The Forge Archives

Previous threads on "Dominion":

Abilities in "Dominion": http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=10069

Dominion: Jihad: http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=9651&highlight=

[Note: technically "Dominion" is now just one setting for the game system I'm working on. The game is about the conflicting passions among movers and shakers in feudal settings, who are often engaged in physical combat, and who have occasional access to both "black" and "white" magic. However, I don't yet have a name for the game system, so I'll just keep on using the "Dominion" name for now when refering to the game.]

So, I was reading the thread on the Eclipse game ( http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=9910&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0 ), and I realized that the Dominion game is at best a Science Fantasy Heartbraker. It might qualify for Heartbraker status because of some of the ideas for the passions and for the setting that I've been kicking around (which haven't been posted in their latest iterations). But, the combat system seems totally uninspired.

The goal of the combat system is to create a delicate balance between incorporating the passions, setting Sim, and low handling-time. There's supposed to be interest created both in the passions that the characters act on or fail to act on and (to a lesser degree) in the tactics chosen by the players.

With the Dominion setting, there is a simple set of tactical features to navigate. Weapon choices are: handguns, assault rifles, grenades, rpg's, and plasma projectors (basically, light sabers, though they don't "parry", and can be projected to varying lengths--also, they are only used for ritualized dueling or for close combat situations, and the latter are less common than in Star Wars movies). Each weapon is a combination of range, damage dice, blast radius, reload time, and concealability. Armor choices are: skin suits, exoarmor, and power armor. Each armor is a combination of concealability, targeting features, and protection dice.  

The basic idea is that the weapons in this particular setting are freakin' dangerous, so if you don't dodge the explosive projectile, and if you don't have any armor, you're in real trouble. Not necessarily dead (the PCs generally only die if it's dramatically appropriate--and, with this game, magical healing or high tech medicine is often available to PCs), but you're at least out of the combat.

It's because of this that I want the attack roll to be separate from the damage roll, like in D&D, Runequest, etc. Some of these weapons will do no damage, if you're agile enough--yet, if you're physically hit and you've no armor, it's over for you. So, there's an incentive to keep the attack and damage rolls separate, and to focus on task resolution, not conflict resolution.

But, the best I could come up with is the following plain vanilla system. I consider it "adequate" but am not positively happy with it.

DOMINION Combat

General resolution rule: Roll a # of d6's equal to the stat being tested, plus bonuses or penalties for passions, situation, and role-play. (Bonuses/penalties are always in terms of numbers of dice.) Each "6" rolled counts as a "success."

Abilities relevant to physical combat: Physique (Ph), Dexterity (Dex), Speed (Spd); Occupatin (Occ).

Steps in Combat Resolution:

Initiative: Characters act in order of Spd. A character can "hold" until a later Spd #. [Insert rules about holding.]

Each physical attack is handled as follows:

1. Attack Roll: Attacker rolls a # of dice equal to Dex + Occ (if combat-related). Every "6" equals a success (hit).

2. Defend Roll: If the attacker has at least one success, the target then rolls to defend. Target rolls a # of dice equal to Spd + Occ (if combat-related). Every "6" means the target negates one success of the attacker.

3. Damage Roll: If at least one attacker success is not negated by the defend roll, then the attacker rolls for damage. Attacker rolls a # of dice equal to # of hits + Ph (for a muscle-powered attack), or + the weapon's damage stat (for self-propelled weapons).

4. Resistance Roll: If at least one damage die succeeds, the target rolls to resist. Target rolls a # of dice equal to Ph + armor bonus (if any).

5. Apply Damage: If any damage roll successes are not resisted, these are then deducted from the target's Ph. When Ph equals 0 the target is dead or incapacitated or thwarted in some way (context-dependent).

My question is, is there any way I can tweak this system to enhance player interest, given what the the game is "about," without going off the deep end in terms of handling time? (Note: this system may itself look to be moderately heavy in terms of handling time already, but keep in mind then when you roll all those d6's, you're just looking for rolls of "6," and not for any other rolls.)

Regards,

Rexfelis

A combat system alone does not a hearbreaker make or break. What you have seems pretty standard, but you seem to have some new and interesting concepts, overall. So it's hard to say at this point if it's a heartbreaker or not. Too little info.

You mention the passions, and how they should affect combat - I don't see any of that in the process you describe. Where do the passions come in? Mechanically.

Mike

QuoteThe basic idea is that the weapons in this particular setting are freakin' dangerous, so if you don't dodge the explosive projectile, and if you don't have any armor, you're in real trouble. Not necessarily dead (the PCs generally only die if it's dramatically appropriate--and, with this game, magical healing or high tech medicine is often available to PCs), but you're at least out of the combat.

It's because of this that I want the attack roll to be separate from the damage roll, like in D&D, Runequest, etc. Some of these weapons will do no damage, if you're agile enough--yet, if you're physically hit and you've no armor, it's over for you. So, there's an incentive to keep the attack and damage rolls separate, and to focus on task resolution, not conflict resolution.

Hey Rex.  
You may want to check out Mongrel the game Ron used as an example for his Simulationism Essay.

Combat in that game is meant to be equally deadly...when you hit you tend to do massive amounts of eviscerating damage...but comes at the problem from a much different angle.

Might be a useful touch point for inspiration.

Quote from: Mike HolmesA combat system alone does not a hearbreaker make or break. What you have seems pretty standard, but you seem to have some new and interesting concepts, overall. So it's hard to say at this point if it's a heartbreaker or not. Too little info.

Yes. IMO it might not be a heartbreaker just because I'm not sure if there's anything really interesting/innovative about it. Since I have committed myself to at least web-publishing it, it would be nice if there is something interesting/innovative about the game that others can gain from/appreciate.

My fear is that, even if there is something interesting/innovative about it once it's all put together, the most it will be is a Heartbreaker, if'n it's overly laden with out-of-place rules I've gleaned from other systems. Time will tell. Meanwhile, I'm going to try to start playtesting it within the month, broken hearts or no.  

QuoteYou mention the passions, and how they should affect combat - I don't see any of that in the process you describe. Where do the passions come in? Mechanically.

Mike

Right. The basic idea is that, if the player makes a case and if the GM thinks it appropriate, a PC's Passion score adds directly to his resolution dice. (The GM can unilaterally declare that an NPC gets his Passion dice for an action.)

Rarely, more than one Passion will apply to a single roll. Occasionally, the GM can rule that 1/2 Passion dice or 1 bonus Passion die will apply to a roll (if the Passion is only peripherally involved or if the player makes a lame description of how he's calling on the Passion).  

Although I've never read or played TROS, I've decided to take a few ideas from it for the Passions rules (slightly modified). Passions have a cap of 5 (as do the Abilities), but can be "burned" in play in return for a permanent boost to an Ability. However, only one point of the Passion can be burned, and a Passion can only be _permanently_ "burned" at such time when the player has the opportunity to use the Passion to _temporarily_ boost one of his stats. Also, no Passion can be burned below 1 point. (Example: A PC has a chance to save his long-lost love, the princess of the Democratic Republic of Congo. The player chooses to blow off a potential temporary Passion [Love: 4] boost to one of his stat's, instead burning 1 point of the Passion and giving a permanent 1-point boost to one of his other stat's.)

Also, Passions increase or decrease during the game based on players' actions, at the GM's discretion.

Finally, after a game session a player can burn Passions to boost other stat's (one point at a time).

Currently the Passions include the following: Ambition (desire for some goal, such as wealth or status), Fear (specify object), Hatred (choose an object--either an individual or a group/class), Loyalty (choose a group or person--this will be determined by the character's Homeland and Occupation), Love (choose your beloved--either an individual or a group/class of persons), Lust (carnal desire--choose an individual, "type," or fetish), Need (= a desire for regular consumption of food or a drug), Pride (choose a source of/reason for the Pride).

When a character is created, 20 points are divided among the Passions as the player desires (but the max. score for a Passion in 5, and the minimum is 1).

A very important proviso: while a character has an "object" or specification for every Passion, this is NOT the ONLY object for which the Passion applies. It is simply the object for which the Passion applies with a _+1 bonus_. Thus, a character cannot have a strong Passion with respect to one object without it "leaking" over onto other objects. For example a character who HATES Darth Vader or Usama bin Laden with a Passion score of 6 will also have a general Hate Passion score of 5.

Regards,

Rexfelis

Quote from: Valamir
Hey Rex.  
You may want to check out Mongrel the game Ron used as an example for his Simulationism Essay.

Combat in that game is meant to be equally deadly...when you hit you tend to do massive amounts of eviscerating damage...but comes at the problem from a much different angle.

Might be a useful touch point for inspiration.

Thank-you for the tip. I had indeed not checked out Mongrel. It has given me much food for thought.

There are two scary things about Mongrel. The first is that my game looks a lot like it, even though "Dominion" is supposed to be primarily Narrativist. There might be a conflict with my goals and the rules I've been writing so far. "Dominion" even resembles Mongrel in terms of the setting. No, there are no bestial demon men in the Dominion setting, but there _are_ rival noble houses (in addition to religious groups, cartels, gangs, and revolutionaries), the inter-relations of which I have envisoned pretty much in Mongrel terms.

The second scary thing is that Mongrel is apparently a throw-away example of a game, and not a "real" ready for prime time game, and yet it's probably more interesting/innovative than anything I've ever come up with. And I say this not as an Edwardsian sycophant, but as someone who's genuinely bewildered/impressed/discouraged.

Rexfelis

Don't fret *too* much-
I've often been explaining parts of my game/world to others to which they go "Oh yea, I saw that in ". Heh, I even had an idea roughly related to midichloriates (or how the freck do you spell that?!) long before SW Episode 1 came out and brought up that (I like mine more though ^_^), and I'm still using that for my magic system, it was too much a part of my world to change~
Focus on whats different/unique/cool about yours~ Way I see it, if you're not wholesale lifting of someone elses ideas and the concept/rules you're using for that don't appear to be dropped in 'because its convienent', it might actually help; thats less you have to explain and less of a hurdle for some audiance members to get over.
Plus too, as one of my artists put it, with 6 billion people on the face of the Earth, the odds are high someones going to have similar thoughts~ Just make sure to present your 'recycled' thoughts in new/intereting ways ^_^

Quote from: daMoose_NeoFocus on whats different/unique/cool about yours~ Way I see it, if you're not wholesale lifting of someone elses ideas and the concept/rules you're using for that don't appear to be dropped in 'because its convienent', it might actually help; thats less you have to explain and less of a hurdle for some audiance members to get over.
Plus too, as one of my artists put it, with 6 billion people on the face of the Earth, the odds are high someones going to have similar thoughts~ Just make sure to present your 'recycled' thoughts in new/intereting ways ^_^

A sound observation.

At the end of the day, I hope that the game puts an interesting twist on ideas that are already laying around.

. . . .

In terms of the combat system, I'm shit-canning the one outlined above. I haven't even play-tested it yet, but I think it would make combat resolution take too long. Currently, I'm split between going for (1) a basic "roll + stat vs. TN" system or (2) a simpler "roll a # of dice equal to your stat" system which is very close to that of Sorcerer.

So, at this point I'm without a basic resolution system, and the first round of play-testing is only a few weeks away. :-(

Rexfelis

You say "in order of speed." Highest to lowest, or lowest to highest?

Your damage mechanic suffers from the same problem that white wolf's (varialbe TN version) does: redundant soak. Why not just have the attacker roll (hits + phy/dam)-(phy + armor) dice? Very comparable results, gets rid of one dice pool every attack or three.

Do muscle-powered weapons have damage modifiers? Other modifiers? Do ranged weapons have modifiers other than damage?

Is there any way to perform multiple actions at once? Do you want Dominion to encourage or discourage this? Does it?

I like the way one stat covers most of a character's skill set. Is it possible for them to pick up skills outside their occupation, like in *Claw? (Erm... that's not to combat related, but oh well.)

I hope these questions help, and good luck with your game. :^)
--Jeff

I have since decided to make Dominion a Sorcerer variant. It's a very weird thing, but it occurred to me that most of what I was going for can be accomplished by tweaking Sorcerer.

The 3 abilities are Body, Mind, and Spirit, each with a descriptor. "Cover" is re-named Occupation or Career. The "Price" becomes a Flaw, as for Naive sorcerers in S&S. Each character has a Destiny, as in S&S.

There is no distinct mechanic for the Passions. Instead, the Passions are folded into the descriptors for the Spirit Ability, into the character's Destiny, and into his Flaw. Thus, a (cliched) character may have Spirit 5 (loyal, vengeance), a Destiny to become king, and a Flaw of Wraithful.

Humanity is interpreted as the bundle of traits and behaviors which are approved by society at large and by whichever entities are the focus of the society's reverence/worship.

What threw me at first is that my game is not focused on demons. I figured the rules had to be fundamentally different from Sorcerer. Now I don't think so. I'm eager to start play-testing to find out.

QuoteYour damage mechanic suffers from the same problem that white wolf's (varialbe TN version) does: redundant soak. Why not just have the attacker roll (hits + phy/dam)-(phy + armor) dice? Very comparable results, gets rid of one dice pool every attack or three.

You're right. That's one of the reasons why I shit-canned the system.


I'm changing some of Sorcerer's rules for damage, though. Essentially, unless a character is severely wounded, damage has no effect until after the fight is over. But, the long-term effects of damage are more harsh than in Sorcerer.

During a fight, adrenalin and the body's other natural resources allow the character to keep going without penalty until he is knocked out, chopped in half, or otherwise incapacitated. Even if he loses a limb, the only effect is to make it harder to move. (If a fight drags on long enough, though, the long-term effects could kick in.)

The long-term effects of damage are as in Sorcerer: a penalty applied to all rolls. However, this penalty cannot be removed without either effective medical treatment or long periods of rest. And, if the damage is severe enough, it might not recover on its own, and can get worse.

The purpose of the rule change is to make combat a little grittier. The PCs may be heroes, but they are vulnerable. A secondary purpose of the rule change is to make combat slightly more "realistic" in a very limited, simple way: based on what little reading I have done on the effects of real-world combat, in the short-run combatants are not usually impaired in their overall effectiveness when they have sustained injuries, unless the injuries are to a specific body part that they are trying to move/use. Over the medium-to-long run the full impact of wounds can kick in and reduce the effectiveness of the combatant.

Thus, you might lose your arm to an explosion, but might conceivably still toss off a couple of grenades before falling unconscious due to loss of blood.  

QuoteI like the way one stat covers most of a character's skill set. Is it possible for them to pick up skills outside their occupation, like in *Claw? (Erm... that's not to combat related, but oh well.)

No. But, it is possible to pick up a new Career if a character receives the right sort of "training."

QuoteI hope these questions help, and good luck with your game. :^)
--Jeff

Thanks. I find that answering any sort of question helps clarify my thinking about the game.

Rexfelis