[Shattered Earth] Trying to spot obvious issues and suggestions

[CrookedBroomstick]

I'm new to the forum and I'd like to place my idea up on the chopping block.  Been needing some kind of feedback on the general premise of the mechanic.  Still in the design phase and I'd like some more experienced designers look and see if they can spot anything that is horribly, obviously wrong.  Also just trying to judge the interest level from people would be nice and see if there is anything that'd grossly turn away people outright.

Premise:
Shattered Earth is a post apocalyptic RPG with an emphasis on practical flexibility from character concept to the world you play in.  The game segment is build upon the in-development mechanic I'm currently defining as "d10/0".  Shattered Earth plays upon the theme of scattered societies and worlds trying to rebuild after the Apocalypse.  The whole premise is that the flexibility of the system and premise will allow the GM to design campaigns and situations to their tastes without any great restriction.  Like strategic battle planning to send a Post-Apoc SWAT team to flush out mutant scum from a town that's a throw back to a western ghost town?  Sure!  Want your players to explore the multitudes of grossly different societies, whilst trying to survive confrontations with a few, while the plot thickens to discover some great sleeping horror of the past that now threatens what some many have built?  Why not! Or maybe you want to play a group of hard-ass raiders and their adventures on the high wastes, looting towns, having at the women, beating the step-children, and burning the village to the ground... Sometimes not in that order...

Setting and Characters:
The time is about 200 years Post First Fall (PFF).  No one knows what time the bombs actually fell, but judging the the radioactive half-lives... it's been about 200 from when they dropped.  The world before Before First Fall (BFF) was to the say the least, HIGHLY advanced.  Great leaps in technology due to conflict between everyone in the world trying to out do each other lead societies to cyberpunk eras.  Now all that remains is the waste and ruin of some the greatest spots.  The world is not all waste.  There are deserts, plains, forests, jungles, wastelands, and even suburbs!  Everyone has been driven to rebuild in one way or another and make it work.
Who remains?
Humans, Mutants, Gen-Eng's (Genetically Engineered), Gen-Mod's (Genetically Modified), AI's

Character creation:
First the idea of the character is mind...  Okay... Now...
Base Stats are chosen to begin with.  You start out with so many points in each and are given points to place and move around.  Sacrifices will have to be made to get anything really high.  From those initial stats... EVERYTHING ELSE can be derived.  Base Skill proficiencies are derived, starting skills points, and a collection of other helpful bits that are ready on the character sheet for quick reference.

To handle basic resolutions:
PC vs. Environment:  Roll under you stat (Usually ranging from 1 to 10) with a d10.  Pluses and minuses are applied to the roll make it easier or more difficult, depending on the situation.
PC vs. NPC, PC, Critter:  Your stat plus your d10 roll compared to the other's stat plus d10 roll.  Higher wins.
Disparity between target number and roll determines the degree of success, fail, or flop.

To handle basic Skill resolutions:
PC vs. Environment:  Roll d100 under target number.  Sometimes there is a minimum skill level required before a success can be had, and from there is a penalty added to the dice due to difficultly. 
Example:  PC is trying to lockpick a hefty lock.  His skill is 75%, which meets the minimum of 50%.  He's good there.  There is a 25% penalty to his roll, due to the difficultly of the lock.  So... He has to roll under a 50%.  Range is 0 (buckshot) - 99, with buckshot being really good and 99 being REALLY bad.

PC vs. NPC, PC, Critter:  In skill situations where there is direct conflict between two duders (technical name I know), in which there is a reasonable ability of a skill to act and prevent... (Such as Melee sword fighting)...  Example:  PC has a sword skill of 75%.  He rolls a 35% which is a hit (with penalties added in)... Even though the NPC only has a skill of 50% (35% after penalties)... If he rolls under the PC's roll, a parry is encountered.

Skills:
A set of general base skills is given to all characters.  From there they can train in refinements of that skill and branch off the skill tree.  Characters are given skill points to spend refining these skills. 
The cost of each skill increase is weighted, to encourage specialization.
0 - 25: 1 Point
26 - 50: 2 Points
51 - 75: 5 Points
76 - 100: 10 Points

Snippet from an old text I wrote up which describes this best:

"Collapsing the tree"
In Shattered Earth the skills are done through trees which allow the player to specialize as much as he or she wants in a specific refined skill or a more general knowledge skill.  This allows a player to become a master of a AK-47, but not good with any other weapon if he or she chooses.  Lets show this through example.

Level 0: Small Arms: 25%
        \
         \
          \
Level 1:     Rifles: 25%
      /      \
          /        \
         /          \
Level 2: Automatic: 25%  Bolt-Action: 5%
        \
         \
          \
Level 3:     AK-47: 50%


Right here we have a tree given for a particular skill set.  For every level you get up  (0 to 1, 1 to 2, etc. ) the maximum percentage you can have in a particular higher skill is double the last.  Hence the most you can currently put into Rifles a Level 1 skill is 50% which is double what is present in Small Arms a level 0 skill.

So...  Our friend is currently using a AK-47.  To determine his hit percentage you would collapse the tree and add every percentage along you way to Level 0 from Level 3.  Hence:  50 + 25 + 25 + 25 = 125% skill rate.   Whoever is very skilled with an AK-47.  But lets say his favorite weapon jams.  Hence...  he is forced to use his backup bolt-action rifle...    5 + 25 + 25 = 55%   Obviously he's not as good with the bolt-action's mechanics and would of loved to be able to use his normal AK-47.

Reward mechanic:
There are a few reward mechanics...  In order to represent different means of rewarding.
Experience Points -
  Reward: Classic, but a good means of controlling normal character progressions.  A good means of timing releases of boosts to raise characters to the next step and a way to keep everyone synchronized with each other.
  Penalty: Deduction of points for some kinds of effects that drain the wholeness of your character.

Roleplaying Points -
  Reward: A player that plays should be rewarded.  This is a way for the dedicated player to get some reward for playing the character properly in times where using outside player knowledge would be tempting but not true to the game.  These points can be traded in later for regular XP to push someone over the next level mark or trade to tip odds in rolls or such.
  Penalty: Negative points can be assigned for violating various rules of RPing, busting the Player Knowledge barrier, and such.  These debts need to handled by playing your character right.  If the debt is too big, the GM can call in the debt and regular XP is docked.

Kudos -
  Reward:  For events that happen outside the game.  Because what happens in the game world isn't all that matters.  A perfect use of a cult classic movie quote, unknowingly putting your character into odd situations and making the best and most humoring from them, and being part of events that drop everyone at the table into uncontrollable laughter.  These can be used as a means of bartering with the GM, to tip the tides of fate in the game towards your favor... if only for a little bit...  Will that great gun you found in the desert be in working order or will if need some repairs?  Will that next person you need to meet off the side be in town?  Will another master to learn your art from be at the bar? etc etc etc...
  Penalty:  Sometimes some things are just so cheesy and bad, you just have to take points somewhere. 
Negative numbers aren't as bad as with other accounting measures... But sometimes a GM can obtain a balance at in opportune times to make cocky players humble themselves before a battle a little harder than they expected.  Or GM could simply make the player with the biggest debt go on a beer run for the group.

Perks - Perks are little character defining points about your character.  These are always good and are given to a certain extend every few levels.  Some smaller perks exist for experiences your character can go through.  Special training, some great life experience, or have endured and brought from the experience lasting effects.

Karma Shines/Marks/Stains - These are things that stick with you.  Saved a life, prevented a great crime, rushed into a burning building to save orphans?  Were you an orphan?  Were you a little bastard growing up?  Are you a bastard now?  Ever burned down a building with orphans in it?  These bits of karma will affect how the world receives you.
  Rewards:  Depends on if you are playing a good, neutral, or evil character...
  Shines:  Good mark.  You've done something so nice and good willed that it deserves noting.
  Marks:  Neutral mark.  Stuff that isn't good or bad... but it's notable enough to be recorded.
  Stains:  Bad mark.  You've done something bad that's going to linger around:  Child killer, traitor to your people, serial killer, sheep fucker, etc...

Augments/Hinders - These are tweaks done usually in the character creation process, but can be use to define characters as they develop.  GM's can assign these to characters who have proved themselves worthy to deserve the label.
  Reward:  A player that plays a character and it turns out that the character has developed into someone that is the definition of a cautious person...  The GM may take Roleplaying points and such to give them Cautious augment.
  Penalty:  A player that plays a character and the character is supposed to be Cautious, but he is actually more or less a paranoid SOB and the player is not doing a good job playing the character right...  The GM may call his roleplaying debt and replace the Cautious augment with a Paranoid hinder.

Here's a file with some data here and there....  http://www.mtsu.edu/~bws2d/sestuff.zip

Any help is greatly appreciated.

-CrookedBroomstick

[TonyPace]

Just by chance, I happen to be working on an 'adding through the skill tree' design myself, and it's an interesting design, but it really encourages mastery of the system. Think about the typical effectiveness of a character who specializes heavily in his preferred weapon vs. a player who decides he wants to play a 'jack of all trades'. The system as you have it here penalizes the jack of all trades heavily. You can say 'oh, just take away his favorite weapon', but such a player always has his ways around such things - including backups, encouraging other players to specialize in the same weapon, choosing common weapons, and if all else fails simple whining.

I really don't understand the point of the basic resolution system. It's completely different from the rest of the system, it works on different principles, encourages automatic failure, etc. It's a step back to the bad old days of AD&D with roll over attacks and roll under skills.

My basic thought is that you should rescale the stats so they directly add meaningfully to the bottom of the skill tree - say on a  10-50 scale. That way in your example the characters all have significantly higher ratings, but it's simple across the board and your default ratings are well taken care of without any additional derivation.

Three different experience systems? Whoa, two is more than I can usually stomach. The Kudo and Role-playing penalties strike me as deliberate insults.

Isn't role-playing well its own reward? Why does it need to be rewarded by the system?

I really hate the whole advantages/disads system (in any game, not just yours). It really encourages the maximizer in all of us to run wild and cheat ourselves of a good game, in that players inevitably strive to choose disadvantages that will never limit them in play.

Some newer games work around this by making your weaknesses the heart of the experience system - that is, you only get experience when your disadvantages come up in play. Another way is for the disadvantage act as a straight bonus to actions against that character if it applies.

The setting is kind of generic - it has potential, but in and of itself it's not very unique. It seems largely to be an attempt to justify the inclusion of all sorts of fantasy and science fiction elements - monsters, ray gun, robots, AIs, etc... which is cool, but very unfocused.

What I think that means practically is that you need to stop thinking about how much potential your setting has in every direction and start thinking more about how to focus that potential in one specific area that really excites you - maybe the SWAT team, maybe the raiders - but a specific cool thing to do that has lots of interesting detail and focus. People can build the other things if they want to, but you have to show them it would be worth it, and scattershot in every direction isn't going to do it.

Finally, Mike Mearls had some interesting words about core story in games. In a nutshell, he said that if your game doesn't have it's own core story - something the characters are and do - then the players will turn it into D&D.

This game looks very easy to D&Dize, so if that's not what you want, I think your work is cut out for you.

[CrookedBroomstick]

I'm still playing around the skill tree system.  I'm going to lessen the costs and such.  I just think having a 100 in a base level skill should be a little be more difficult than having a 100 in a refined skill.  Plus, I've thought about making so that extensive use of a skill will allow the ability to increase that skill and everything related to it.  Because it stands to reason that a person that figures out something for a refinement skill understands a little more about the broader part of the spectrum.

You can either be a master of one or a jack of all trades, but master of none.

Basic resolution system is just a simple roll under that basic stat.  If you don't roll under it's not instant death or failure like it D&D, which I ABSOLUTELY HATE.  Here's an example from another forum I've posted in:
The party encounters a 8ft wall they must climb up in an alley, before the guards looking for them find out where they ducked off.
PC1 is fairly atheletic, so he says: "I'm just going to do a running jump for the top of the wall and pull myself up."
PC1 has a Strength of 8 (He works out ALOT.) and rolls a 5. 3 points under his ST score which is a good success. So PC1 takes a running jump, grabs hold of the ledge, feet plant against the wall, and he pulls himself up with no problems.
PC2 is not that strong, but he's willing to give it a shot. He attempts the same trick as PC1. He's only got a ST score of 6. He rolls a 6. Even. He didn't roll under. PC2 takes a running jump at the wall, gets hold of the ledge, but can't get footing to allow him to pull himself up. PC2 drops down and looks for another way. GM says his character spots a gutter drain on the side wall close to the wall he's trying to get over. The gutter is fastened to the wall with metal bands that form a rough ladder. PC2 says: "I'll climb the gutter up and get over the wall that way." PC2 has an Agility score of 7 (He's fairly nimbly-bimbly) and rolls a 3. 4 points under, he climbs the gutter like it's his job and gets over.
PC3 is not feeling too good right now. He's not strong or agile. (5 scores in both) But he gives both options a shot. Tries to scale the wall rolls a 7. 2 points over. Not good. PC3 charges with his best effort and can't get enough height to get to the ledge. Turns towards the gutter and makes an effort climb it and rolls another 7. He gets maybe two rungs, slips, and is forced to drop down. He's in dire need now. PC3: "Fucking hell! The hell am I suppose to do know?! Goddammit, I kick the damn wall!" GM glances at the PC3's sheet and sees he got a 8 in Luck... hmm... GM rolls a d10... it's a 1. Lucky bastard. GM: "As you kick the wall a section crumbles and falls apart open, large enough for you to crawl through." PC3: "HOT DAMN! I crawl through that bitch!" PC2's Character: "How the hel- Oh, nevermind lets get the hell outta here!"

Regular XP is always in use.  The other systems are there... if you want to.   If you think something is deserving of extra points somewhere you place in one of those.  It's up to the GM.  You could not use it at all for a campaign.  I figured it'd be a nice way to reward excellent moments of gaming and note that you made the contribution.  Because there have been moments that I've played with people that may not have characters that could actually kill the monsters for experience, but they sure made up for it by the laugh riots they caused.

The Advantages/Disadvantages system..  Augments and Hinders...  It's just been a recent development to use them for general character definement.  Orginally they're used for the Mutants and Gen-Mod's.   Mutants take three Ads/Dises,  Gen-Mods just take three Ads.  I might transistion the general stuff to Traits which are pre-balanced components.

I'm starting generic with the setting and I'm going to refine it down for a path for the manual.  I've just gotten some REALLY cool setting ideas from people that I'd like to leave in the capacity for.
You still have everyone striving to survive:  Humans from very accepting to boondock racists, that can live in major cities or out in the swamps with the banjos playing.  Mutants trying to get accepted by the humans, but sometimes failing miserably or just not caring.  Gen-Mods hiding from some, but always having the desire to improve themselves more.  Gen-Eng's proving themselves worthy of being considered a person by everyone else, while living off the technology from the hidden research labs most survived The Fall in, and ALWAYS being a little suspicious of humans, understanding mutants, laughing at the wannabe Gen-Mod's.  And then there are AI's wandering the wastes in a independant shell, pondering everything from the meaning of life to which town needs "cleaning" next.

The only thing I hated about D&D was the incarnation of d20 system and classes.  As for the range of worlds you could play in...  I liked having variety.  Though the maximization players always sucked.

[Matt Wilson]

Hey, uh... can I call you "Crooked" for short?

Mind if I back up a bit from your post and ask you some prelim questions? Well, hell, I'm just going to.

Why are you making this game, first of all? I don't mean that in a "what are you thinking, you crazy person" way. I mean that more like, are you dissatisfied with, say, GURPS? Is there something missing from the play experiences you've had? Or is it more that you just have a need to express creativity?

Second question: What do you want the game to do, overall? In other words, why would I play this instead of GURPS or HERO or something? What will I get here that I wouldn't get there? I'm sure you and your game have an answer, and if we focus on that, it'll be easier to discuss all the stuff you posted above. Cool?

[CrookedBroomstick]

Crooked is cool...

One thing that I'm dissatisfied with GURP and HERO type systems is the universal point buy system for everything.  The problem I've found with that system is that you either have a character heavy in the basic stats or skills, because a balance usually isn't that beneficial.  This can sometimes put characters in situations where they are more than just a fish out of water.  While it does make for some flexible character creation, there's no way to really judge how good a character is.  I like sectionalized systems.  Everyone starts out with the same amount points for basic stats, they just gear them differently to the taste of their character.  Everyone starts out with the same skill set, just differing proficiencies with all of them.  I just like when people start out with same range of stats and skills... it just how proficient their character is with each individual skill that defines them.  And I like accurate bookkeeping, so a GM can know in what way they'll keep everyone balanced.  I guess I've played too many games where I've been shorted just because my character is lacking a one skill or because my choosen set doesn't mesh with the campaign for some odd reason.

With this game...  I want to give each player's character at least an even foundation in comparison to everyone else in the group.  This way you don't accidentally set yourself up for problems straight off from over specialization or being too spread out.  It's how the character plays and interacts that starts defining their character more.  And I want to reduce situations where someone gets left behind because of some technicallity with the system or the GM not able to remember or keep track of things properly. 
As with the game environment, I want something that is wide and very encompassing.  I don't want the "You can't do that in..." syndrome...  Of course your campaign may only cover a small subset, but I don't want to remove the ability to sway outside the original plan in case something interests the party...