Ethelea - a simple little game

[eldaen]

Greetings, all!

I would like some of your appreciated feedback on the rules for my own system. These are still drafts and not finished by far. Maybe you would care to have a look at:

www.ladroun.de/cms

(It's under the rules section - the world will be added a little later. PLease also note that the website is under construction...)

Thanks in advance!

[montag]

A had a look at the rules, seems you've only got the bare minimum written down, so that make sit hard to comment.
Much more importantly however, what ware you trying to achieve with these rules? What is the point of your game? Most importantly, how are   the answers to the first two questions interconnected?

Apart from that, it might help if you asked specific questions, you're interested in having answered.
<plug>If you speak German (as the button seems to indicate) you might want to have a look at Fera and ask some specific questions there as well.</plug>

[eldaen]

THanks for the reply. Yes, I have only written a minimum down, but the rules are not supposed to become much more exhaustive. I come from a game called "HârnMaster", a very detailed (and supposedly "realistic") and low-level game.

Well, I got sort of fed up with that (as did my players). My goal with these rules is to create a very simple game that enables players to play a "nordic saga" style game. That is, they shall be able to perform formidable tasks occasionally, but they are not supposed to be absolute superhumans. Another thing (being a living history swordsman) is that while I want the rules to be very simple, they are also supposed to "not contradict reality" too much.

I am aware that reducing detail and simplifying the game has some effect on the "realism", but my intention is to keep that at a minimum.

The combat and skill rules are basically complete - and everybody I explained them to understood them within two minutes. This is one of my most important goals. I want rules that do not hinder roleplay. Too many optional/additional/special rules caused me to having to look up rules during combat and that takes both the speed and the thrill out of it. That's one reason why I am basing it on only one die roll - it makes it rather quick.

The "left-over points" routine allows the GM to very rapidly determine the outcome of a skilltest without any special rules and without limiting the imagination of both GM and players. In order to make it even more simple, I reduced the level of attributes/skills to figures everybody can calculate within  seconds. I want my players to have the images in mind - not the figures.

The character improvement allows players to save character points for spending on a single skill roll at a much lower rate than when improving a skill or even an attribute. This makes spending points a little more difficult for players since any character points left over may come in very handy when the going gets tough. I've had too many sessions where we spend hours of planning and then a single die roll failed. I want to include a routine that can be used to prevent that.

Well, that's about it - a simple yet not overly abstract rule system that allows players to play a sort of character that may have been the main figure in an old nordic saga.

Hm... re-reading this post, I'm not sure whether my babbling actually answers your questions?

P.S.: Yes, I am German. Thanks for the link! I will pay a visit to that site ASAP.

Thanks again!

Matthias

[montag]

Hello Matthias

all of the stuff I'm going to say has recently been said much better by greyorm and mike holmes in this thread about Ravien's Eclipse. I'll probably make some mistakes in trying to emulate the kind of advice they gave over there (and which IMO contributed to such cool stuff as Eclipse's social interaction mechanics.)

I come from a game called "HârnMaster", a very detailed (and supposedly "realistic") and low-level game.
Well, I got sort of fed up with that (as did my players). My goal with these rules is to create a very simple game that enables players to play a "nordic saga" style game. That is, they shall be able to perform formidable tasks occasionally, but they are not supposed to be absolute superhumans. Another thing (being a living history swordsman) is that while I want the rules to be very simple, they are also supposed to "not contradict reality" too much.

In which case, I'd suggest having a look at "The Riddle of Steel". You should love it.
As to further considerations:
- Are you after "few rules" or after "rules that don't get in the way"? Focussed rules will not get in the way of gameplay, virtually irrespective of how complex they are, whereas a loose mess of a small number of rules will cause you lots of pain.
- What does "nordic saga style game" mean to you? Is it just about being able to do extraordinary stuff once in a while. (If so, I'd suggest simply tacking some kind of Fate Point system onto any game you like otherwise.)

The combat and skill rules are basically complete - and everybody I explained them to understood them within two minutes. This is one of my most important goals. I want rules that do not hinder roleplay. Too many optional/additional/special rules caused me to having to look up rules during combat and that takes both the speed and the thrill out of it. That's one reason why I am basing it on only one die roll - it makes it rather quick.

As with the above, the point is, that good rules never hinder roleplay, they enhance it.
For instance, consider playing diceless (just a thought experiment): players expend a certain ressource, to be able to describe what their characters do, within limits (partly set by the amount of ressource they spent). This gives you instant 100% realism (not really, but I hope for the purpose of the example we needn't debate the meaning of "realism") and much more freedom than any specification of penalities, modifiers etc. could do.
Second, consider how the execution and outcome of an event is handled in play. It's perfectly possible, though not desireable IMO, to have rules which use few quick dice rolls, but leave everybody at the table wondering as to what actually happened, and possibly leaving the decision on the actual effect up to the GM.

The "left-over points" routine allows the GM to very rapidly determine the outcome of a skilltest without any special rules and without limiting the imagination of both GM and players.

I for one would consider it a limitation on my imagination as a player if the GM determines the outcome, see above.

The character improvement allows players to save character points for spending on a single skill roll at a much lower rate than when improving a skill or even an attribute. This makes spending points a little more difficult for players since any character points left over may come in very handy when the going gets tough.

This is minor compared to the stuff above, but FWIW, IMO this usually reduces to "die now or suck later", neither of which is usually particularly interesting for the players. Consider separating the two systems.

I've had too many sessions where we spend hours of planning and then a single die roll failed. I want to include a routine that can be used to prevent that.

Why roll if you'll be unhappy about one of the possible outcomes? Seriously, I'm not making fun of you here: why roll?

Well, that's about it - a simple yet not overly abstract rule system that allows players to play a sort of character that may have been the main figure in an old nordic saga.
Hm... re-reading this post, I'm not sure whether my babbling actually answers your questions?

You've answered part of the questions. ... and made me wonder why you want to write your own game. There's tons and tons of good games out there that will allow you to get something as generic as allowing player to play some saga type. If you're in it for the joy of creation, all that other games matter only in so far as you can learn from them for your own design.
But to me (reading things into your post;), it sounds like you are merely unsatisfied with one particular game (notorious for rule complexity ;) and you might perhaps want to sample some other stuff first. It's hard to give further advice without knowing what it is exactly you want, what "nordic saga play" means to you personally.
Either way, welcome to the Forge (I doesn't really count if I say it, wait for the big ones, but I couldn't resist ;), I hope we will be able to help you either way.

[Ben O'Neal]

Welcome to the Forge Matthius!

Firstly, you have Perception listed as a physical attribute... shouldn't it be a mental one?

Secondly, montag's suggested reading link is a great idea... not because it's a thread about my game, but because Mike Holmes asks challenging questions for the purpose of helping all new game designers. So if you read his posts and pretend he is talking about your game, you may find it as helpful as I did.

But I do have a few of my own questions:

You mention that when you are mortally wounded, you take 1 hour to die for every point of stamina you have, minus 1 hour per point of injury above 10, IMHO, this seems a bit excessive. I mean, if you are wounded enough that you can't move, you are going to be loosing blood very rapidly, and it will take much less than half a dozen hours for you to die. Perhaps the default should be quicker, but maybe attempts by comrades to tend to your wounds should increase the time you have to live, and if they succeed by a certain amount, maybe you won't die at all. Just a thought though.

Also, regarding the "Aiming Penalties", why is it harder to swing a sword at someone's head? I'd argue that it is actually harder to hit someone's torso with a swing, because you have to worry about arms and stuff, but easier with a thrust. Perhaps the reverse could be true of the head, but then it is only harder because of their defense/movements, not because of poor aiming. I understand why you would want such aiming penalties -to discourage players from always aiming for the head- but I noted that you wanted your system to "not contradict reality too much". Well, in reality, the only reason to not go for someone's head is because it leaves your body open for a counter. So if you want to discourage players from chopping off everyone's heads, could you factor in some sort of defense penalty for certain attacks?

-Ben

[RaconteurX]

A simple set of rules for Norse sagas, hm? Have you considered Prince Valiant? While is it out of print, copies are easy to find. Follow the links for reviews by Steffan O'Sullivan (creator of FUDGE, another great rules-lite system) and David Dunham (lead programmer for the HeroQuest computer game, King of Dragon Pass).

[Juicetyger]

Not bad!  I'd like to link to it on my site.  Let me know if that's OK.

Juice