Newbie Post

[James Wages]

I hate these kinds of posts, but here it goes. Yes, I'm new here and I do plan on trying to create an RPG. This wouldn't be the first time I've tried it, but hopefully it will be the first time I actually complete one. More to the point, I'm here to, hopefully, get help in making sure that my game isn't X game with house rules (part of the reason I dumped a couple of my previous projects is I found that I was just making house rules). I'm also trying to read through all the articles and some of the posts so I don't ask questions for which the only result will be my foot in my mouth. BTW, I can handle criticism without making it personal (otherwise I wouldn't bother to be here). Well, enough rambling out of me time to get to the point of this post.

I have two potential concepts (for which I will post synopsis for in a moment) and would like to know which is thought of as having the potential for making a good RPG.

Concept 1: A Science-Fantasy genre of a universe set in the year 2015. The universe has been turned on its head with the discovery by every world that was considered myth and legend was, at one point, real and is making a major comeback. Now there are three competing powers, tech, psionics and magic, all working against each other to become the dominant power in the universe. Earth in particular is having problems, as most people want to people want to pretend this isn't happening despite irrefutable evidence shoved in their faces. It'll have a mostly serious tone and the few cliches that do make it in will be there purely as comedy relief. The characters will be either people not wanting to accept the new reality or people diving into it head first.

Concept 2: A fantasy world with no equivalent to a period on Earth. The population is almost entirely made up of 'chimeras,' humans who underwent a ceremony at some early point in their life that fused them with magical beasts. The world itself is on the edge of social, economic and political revolutions. Yet at the same time never-before-seen magical beasts are showing up and threatening worlds very existance, and no one can explain why.

So comments? Suggestions? Flames?

EDIT: Oops, meant to put this under Indie Game Design, not Site Discussion.

[Matt Wilson]

Hey James:

I'm going to bank on Ron moving this thread to its rightful location and go ahead with some quick feedback.

There are many threads in the Indie forum that say "I've got X game with Y neat things in it," and not a lot of responses. It's hard to know how to respond to high-level descriptions, because to an outsider, the games often sound like a dozen other games. You probably know why it's different, and I suggest figuring out the specific things that you can say on the forum to clarify to us how it's different.

Also, ask for specific things in your feedback, not "what do you think." That will help everyone, especially you.

And welcome to the Forge.

[Mike Holmes]

Cool, great attitude, James. I like people like you, because unlike with touchy people, I can cut right through the BS, and hit you with the appropriate rants to get you up to speed in no time.

The first is Mike's Standard Rant #6: Concepts Are a Dime a Dozen.

Which concept do you like more, feel that you have more drive to make a good game? Develop that one. Period.

Mike

[Dav]

Go with the second concept.  Of the two, it is better.

Let me ask some questions:
1) Why have some ritual or what-have-you?  Why not say that these just *are* the people?  Alternatively, say that this is the land of nightmares, or something to go with your chimera idea, and let be...

2) You have a setting, which is arguably the simplest bit of the design.  Now... what have you for a system?  Mechanically, explain to me why I want to play your game.

3) So that's a setting... now, what do I do in your world?  I am a twisted nightmarish version of a man... so is everyone else.  Okay, what now?

Answer those and you have a game...  well, the beginnings of a game.

Dav

[daMoose_Neo]

Agreed, of them #2 seems the better.

As far as settings go, #1 sounds way too much like the Stargate SG-1 tv series- they've gone through a fair chunk of Egyptian mythology, touched off on Norse mythology with a nordic planet and dubbed the Greys the "Asgard", and are now tackling the myth of Atlantis.
Best leave #1 to them and tackle #2.

Now- More details?? ^_^

[James Wages]

Thanks for the welcome. I was wondering why I didn't see more people try to get advise on which way to start with an RPG, now I understand. More to the point, I'm going to give the chimera one a chance, only because I have somewhere to start in terms of mechanics.

I guess I'll start with Dav's questions.

1. There are three reasons for using the ritual: setting, mechanics ane percieved (at least in my eyes) originality. The setting issue is that a higher being hailed as a goddess, visited this world (and unlike the real world there's too much evidence to refute that she did visit) and turned her disciples into chimeras to elevate them to being closer to her power. This started a belief that having everyone undergo the process, thus people start out life as human but are transformed later on. I'll get more on the ritual and setting later. The mechanical reason is that the ritual provides the diversity in character creation I desire, because not everyone is made from the same combination of critters and simply adding to the bestiary/monsters section is adding to the character creation process. The final issue is that if I just have people simply being chimeras from birth reminds me a little too much of Palladium's Nightbane.

2. I'm still brainstroming the system (and is subject to change). Right now my goal is to create a system that's fast and easy to use, and is largely diceless. For instance, when using a skill, if the skill is higher or lower than the target number, it's an automatic success or failure, you only roll if the target is equal to the skill. Something similar with combat, except magic and certain actions provide modifiers to the numbers and dice are only needed when there is a tie (though in reality flipping a coin would work just as well). Character creation would involve buying creature components with points and the combinations of creatures determines the characters stats, left over points and creature modifiers determine how many skills and at what level the character gets to buy. None of the above is probably very innovative or original, but I'm still brain storming.

3. First let me say that this isn't a horror game, most characters won't consider themselves to be twisted nightmarish versions of anything. As for what you could do, the world is in turmoil, from both internal and external threats. Therefore, a group would ideally be caught up in one of these conflicts and has to decide to help maintain the status quo or to try and make some kind of difference. In other words, I'm still trying to hammer this part out.

Well, I'll probably give more detail and thoughts later, I've gotta go do other things right now.

[Zak Arntson]

Sounds like an interesting start. My advice would be to ignore the actual mechanics altogether at this point, and just consider _where_ you want the mechanics to go during play and what they should promote. Write a script of how you perceive the play experience to happen. Wherever you think mechanics should be involved, make a note of it (see script for Terra Australis as an example of a script with mechanics notes).

You should also be answering the questions: What does the GM/player/character do? Too often, designers mistake player and character goals as the same thing.

Okay, on to your particular game (and no more pimping my own posts), you've got a great bunch of flavor and background. I love the weirdness chimerae can evoke, and you have a whole world's worth of civilization for inspiration (see Egyptian gods, the Greek Actaeon, human-headed Sumerian creatures, the naga, etc).

It sounds like you want to emphasize some conflict. It's good you have an intended direction. Include that conflict in your play scripts!

I've got a soft-spot for strange taxidermy, so you've got me hooked. Can't wait to watch it develop.

[James Wages]

Ok, I decided to write up a script.  The script I have is as follows. Someone tell me if this enough for me to go on or if I should have written more. BTW, I get the feeling that people are expecting my chimeras to resemble crosses between humans and real animals. That's not the case, they are based on mythical/legendary creatures.

Sample play for the Chimera RPG Project

GM: After weeks of shadowing the suspected heretics, you approach the base of a mountain several miles north of the city. Lana is able to make out the band of heretics moving around some unusual knobs and slides that seem to be carved out of the rock face.* Eventually, a section of the rock face opens up to reveal what appears to be a cave that the heretics enter into. A few seconds later the cave seals itself behind them.

Lana: I walk up to the knobs and slides and try to repeat what I saw the heretics do.

GM: You repeat the process, but you receive an electric jolt and the cave doesn't open up.*

Peter: "I've had enough of this sneaking around and being smart." My character casts Earth Shatter on the rock face.

Victor: "So much for stealth."

GM: You cast the spell, and a 40-foot deep crater appears. However, you see no sign of the cave's entrance.*

Peter: Fine, my character uses his Behemoth strength to punch his way in.

Victor: "Hold on there a second will ya? That may have been a portal. Which would mean that the cave, if it was that, may be on a different continent for all we know. Lana, mind if I help you figure that puzzle out?"

Lana: "By all means."

GM: After a few minutes of examination, a recognizable pattern is discerned and the portal is opened.*

Lana: I scout around for any obvious guards.

GM: You find none.*

Lana: "I say we enter."

Peter and Victor: "Agreed."

GM: As you walk deeper into the cave you notice various writings, some on the walls of the cave, others in mildewy scrolls and books. The deeper into the cave you go the writings grow more complex, though some have fallen victim to the dampness on the walls.

Victor: Can any of us understand the writings?
GM: No, it's in a language none of you have ever seen before and there seems to be some kind of ward that prevents magic from letting you decipher it.

Peter: My character just starts grabbing scrolls. "Victor, I know you're going to want to read these later, so I get some for ya. Besides, they'll probably fetch an interesting price from the sages and scribes."

Lana: "Do you ever think about things other than money?"

Peter: "Yeah, but you'll barbecue me if I mention them."

GM: Moving on. You eventually hear some chanting in the distance.

Victor: "Now Peter, don't be stupid and get us killed."

Lana: "Yeah, think stealth."

Peter: "You two really know how to suck the fun out of an adventure. Ya know that?"

GM: Entering the cavern, you see a group of heretics dancing around chanting, "Death to Astra! Death to the Chimeras!" You see a heretic throw a fireball at a chimera child, reducing the boy to ashes. However, the spell sounded like the heretic was reciting a recipe or an equation, and the energy put into the fireball felt cold, and very different from the vibrant energies that fuel your magics.

Peter: "Since when can non-Chimeras cast magic?"

Victor: "I don't know, but there was something very wrong with that spell, besides the fact that he had to chant just to throw a fireball."

Lana: "Well, I'm not about to let that boy's death go unpunished. You with me?"

GM: Before any of you have a chance for further thought, the wall behind you crashes sending you all flying. Lana's phoenix wings and Victor's griffon wings allow you to catch some air and float safely to the ground. Peter, be thankful you're part behemoth or you'd have a broken nose from falling face first into the ground. A giant, serpentine shadow beast, the same one that just crashed through the wall, is now positioning itself between you and the heretics. Victor, you go first; then the beast followed by Lana and Peter.

Victor: I cast an enhancement spell on the group and then assume a defensive stance.*

GM: Ok, the group gets a small bonus to attack and defense. The serpent lashes out at Lana with its tail, causing 15 damage.*

Lana: I cast my specialty: Phoenix Flare.

Peter: Well, this fight's over.

GM: The spell connects but the serpent is only mildly wounded.*

Peter: "What the- ?" Cast diamond knuckles on myself and punch the big snake.

GM: The serpent slithers away from the punch.*

[The combat continues for a few rounds until the serpent eventually goes down.]

*Mechanincs?

[Zak Arntson]

Great script! It looks like you have a good handle on where you want the mechanics to go. Mechanics are initiated by GM fiat (i.e., GM determines some kind of chancy in-game conflict needs to be resolved) or Player initiation. Now, where you have the asterisks, try putting in a bit of mechanic text. This should help you further explore the design. For example, two possibilities could be:

You cast the spell, and a 40-foot deep crater appears. [Player uses a power, initially fails, but another player pitches in some kind of resource, like power points] However, you see no sign of the cave's entrance.

You cast the spell, and a 40-foot deep crater appears. [Player uses a power, but fails] However, you see no sign of the cave's entrance.

These imply very different types of mechanics. The first example shows that players cooperate at a meta-game level and that the GM has pre-planned that the puzzle opens the portal. The second example allows for automatic use of a power, with failure complicating a situation, causing the GM (or player) to state that there isn't an entrance after all.

As for mythological animals -- they tend to be mishmashes of real animals. Griffons, manticore, chimera, cockatrice, Sumerian monsters (lion + snake, human + animal head, etc etc). So how are a griffon's wings different than an eagle's?

[Eero Tuovinen]

I find Peter's play most telling. I see some possible meanings in the text. All are of course just suggestions to consider.

1) The game is a straightforward monster mash with heavily random mechanics predicated to bring the maximum payoff for rote answers. The player job is to take a given mission, follow the simple clues and shout for attack when something moves. Peter's play style would indicate this, as well as the relatively linear way play progresses. In this case Victor and Lana are playing against the type and coflict is indicated as they get tired of no pay-off for thoughtful play.

2) The game is a crunch-type goal oriented crawl, where there is still a clear goal for characters, but the players have to make good choices to achieve success. Victor's and Lana's play would indicate this, as well as the portal, the scrolls and the mechanic-heavy battle system. In this case Peter is in for a conflict when his play style will make trouble for him or even kill the character. The play won't in the long run work for him, as the other players slow down the monster mash in their effort to survive and win.

3) The game is a simulation type, where character personality is an important focus. This would explain Peter (he is playing a character), as well as the plot turn near the end. This is for various reasons a little unbelievable, unless there's a strong mechanical incentive for role playing, like some system bonuses for keeping character.

4) The game is a world simulation with non-linear plot. The skill checks(?) for spotting cultists and otherwise progressing are a main indication, as the only reason for the check in many cases is to close of the plot in case of failure. Can't very well find the cult if you fail to spot them, can you? On the other hand for most other kinds of play closing off plots is a bad thing. In this kind of game the realism of failure overrides that consideration.

All in all I find two and four to be the most likely candidates based on frequency of indications and the assumption that the players are themselves conserned about the guards, choosing battle strategies and otherwise overcoming the situation, instead of their characters. These are hard to make compatible, but it's possible. Just look at Multiverser.  Of course the above can all be combined in various ways, but what Follows  is a suggestion for two and four:

Use rule mechanics that emphasize player knowledge in service of realistic play. Don't use too much fortune (randomization), but just enough to factor for possible outcomes. Make battle more a matter of choosing the right techniques than rolling well. Make sure characters succeed consistently when they have an edge in any kind of conflict. Either scrap your preconseptions about combats taking rounds and rounds or build in some reason to do it.

The above is just my interpretation of the script. Let's hear yours. What do you see as prominent features? Do you really want such radically different play approaches as that of Peter is compared to the other two? It can be done, but is it fun? Defend your suppositions: do you really want a die roll to stop the adventure, or what is the meaning for using mechanics in linear failure situations like spotting the dungeon or opening the portal? Do you really wish for that kind of battles (asking because that didn't sound too exciting to me) with initiative and combat rounds? Do you wish success or failure to the tactics of Peter or the other two? Why have writings in a dungeon if nobody can read them? What is achieved by discrete spells? How do you view this script as different from a script from an actual common session of D&D?

The last one is telling. For a majority of what that script does D&D will suffice quite nicely. In my experience that's the kind of interaction you get with the game, including all the particulars I selected for review above. Even Peter is a common case, and the game frequently succeeds in giving highlight moments for both thinking and smashing players. I could write a very similar script from my last D&D session, except that I didn't roll quite so many dice. Your game has OGL written all over it.

We are interested of the answers of course, and would like to see another script. I feel that there's some unclear assumptions here you can untangle with discussion. If the above points caught your interests, research of d20 games and design is indicated.

[James Wages]

Eero- I based Peter on a lot of gamers I've known, and wanted to use him as an example of the frustration a combat-oriented player and character are going to have in how I envision my game being played. I was actually aiming for a combination of number 2 & 4. I wanted to emphasize smart and cooperative play over just looking for the next combat to begin, because I"ve always considered solving the odd puzzle and figuring out mysteries more fun than finding a monster to kill. I also tried to note that the puzzle that opened the portal wasn't solved until Lana and Victor worked together. Another quick point, the writing on the wall was to represent a mystery that was to be solved over the course of the game.

My personal goals, and hopefully prominent features, are emphasizing cooperation and strategy (both in and out of combat) over luck and brute force. Certain difficulties won't be overcome by one person and sometimes it'll take the entire group working towards one task to overcome a certain situation. I also like games where things don't always go the way players would like to, and somtimes look for alternate routes to continue the session. In other words, in a scenario there are certain dead ends that are reached because of poor decision making. That doesn't mean that the scenario's plot comes to a dead end, another way opens up with different possibilities and the scenario continues. For example, if, in the script above, Peter had smashed the knobs and slides, they wouldn't have opened the portal but they would have found an unusual system of gears with the same writing that was on the scrolls and walls and a gem that seemed to be powering the whole thing. They would then go back to the city and begin investigating this new discovery which could lead to where the gem and gears came from and from there who knows.

In terms of combat, my goal is to create a system where strategy wins the day, and the part that is strategic is which spells are used in what combination. For instance, there are certain small but long-lasting spells that are always useful, but are rarely enough to win the fight by themselves. On the other hand, certain big but instant-lasting spells (like the Phoenix Flare) are usually enough to win the fight but aren't always useful. As for combat rounds, I've never played an RPG without them, so I have a hard time imagining combat work any other way. So if someone can give me a quick example, I'm all ears because that might be an excellent shorten the time combat takes up.

Incidently, the "discrete spells" aren't really meant to be discrete just quick and represents certain setting elements. For a chimera, magic is very much a part of their being. So much so that they just think of the desired spell, know it's going to happen and it does, which requires more faith than reasoning and intelligence. In fact, its only the melodramatic chimera that says or does anything at all when casting a spell. Normal humans don't have magic as part of their being and have to take a more scientific approach to magic and have to manipulate the energies involved through percise planning and calculations. However, prior to the Shadow Beast invasion, no normal human has ever been able to figure that out and cast any kind of magic. By the way, if you can't tell I already have a lot of the setting worked out and will likely post some of it later, if only to make certain questions disappear. I also have some issues to figure out in terms of magic, like how to limit its use so that people aren't casting the big spells all the time.

The only answer I can provide for the final question concerning D&D is that I'd like to keep this as diceless as possible. Most RPGs I've played relatively recently have been online and rolling dice in those games proved to be a major headache for me and as a result usually come up with some tables that I use in place of dice and just give bonuses or penalties based on the creativity and intelligence of the playre to determine success or failure. Therefore I'd like to create a system from the ground up that reliess more on comparing fixed numbers than a random element.

Anyway, I'm going to write a new script with mechanics notes in it. I'll also try to write it in such a way that my basic assumptions are blatantly stated instead of inferred. I'll also edit the first script the first time.

[Ben O'Neal]

I wanted to emphasize smart and cooperative play over just looking for the next combat to begin, because I"ve always considered solving the odd puzzle and figuring out mysteries more fun than finding a monster to kill.

Then why did you skim over the puzzle in the script? Sure, two players co-operated, but they didn't actually do anything. Do you want your system to have a way to handle puzzles? How do you measure "smart" play? Does co-operation simply make everything an instant success? Does it double your chances? Does it provide bonuses? I don't mean to plug my shit in your thread, but if you check out my Social Interaction Mechanics, you may find a few ideas for how to implement co-operation into your system to reinforce play-styles you like.

In terms of combat, my goal is to create a system where strategy wins the day, and the part that is strategic is which spells are used in what combination. For instance, there are certain small but long-lasting spells that are always useful, but are rarely enough to win the fight by themselves. On the other hand, certain big but instant-lasting spells (like the Phoenix Flare) are usually enough to win the fight but aren't always useful.

I'm not sure your examples indicate "combinations" of spells, just different types. I'd personally love to see a game where strategic combination of spells was not only possible, but sometimes essential. Is there currently any way for spells to actually combine with other spells in your system (as opposed to simply overlapping)?

I also have some issues to figure out in terms of magic, like how to limit its use so that people aren't casting the big spells all the time.

Why? Seriously, what reason would you have to prevent players from "casting the big spells all the time"? If I wanted to kill someone, I'd want my biggest weapon at all times. Combat is about killing, not dancing around using every option in your repertoir. If there is a plausible in-game reason to prevent players from using the big spells, then by all means, it needs to be in there. But if the only reason is "balance", then I'd say that's no reason at all. Build the system to define the concepts that you want, not to exclude those that you don't want.

Most RPGs I've played relatively recently have been online and rolling dice in those games proved to be a major headache for me and as a result usually come up with some tables that I use in place of dice and just give bonuses or penalties based on the creativity and intelligence of the playre to determine success or failure. Therefore I'd like to create a system from the ground up that reliess more on comparing fixed numbers than a random element.

Whilst diceless is certainly possible (just ask and I'm sure Ron will give you links to about 50 diceless games), my personal opinion is that if combat is going to be a strong focus of your game (and so far, that's what it looks like) then without dice every battle becomes either incredibly easy or impossible, with little in-between. This might not matter though, depending on what you want to achieve, but I don't see how you could get that drawn out battle you described in your script without dice.

Plus I like dice because they make me feel like I'm actually doing something to play the game. I talk all the time, but rolling dice = playing. But this is all just my own opinion.

[James Wages]

Ravien- I skimmed over the puzzle section because I rushed my script. I just envisioned a scene in my setting and wrote it down and then tried to figure out where the mechanics should go, no reall planning or thought put into it. As for your plug, it'll likely be helpful, once I make heads or tails of it (don't take that as an offense it took me a couple of reads to figure out White Wolf's Storyteller system). The questions you posed in regards to the puzzle have given me some food for thought, but I don't have answers for them yet.

I actually was considering some kind of gestalt magic system to introduc into it. Also, I'm considering running combat the same way the system handles out-of-combat situations: not a lot of, if any, structure beyond how attacks and spells are resolved. Therefore any limitations on the big spells I'd put in there would be weak at best, so I'm probably better off not even trying to create limitations on how many or what kind of spells can be cast. That said, there's no reason I can't change spell effectiveness against different opponents.

Now for the dice issue, I honestly don't know about that anymore. I still want to keep the random factor down to a minimum, but I admit that the way I'm seeing the game play in my head still requires dice. Just something I'll have to figure out later.

Zak- I wasn't ignoring your post, I just didn't have a good answer to it until now. The reason I'm using mythical critters instead of real ones is for the ones that aren't a mish-mash of real animals, such as golems and (arguably) dragons.

My new script will be very different and a lot more thought out than the first one. However, it's also likely to be a lot longer. By the way, would it be a bad idea to change the title of this discussion from 'newbie post' to 'Chimera RPG beginnings'?

[orbsmatt]

I'm sorry that this post doesn't contribute but I have to say that this thread has been extremely revealing to me on how to create an RPG.  The comments made and the examples given have been very helpful.  It has become a lot clearer to me how RPG concepts really work.

Are there any articles that give this same insight/clarification?

[Zak Arntson]

[Cut post, since it was supposed to be a PM to orbsmatt]