bonus, 12.5% chance of 3pt bonus [which brings them even with the difficulty and allows them to succeed]) and a 50% chance of scoring lower (37.5% chance of 1pt penalty, 12.5% chance of 3pt penalty).

Once the novice tries a daunting effort they have a 12.5% chance of succeeding, (12.5% chance of 3pt bonus) and a 87.5% chance of scoring lower (37.5% chance of 1pt bonus [which still isn't enough for success], 37.5% chance of 1pt penalty, 12.5% chance of 3pt penalty).

There doesn't seem to be a whole lot of difference between average tasks and challenging tasks to a novice. The same pattern works it's way up the scale (with competent characters easily accomplishing average tasks 87.5% of the time, while finding challenging and daunting tasks fairly similar in their difficulty.

The system works with three dice, but the results are pretty staggered and granular rather than a smooth progression. It would work better with higher numbers of dice, regardless of whether they were odd or even (but then you'd probably have to expand out your range of skill proficiencies and difficulties).

If you were to throw in a mechanic where 1s counted as two levels of failure, and where 6s counted as two levels of success, you might counter a bit of this issue while keeping the numbers of dice low...but the maths gets a bit more complicated, I can go into it if you want.

V

[signoftheserpent]

I appreciate the analysis, though I don't understand how you get 8 different dice results. I make it 4:
3E 0O, 2E 1O, 1E 2O, and 0E 3O.

You just count the total odds and evens, that's it.

[Vulpinoid]

To calculate the data analysis, I had to show you that the only way of getting 3 evens is if all dice show an even face. The same applies for odds.

To get two evens and an odd, there are three possible ways of getting this (with any one of the dice showing odd while the others show even).

Thus there's three times as much chance of getting two evens and an odd as there is chances of getting three evens.

Yes there's four potential outcomes from your die rolls, but they are weighted 1-3-3-1.

V

[signoftheserpent]

Ok, taking a page from FATE; how about this, based on the d666 idea:

Stat levels are commensurate with difficulty levels. These are applied by the GM to adversely affect the character when trying to do something. They come in three fairly broad ranks with similar modifiers
Average difficulty (-0)
Challenging activity (-1)
Daunting effort (-2)
When a player resolves an action he starts with X successes and modifies that with a 2d6 roll (the player actually rolls 3d6 – see next). Each die is read individually, thus:
1-2: -1 success
3-4: +0 successes
5-6: +1 success
Snake-eyes: -3 successes (total).
Boxcars: +3 successes (total).
Subtract the difficulty modifier from this total for the final result – the number of successes the character has accumulated. In order to realise his efforts, that degree needs to be at least 1.
However any time the player rolls in this way a third die is added, one uniquely identifiable. All three bones are rolled together. This is the devil's die and produces an alternative result giving players a choice as to how to resolve the action. They can either resolve their effort as above; or they can pay X Soul points and automatically succeed. X is half (round up) the result on the devil's die.

[signoftheserpent]

Anyone have any ideas as to how to approach powers?