Basic concept for Gamist dungon-crawl...

[timfire]

Taking a short break from my larger project, I thought about experimenting and trying to design a simple overtly-gamist fantasy dungeon-crawl. My goal would be to create a purely combat-focused system that encouraged team tactics. So here is the idea I came up with:

The goal of the game will be simple survival. The characters will all be mercenaries, hired to either clean out a dungeon, save a princess or retrieve an item (standard dungeon-crawl stuff). It will thus be mission-based, meaning one-timers or short campaigns.

But here's the deal - the characters will be simple pawns for the players. Players will create new characters for every adventure. In fact, it will be the players that will receive a rank/ level, not the characters. If a player/ character succeeds at a mission (ie, live), that player's rank goes up. Fail (die) and their rank will go down. Rank will provide currency for creating more powerful characters (or increasing the skills of their current character, alternatively).

I thought that before gameplay, players will be brief-ed on what to expect from the mission, so they can tailor their characters to match the adventure. I also thought maybe putting in requirements about what types of characters must be in the party - ie, there must be 1 healer/ 1 scout/ 1 mage/ etc (more on archtypes in a moment).

Chargen will be based on strict archtypes. Players will pick an archtype, and then depending upon their rank they can customize the character with advantages (or disadvantages to gain extra currency) and new equipment. I figure the strict archtypes combined with requirements for which types are allowed in a party will encourage team tactics.

Combat will involve utilizing manuvers which will have some sort of karma-based relationship to each other. Equipment and magic will similiarly have some sort of karma-based relationship to each other and other aspects of combat. Actual task-resolution will still be fortune-based, though. Probably a simple die roll modified by the manuvers/etc used by the combatants. (I still have to think about mechanics a bit more.)

I'm also toying with ther idea of creating some sort of system with playing cards, where you can do different things with the cards. The most basic would simply be adding the card's value to a dice-roll. Player's would be given something like 5 cards to start with (randomly handed out), and certain actions along the way (killing a bad guy maybe?) would allow the player to pick more cards.

What do y'all think? My main hooks are the player-rank and cards thing.

[Shreyas Sampat]

I know people who play D&D like this; every week, they just "bring in a character of level X", constructed from whatever sources the DM feels appropriate and monetary resources based on... well, some rules framework exists for that as well.

The card thing is interesting - I suggest that you develop that further.  It's possible that the cards can be both in-game resource and your player rank concept simultaneously... that would be neat, I think, and help bind the card system into the game more directly.

[anonymouse]

Have you looked at both Dungeoneer (from SJG) and Fungeon (from Zak A. here at the Forge)? Might be something to mine for ideas, or see if maybe it already meets your goals.

[Zak Arntson]

You should also check out Rune from Atlas Games. A round-robin GM, purely-gamist dungeon crawl game. I've yet to play it (there is a lot of time investment in both understanding the rules as written and prepping for play), but it's got some very interesting ideas.

I'm not sure why you want to focus on cards. A ranking system outside of individual characters is very interesting. Next to ranking, the combat system interests me most, with your vague mentions. How do you picture combat in the game?

(oh, and thanks, anonymouse!)

[timfire]

If I get a chance I'll check out those games. I'm treating this game as a simple mental exercise, though, so I'm more concerned with just designing a game than whether or not it will get played much.

Alright, excuse me if I start rambling, I'm just thinking out loud with this post.

First the cards issue. I don't know, maybe I've just been playing too much hearts and solitaire on my computer lately, but the idea of using playing cards in a RPG intrigues me. It's still fortune-based, but it allows for some player control & strategy. I'm tempted to make the entire game card-based, but I suspect a full-on card mechanic would be better suited for a game with a minimal number of task-resolutions, but I envision this game being fairly resolution heavy.

I want the card-resource/ mechanic to be a integral part of gameplay, where players don't NEED to use them, but it will be difficult without them. I'm thinking that the number cards will be used simply to add to dice rolls. Maybe you can lay down multiple cards if they are the same suit? Then the face cards will have special-effects of some kind. Maybe the ability to heal, replenish ammo/ magic? Maybe I'll have a trump suit? I also need to develop some in-game way to replenish the cards.

How do I envision combat? I envision that every manuver/ item/ spell/ class/ etc will have some sort of bonus AND penalty attached to it. This is what I meant by karma-based relationship. I haven't developed this idea yet, but one possibility would be a rapier (fast but weak damage) vs. a greatsword (slow but strong). I don't know that I'll use that example, I'm just throwing it out. I might have some manuvers that cancel each out, like rock-paper-scissors, I don't know.

Actual dice mechanics will probably be fairly simple. 2d6 + modifiers maybe? Opposed rolls? Attack roll - Defense roll = Damage? Characters will be reduced to simple combat skills. No Attributes/ stats, and no non-combat skills. Though players can modify characters with advantages, like strong (+2 damage) or Fast (+2 to hit).

Shreyas Sampat: It's possible that the cards can be both in-game resource and your player rank concept simultaneously... that would be neat, I think, and help bind the card system into the game more directly.

That is an idea. Connect rank to cards. My issue is that I want to design the game so that players of different ranks can still play together and the game remain functional for everyone involved. So I don't want to give TOO much power to higher ranks. If I tie rank to cards, I feel I should eliminate giving higher ranks more points at chargen. Maybe I could give cards a point cost, so players have to choose between a large hand of cards and a suped-up character?

[Harlequin]

Incidentally, quite on another tack, your stated assumption that full card-based wouldn't suit a lot of resolution events made something spring totally full-fledged into my head.  I've posted it separately, here, so as not to threadjack.  But I'd sum up by saying that IMO card-based can actually be made to better serve a really frequent use of the mechanic, if done in this style.

(A version which didn't use custom cards also came into my head at the same time, sort of like a realtime version of Dance of Steel, but the post had to end somewhere.)

Anyway, consider this space occupied by an attempt to refute the assumption that full-on card-based couldn't be used for the stated design.  Whether you want to or not is totally different; I take no position, there.  Shreyas' comment that linking the cards to the player rank, I like.  Combining the real-time cardplay with that concept could even be as simple as "Card value < player rank is a successful maneuver; maneuver type (attack, defend, etc) is given by suit.  Draw until someone gets a successful maneuver in, pause and resolve, continue."  Customizing a character by selecting any, say, 30 cards out of a 52-card deck, would allow them to do styles by character, with the player rank remaining supreme.

- Eric

[Zak Arntson]

I'm going to toss out the suggestion that you write down a script of actual play (who was it who first recommended it? I keep forgetting!). Basically, write down what the participants are saying. Put them in a situation you would expect from your game. Now, whenever you want to insert game mechanics, just make a note. Something like:

Bob: Bragi the dwarf stomps up to whack the orcs. [insert mechanic]
GM: Bragi smashes three of them!

See how it would be different than:

Bob: Bragi the dwarf stomps up to whack the orcs. [mech.]
GM: Bragi hits two, and misses the last.
Bob: Alright I [some neat mechanic] to extend the attack into that last orc.
GM: Okay, Bragi smashes three of them!

That's a pretty simplistic script, but it gives you an idea about how you want the dialogue and rules cadence to be. As you develop your idea, you can insert actual mechanics.

If you are going to combine dice and cards, make it simple. Even adding the total of several dice plus a modifier could get in the way if the additional layer of cards is concerned. A big time saver is roll several dice, pick the highest. And cards could manipulate that roll, by adding a die or rerolling a die, etc.

[timfire]

Partly due to Harlequin's post, I've decided to use a cards-only system. (BTW Harlequin, thanks for offering the system, but I've designed my own.) I posted the basic system over in the RPG Theory forum.

I still have to figure out how skills/ manuevers/ equipment/ etc will effect combat.

BTW, I'm tentatively going to call this project Crypts & Cards, to go along with the old-school dungeon-crawl feel of the game.