Lost to the mists(working title)

[Anders Larsen]

Thank you, your comments on beliefs and Exp have got me thinking, I am going to be using a small amount of Exp system so I wouldn't want players just focusing on hoarding that, so I decided to make it a DM call. If a player has adequately roleplayed his beliefs into good situations, he gets 1-2 Exp at the end of the adventure, if he does the same for negative consequences then an additional 1-2 is given. I am undecided as to how beliefs will effect game rolls.

Be careful to give XP at the end of an adventure, because then the player will not be sure what he did to earn them. If XP is given the moment the player earns them, it will be more clear to him what to do to earn more, and then the game will be more intense.

As for conflicts I'm not sure whether you mean things that players overcome, or between groups in the game.

I mean the conflicts the player (or characters) have to overcome. (Does the players not take part in the conflicts between groups?)

- Anders

[DarkAsmodeous]

Perhaps at the end of an adventure the DM can ask what the player thinks he did to earn the experience, and when he is done the DM awards it if necessary and explains why some things worked and other didn't.

As for conflicts
~ Friction between families and organizations that turn to conflict of some sort(not always violent0
~Older darker creatures seeking to harm them or others
~Grappling with the curses and problems of their existence
~Pursuit of ancient knowledge and the dangers involved in doing so
~Characters own existence and place in society, including the contrast between magical and mundane society

[Anders Larsen]

A little rant about XP:

The thing you reward the player for, is what the character is going to do. The thing the player can use there XP on, is where the character is going to advance.

Now, this is very important, because this is tied into what the game is about. Actually the reward system is properly the most important system, so you have to be very careful when you design it.

The players get rewarded when they are acting on there beliefs. That is fine, because it is flexible, so it is easy to direct the character to what is important for the game.

You will give 1-2 XP at the end of an adventure. I don't know how long you expect an adventure to be, but 1-2 XP seems to me to be very few. But I believe you are thinking about XP the wrong way.

You properly see XP as something to be used to advance in skill or attributes. But look at what the game is about. The game is NOT about character advancing their skills and attribute. The game is about "pursuit of power within the hierarchy of the world" and "seek knowledge to alleviate the curses and pains that each one suffers" and "Pursuit of ancient knowledge". So maybe it should be possible to us XP to achieve these thing.

Maybe it will help if you use an other term than XP. Maybe story point or hero point or something.

Don't get me wrong. It should properly be possible for the character to advance there skills and attributes. But there is other hing that is more important for the game.

btw. I like the idea of letting the player state, when he think he should earn XP.

- Anders

[DarkAsmodeous]

Hmm.. This is very interesting, I was considering a system that also uses relationship points with the different groups, affecting rolls realted to it, but dismissed it as needlessly complex. Perhaps I can use a Rank point aspect, that when you rise in power you gain "advancement  points" and when you find secrets you also gain "advancement points", about buying secrets, I think that should be something the adventure does, not points, however perhaps you can use them to increase your status by having a numbered status withing groups?

I need to ponder this.

Thank you for the EXELENT feedback

[Anders Larsen]

Thank you for the EXELENT feedback

Thanks, I am glad you can use it.

but on to the comments about the setting. I will also comment some more on the rules. But it can be argued that setting and rules can not be separated.

I am going to make a lot of assumptions. You can see them as suggestions.

Ok, lets first take a look on the character types:

Dons: scholars - they seek knowledge - they gain power to controlling reality - they risk madness. They have the role of being the wisemen and they seek transcendence by changing reality.

Aerials: clans people - They control the cosmic powers - they risk overburn. They have the role of being the people of the land(?). But what do they seek, what is there goal?

Keepers: Offencive combat - Inflects damages by fire and water. They have the role of being the police for magical beings and the using of magic. There goal is the goal of the clan, and to keep peace.

Guardians: Defencive combat - Defending with are, life and wind. They have the role of being the police for magical beings and the using of magic. There goal is the goal of the clan, and to keep peace.

Reapers: The witch - Use the dark side of magic. They have the role of being the inquisition. Their goals?

I see the keepers and guardians as being to much the same thing. When I read your first post I was concerned that the character types was too different - had too different goals. But I actually thing that this could be a strength of the game.

I am thinking, maybe there could be a mythology for how the character types fit together. They could represent the different aspects of life, and when they are together, they form a powerful unity. This unity may be necessary to find the true meaning of the ancient knowledge.

To empathise the different aspect of the character types, there could be different rules for the different types. Not only do they have different magic systems, and of course different beliefs, but they could have different sets of attributes. The dons may not have Strength or Endurance, and Keepers may not have Social. The reward system could also be different for the different types. And there could be a unique character sheet for each type.

The myth could be that one person from each character type unified onto true cooperation, could make great thing happen. And the rules should reflect this.

Of course it can be hard to get a group to play one of each type (there may be more or less that five people in the group). But reality of today could be that the five character types rarely work together because of conflicts. But sometimes a random collection of the different types put their conflicts behind them and tries to regain some of their former power and, even though they are not one of each type, tries to find the unity. And these groups could be the player characters.

You should be careful with having to many conflict between the player characters. Personal conflicts, and conflicts between characters can be fun, but they risk dominating the game play. And I am not sure that it is what you want with you game.

The reason why I suggest that the group the player characters form tries to put their conflict behind them, is to prevent to much time spent on character arguing among each other.


I have not worked all the conflicts into this, and there should properly be a little more focus on what the game is about, but as I said: This is only suggestions.

- Anders

[DarkAsmodeous]

Alright, I am now going to adress this last feedback, yes the dons serve as scholarly characters, but occasionaly there are dons that decide that their power makes them invincible, or that they need ot administer justice, this is being reflected in the belief system that me and my partner are drafting up, we are also implementing a fears system. I have also noticed that the Aerials do not have much of a goal, so I have been working on making the shards a blessing as well as a curse. The use of shards is now addictive, and the characters risk subcumming to it for short amounts of time depending on the power they use, and we are creating creatures that for whatever reason we form, and they seek strentgh to battle of these creatures, as well as free their clans from ancient duties that now serve as shackles that cannot be broken.

In regards to the group mythology, I like the idea, however I do not want to punish the players for not having one of each type, perhaps since the players for the most part will not be working on large skale politics(kept very simple) until mid-level,  there are places known as havens that characters gather at to seek aid in the jobs given by those of more power, and political differences have little sway on oppinions at the street level parties can form fairly easily, you wouldn't of course get a Aerial of the clan McGregor to bomb his house right? So this will allow for reasonable limitations there, and at mid to high level, characters will be thrust together for whatever political, life-threatening, mystery solving, or odd adventure the DM can toss due to common goals. Now DM's run games of only Aerials of the clan Akihiro and work soley from that groups view, it would all be up to the DM and players.

And I think I may have not done a good job of portraing the dons, yes they do have a thirst for knowledge greater than any other group, however their ability to warp reality has it's greatest effects on their own bodies, allowing for super-human abilities rather than magical seeming ones, they can alter reality in a limited way around them such as softening metal, or helping a tree to grow.

[Anders Larsen]

There have been some different things that I have wanted to write, but never got around to. So I will collect them here.

First some links

You may want to take a look at Shadows of Yesterday by Clinton R. Nixon. In that game there is a system of beliefs, called Keys. It is properly not what you are going for, but there you can at least see how a beliefs system can be done.

I resently got pointed out this article about Flagging. A beliefs system can be used as Flags. But it is also possible to have a dedicated flagging mechanic.


Little more about the setting

In your first post you have this:

Thus far we have come up with a basic concept, in ancient times their were older races lost to the memory of man and events happened, this may not sound very descriptive, but we intend to have each of the character types tell their own legends and accounts of what happened.

I was thinking: Instead of you, the game designer, write down what each character type believed happened. You can make some guidelines about how the types perceives different things, and then you can let the players write down what they believe happened in ancient time. The GM can then use this to structure the adventures around. That is, you are making the frame, and the GM and the player can fill out the content.

It have two advantages: You don't have to write a lot setting materiel, and the GM and players have the possibility of making the setting there own.


Something about conflicts

Is should tell you why I asked for the most important conflicts. It is actually just another way of asking what the game is about and what the characters do. Because the conflicts the characters is facing is what everyone at the gaming table will be concerned about; nothing happens if there is no conflict.

It is also dangerous to have too many conflicts: The more conflicts there is the less important will the single conflict be. And it is dangerous to have conflicts the wrong places (having conflicts that is not important for the game), because it will slow down the game; making it less intense.


Final note

Hmm.. This is very interesting, I was considering a system that also uses relationship points with the different groups, affecting rolls realted to it, but dismissed it as needlessly complex. Perhaps I can use a Rank point aspect, that when you rise in power you gain "advancement  points" and when you find secrets you also gain "advancement points", about buying secrets, I think that should be something the adventure does, not points, however perhaps you can use them to increase your status by having a numbered status withing groups?

You have some very interesting ideas here. I can not make any "insightful" comments before your ideas are more structured. But I believe you are going in the right direction.

- Anders

[DarkAsmodeous]

To help me get things in perspective, I have made a preliminary outline, let me know if I missed anything. oh, and I named the reapers Anointed.

Intro
   Short story set in world, not focusing on any one type
   Introduction
Setting
   Opening lore
   World
   Character types
   Creature types
   Aerials
      Description
      Society
      Beliefs/religion
      Magic
Goals
                   Anointed
      Description
      Society
      Beliefs/religion
      Magic
      Goals
                       Dons
      Description
      Society
      Beliefs/religion
      Magic
      Goals
   Guardians
      Description
      Society
      Beliefs/religion
      Magic
      Goals
   Keepers
      Description
      Society
      Beliefs/religion
      Magic
      Goals
Characters
   Creation
   Templates
      Aerials   
      Anointed
      Dons
      Guardians
      Keepers
Magic
   Shards/Aerials
   Rituals/Anointed
   Perceptions/Dons
   Spells/Guardians/Keepers      
Taints
   Aerials
   Anointed
   Dons
   Guardians
   Keepers
Running the game
                       Rules
      General
      Combat
      Flavor
   
   Creation/Running
      Advice
      Concept
                  Planning
      Preparation
      Play
      Reward
                    Sample
      Introduction/overview
      Adventure
      Rewards
      NPC stats
Glossary
Index
Credits      

[Anders Larsen]

I can not see anything obvious you have missed. But I have some questions.

What is "Templates". Is something to do with character sheets? And "Taints". It sounds cool, but what is it? And "Flavor"?

And a comment: I can see you have a chapter about combat. Why? All the character types are magic users, and for what I can see, the game is not about combat; where is combat important? You may want to have something about magical combat, though.

- Anders

[DarkAsmodeous]

Templates has to do with the character creation for that type of character, taints are the curses involved with having the magical abilities, still working on those. Flavor rules are optional rules having to do with more narative play and the like.

[DarkAsmodeous]

I keep hitting tab then enter, and it makes me post :\

Anyway, combat is their for several reasons, it will not be very rule intensive, and it will use integrated rolls, but sometimes the use of magic just isn't acceptable or the player wants to have a crossbow, who knows? Also, the guardians as I said often have a weapon of choice which also sets them apart from the keepers, for all their magic is generally clerical or augments their weapon. And magical combat will have some information on it in both the combat and magic sections.

[Anders Larsen]

I am sorry, but I am going to go into one of my rants again. I should properly just let you get on with your game in peace.

The reason I asked you why you have a combat system, is not that I necessarily think that you should not have a one. But I see too many games include a combat system, just because most other game have one.

And thats really not a very good justification!

First I will collect here what you game is about:

The three questions
1) My game is about the pursuit of power within the hierarchy of the world, whilst attempting to learn the mysteries of the past and keep order, amongst themselves, and the darker beings that roam just out of sight.

2) Depending on their type, they hunt down that which gives them power, work for their corresponding organizations, seek knowledge to alleviate the curses and pains that each one suffers(not yet established) and to work towards defeating the darker organizations and beasts, or even eachother.

3) At first, simply deciding what their characters are going to work towards, be it order, chaos, power, or knowledge, as this will effect the game to suit them at higher points of development, and to make moral decisions, as the GM will often present the need to remain compassionate and the like or to disregard it(considering working that in rule wise) and at higher points in the game, to point the organizations to or against war, or to forever change the world.

The conflicts
~ Friction between families and organizations that turn to conflict of some sort(not always violent)
~Older darker creatures seeking to harm them or others
~Grappling with the curses and problems of their existence
~Pursuit of ancient knowledge and the dangers involved in doing so
~Characters own existence and place in society, including the contrast between magical and mundane society

Let us call this the Foundation, because this is what you feel is important for your game.

When you are making the system, you have to use this Foundation to justify every single rule. And you should seek to make mechanics that support this Foundation.

If you have a rule that don't have any direct connection with the Foundation, you should properly drop that rule. If you have too many role in the system that don't have anything to do with your game, you risk the players will begin to play your game like they play any other game. And then they are really not playing your game.

So if you use justifications like "the player wants to have a crossbow" (I know I take this quote out of context, but it is just to make a point), then you are on a sliding slope. The player may want all sorts of thing that have nothing to do with your game, and you will end up with just another general game system.

If you keep the focus on what you what with the game (keep the focus on the Foundation), the game play will be much more intense, and the gaming experience will be much more unique. Everyone will know when they are playing your game.

And remember. You may not always sit in the GM chair when this game is on the table. The day you hand this over to strangers, they too have to understand what the game is about to really play your game.

Again, I am not saying you should not have a combat system, but you should just be able to justify it with the Foundation.

But don't do it now. Just think about it. you properly want to get on with your game, rather that responding to my annoying rants.

- Anders

[DarkAsmodeous]

We have determined that we want to simplify the attribute system, the new attributes are
   Body
   Mind
   Social
   Reflex

[DarkAsmodeous]

And your rants are very helpful, my partner is lazy, and as competent as a retarded orangutan

[TheineLD50]

And your rants are very helpful, my partner is lazy, and as competent as a retarded orangutan

Why thank you!  I do love orangutans...

Me and DA (DarkAsmodeous) have been discussing the creation of another separate character archetype representing magic in the traditional sense, incorporating nature reverence and spiritual focuses.  This type of casting depends more upon lengthy ritual and most spontaneous casting relies upon pre-charged items.  Although magic can be performed outside of a prepared place and without rituals, the effects are variable and outside energies may alter its form.

An antagonist archetype will be the Creatures of Decay, which are created and maintained by the Rancourium Don's energy.  They are also believed to feed off of major human faults, such as greed, lust, envy, etc. and thrive in times of chaos.  When things are not chaotic, they work hard towards the goal of creating chaos, using the limited magic they are capable of.  Each type of Creature of Decay feeds of a different human fault, or toys with another aspect of the mind or body.  These creatures act against every type of player character, but they play a larger role in the Oath Clan's (keepers/guardians) role in the game.  The Oath Clan's goal of suppressing potentially dangerous or obvious magic from mortals includes the destruction and suppression of the creatures of decay.