A flowchart for generic strategic rpg.

[Gaiaguerrilla]

I'm trying to make a basic flowchart for generic strategic rpg and it really looks confusing. I don't know if I really have anything, but no sense in keeping it hidden.

Here's how it works.

Spells, weapon fights, inspections, etc. All of these are treated the same. So the Character sheet wouldn't necessarily have categories for them; even though the sheet could be filled with a complex list of objects.

The elements I use are ENTITIES, POSSESSION, INVOCATION, and ASPECT.

Other words are: SOURCE, TARGET, MALE (effective), FEMALE (passive), CHANCE.

Entity: Absolutely any object listed in the game is an Entity. From a square foot of floor, to an item in hand, to another Character, to a ball of fire. Invocations will generally target Entities, which will affect the Aspects of those Entities. But the real things acting are always Aspects. In other words: An Entity is nothing more than the umbrella of Aspects. Invocations will target the umbrellas of those Aspects. So the Entity of a Fireball is nothing more than the Aspects "(1) Burns that place, (2) causes this kind of light, etc."

Aspect: Always belongs to an Entity. Contains no more than a list of Possessions. Always contains at least one Possession (Male) and is Possessed (Female) by another Aspect. For every Invocation, all Female Aspects must be checked for the reference to it by a Male Aspect. An Aspect can have any number of points attached to it, or one Chance attached.

Chance: A roll between certain odds. Always written as one fraction. The Invocation is unsuccessful if the Aspect is not rolled within the odds when Invoked.

Possession: The ability for one Aspect to Invoke. Each Aspect has at least one Possession. Players are the only Aspects without an Entity. They have Possessions alone and no Aspect. As a default, that Player can Invoke the Possession at any time.

Invoke: Invoke always has 1 Source Possession and at least 1 Target. The Target can be an Entity, an Aspect, Aspect points (+ or -), a Chance (+ or -), or a Possession. The Invocation automatically creates a new Entity. (Eg: Invoke a fireball. The entity is a fireball. Invoke sleep in a person. That sleep is still considered an Entity as long as it has power over the person).

Example: David the player says Myron the swordswinger slashes at the behemoth with the Broadsword he's holding.

David Invokes the Male Aspect of Swing (at least 1 point), Possessed by Myron (Entity), Possessing the Held Aspect of Broadsword (Entity). Held Broadsword has one Aspect that Invokes Female Slash when combined with the Male Aspect of Swing, by the Entity Possessing Held Aspect over the Broadsword. The Broadsword converts each Invoked Swing (Male) of 1, to 10 Slash points (Female). The Behemoth Possesses Melee Block of 4 against a Swing (which is point for point vs. Swing). The Swing is unsuccessful.

You can feel free to consider it nonsense ;)

[Ben Lehman]

Cool concept (though why is this post not in RPG Design?  This is practically a complete game!).  I've been working on games like this, on and off, for a few years now.  I like that hiearchy a lot.  I am tempted to steal it for my own purposes.

There is a big problem with this type of system, though, which is that its painfully hard to define (in your terms) Aspects for every single Entity in the game beforehand, since every scene contains a transfinite number of Entities.  The problem here is that if the GM just makes up the Entities and Aspects on the fly, that undermines the fundamental tactics (I would classify this game as tacical, not strategic) of the game.  And, generally, "GM calls all the shots" games are somewhat dull, unless the GM is a good storyteller, and there's no reason to use a system this heavy for that type.

I have come up with a few solutions to these problems, none of them totally satisfactory.  I don't want to impose on your design or your thread, though, and I don't really think that the designs are fit for public consumption (even on the Forge).  If you'd like to raid them for ideas, though, I'd be happy to send you the texts in PM.

yrs--
--Ben

[Andrew Martin]

Example: David the player says Myron the swordswinger slashes at the behemoth with the Broadsword he's holding.

David Invokes the Male Aspect of Swing (at least 1 point), Possessed by Myron (Entity), Possessing the Held Aspect of Broadsword (Entity). Held Broadsword has one Aspect that Invokes Female Slash when combined with the Male Aspect of Swing, by the Entity Possessing Held Aspect over the Broadsword. The Broadsword converts each Invoked Swing (Male) of 1, to 10 Slash points (Female). The Behemoth Possesses Melee Block of 4 against a Swing (which is point for point vs. Swing). The Swing is unsuccessful.

So how is that long description better than this?

David says, "Myron swings his broadsword at the behemoth!". Dave rolls a D10, then Dave announces, "I got 4! Does it do anything?".
The GM then announces, "the Behemoth has Melee Block of 4, which negates your result of 4, so nothing happens."

You can feel free to consider it nonsense ;)

Indeed. How did a Behemoth manage to block a sword swing with a melee block? (I'm assuming that a Behemoth is a very large monster, far larger than a human.) Is Dave rolling Myron's melee or swing skill, strength or damage?

I'm puzzled. What was the point of chopping up everything? And then reassembling it badly and inserting made up things like 1D10 slash points and 4 points melee block?

[Gaiaguerrilla]

Lol! Well, I have two neatly opposed replies.

Andrew--

I don't know. I'll have to leave it to you with my last sentence sufficing. Thanks for the input.

Ben--

Sorry, I considered this far from a game and couldn't see the other subjects applying. Perhaps moderators can move it.

Thanks for the help, and Yes. I'd love your textfiles in any way possible. Remember, though. Any ideas that enter my head I may use unconcsiously (and unconscionably) in some distorted way. That's why I'm not rubbing my nose too hard on other designs.