Shadowmen system ideas

[signoftheserpent]

(This has been posted, somewhat, elsewhere as well).

Shadowmen http://tomorrowcity.blogspot.com/

[signoftheserpent]

So does this idea make sense? Hold water?

[Ron Edwards]

Hi there,

I really like the spectrum-of-dice model you're using. I'll start by looking at another example using your description. You wrote,

So, for example. I am currently starting afresh and am relaxed; my Momentum is Edge 1, at the far left beginning of the track. I am going to do some research using my Science stat, 4. That creates a total dice pool of:

stat (4) + (struggle 4, one less for the Edge value) + Edge (1) = 9, 4 of which are struggle dice.

I roll them and count successes for every even, but subtract the 'successes' shown on the 4 Struggle dice from the rest.

If I'm understanding correctly, effectively, this is rolling 5 dice against 4 dice, to see which set comes up with more even values.

In my example, let's say the same thing is happening, only my Momentum is Edge 5. So the dice pool is now:

stat (4) + (struggle 0, 5 minus 5) + Edge 5 = 9, none of which are struggle dice. I roll 9 dice and count the even results.

This brings up an interesting point, and actually a pretty important one. Is one rolling against a difficulty value? If not, then when Struggle is 0, the only way to fail is to roll no even dice. That seems perfectly OK ... if the rules are quite clear about when a character must roll and when he or she does not have to roll. I guess I'm saying I'd like to see really concrete definition for when a character is in the Struggle, even when its value is offset to 0.

If one is rolling against a difficulty value, then I think the whole mechanic faces a problem - one must not only overcome an inherent failure within one's own dice pool but also some level of success from another source. This problem plagues a lot of game systems and has persisted mainly through imitation, because it's annoying as hell during play.

You may already have worked your way through all this and so that might have been an exercise in me catching up with you; if so, let me know. If not, and if you have any questions about what I'm saying, let me know.

Just for fun, another example to make sure I get it. With everything else staying the same, the Edge is currently Momentum 3 ...

So it's stat (4) + (struggle 2) + Edge 3 = 9 dice, which is really 7 dice vs. 2 dice of Struggle.

Does Grit work exactly the same as Momentum, as it is still Edge? I'm pretty sure from your description that it does.

Alrighty then, then point is that we have two opposed dice pools which always sum to Stat + 5 (hence 9 when the stat is 4 as above). Up to 5 of those are opposition dice. When the opposition decreases by 1, the "positive" dice increase by 1, for a two-die shift in probabilities. That effect is governed by Edge.

Huh! I rather like this. I think the two-die shift is strong enough to be really quite meaningful.

Here's another question: how niche-y do you want the characters to be? People can debate endlessly over whether pulp/comics heroes are specialized or generalized, so rather than go into that, I'm talking specifically about your game and the experience of someone playing it.

Typically, when I see a game with as many scores as you've listed, with a limited number to distribute among them, I think "niche." So Doctor Clockwork might have high Gear, Science, and Command, while the street-fightin' Saracen might have high Streetwise, Speed, Might, and Combat.

This is ... well, maybe more problematic than it looks. It's certainly familiar; a lot of games use this sort of model. But I suggest a second look.

Let's see whether the names on the stat list are truly independent. If a player wants to be a character to be a good fighter, does he have any real choice in scores? Not really, I don't think. There are at least three he really needs, and some which are going to have to be canned to make those three really reliable.

Or to look at my point another way, I think that it's frustrating to be told that (a) this list describes everything a pulp hero can do, and (b) oh yes, your character will have to suck at about half of them, at least. It's pure niche. Do you really want it to be pure niche?

What might be an alternative? Please don't read the following as an actual attempt to dictate or design your game for you. I'm offering it as an example of a different way of thinking about scores ("stats" et cetera) and characters. Let's see ... OK. let's have two types of scores: an "everything" score and a number of "my schticks" scores. Looking at your list, what I see are:

Might, Speed, and probably Combat = "everything," which is a single score; one might also toss some kind of Deduction or similar stuff into there if you want that sort of thing to play into dice-resolved conflicts. Call this one by a general name of some kind.

Gear, Command, Operator, Medical, Science, and Streetwise = schticks. These have to be bought up individually. The point is that if the character wants to do something Commanding, for instance, they need to have at least a point in Command or they are rolling with 0 stat value (and thus really have a shot only in the middle of the Edge).

I haven't specified any sort of point structure and haven't even said whether the schtick score value adds to the general value or is used as an alternative. Those are all important details of the actual game design and I don't want to go there for your game. But suffice to say that a number of functional ways to do it exist.

The point is that one now has the choice whether to generalize or to specialize. Specializing means taking a bit of a hit in general capabilities. Generalizing means reducing specialized applications, but not general competence. In other words, generalizing does not necessarily mean "mediocre across the board." I think in your construction, generalizing does mean "mediocre across the board." Which in my view ain't very pulp and ain't as fun as it looks, but that is only my view and is subject to your judgment.

Does that make any sense? If I'm violating key features of what you'd like to do, let me know, and we can stick within your preferred parameters.

Best, Ron

[signoftheserpent]

Hi there,

I really like the spectrum-of-dice model you're using.

Thanks!

I'll start by looking at another example using your description. You wrote,

So, for example. I am currently starting afresh and am relaxed; my Momentum is Edge 1, at the far left beginning of the track. I am going to do some research using my Science stat, 4. That creates a total dice pool of:

stat (4) + (struggle 4, one less for the Edge value) + Edge (1) = 9, 4 of which are struggle dice.

I roll them and count successes for every even, but subtract the 'successes' shown on the 4 Struggle dice from the rest.

If I'm understanding correctly, effectively, this is rolling 5 dice against 4 dice, to see which set comes up with more even values.

That is correct.

In my example, let's say the same thing is happening, only my Momentum is Edge 5. So the dice pool is now:

stat (4) + (struggle 0, 5 minus 5) + Edge 5 = 9, none of which are struggle dice. I roll 9 dice and count the even results.

Again, correct.

This brings up an interesting point, and actually a pretty important one. Is one rolling against a difficulty value? If not, then when Struggle is 0, the only way to fail is to roll no even dice. That seems perfectly OK ... if the rules are quite clear about when a character must roll and when he or she does not have to roll. I guess I'm saying I'd like to see really concrete definition for when a character is in the Struggle, even when its value is offset to 0.

It is somewhat difficult to properly rationalise, and perhaps having struggle dice in direct competition with the rest of the pool is the wong approach.

Essentially momentum is the character's overall state from which they can tap into to do well. In order for this mechanic to work it needs to compare against something in order to define itself, hence the struggle dice. The first 5 results represent clarity of mind which increases as the character's adrenaline and alertness increases. As that wears the character starts to depend on his 'grit' his force of will before finally expiring (a temporary state in which the character is out of action for a while). Struggle dice define the power of the level of momentum by deign of the conflict with momentum which otherwise are just bonus dice and that isn't enough of a mechanic for me.

If one is rolling against a difficulty value, then I think the whole mechanic faces a problem - one must not only overcome an inherent failure within one's own dice pool but also some level of success from another source. This problem plagues a lot of game systems and has persisted mainly through imitation, because it's annoying as hell during play.

Currently the system is as you describe and yes that presents a problem by virtue of being a double whammy against the player. This can be fiexed by having Struggle Dice create a different effect rather than directly reducing succeses.

Or by having the dice pool do something else, but then I don't think dice pools work sans Difficulty levels (ie I can't think of anything).

So, let's say for each 'success' on the Struggle Dice (perhaps every odd result thereon), the GM adds 1 point to what Marvel SAGA called the Doom Bank - a point pool that allows him to buy effects (this brings me onto Flaws, which I didn't mention, every PC has a Flaw) or increase difficulties etc.

Just for fun, another example to make sure I get it. With everything else staying the same, the Edge is currently Momentum 3 ...

So it's stat (4) + (struggle 2) + Edge 3 = 9 dice, which is really 7 dice vs. 2 dice of Struggle.

That is correct. Though proper to say the Momentum is Edge 3.

Does Grit work exactly the same as Momentum, as it is still Edge? I'm pretty sure from your description that it does.

Essentially two sides of the same coin, that coin being Momentum. It may be possible to indtroduce effects dependane on the result of whether the dice rolled were Edge/Grit as appropriate.

Here's another question: how niche-y do you want the characters to be? People can debate endlessly over whether pulp/comics heroes are specialized or generalized, so rather than go into that, I'm talking specifically about your game and the experience of someone playing it.

A Shadowman agent is both specialised and generalised; they are not eruperheroes who might well be specialised. Within the stat framweork that is itself generalised, in that every PC has some rating in everything, they can be built, though point allocation, to specialise in certain fields. There will also be Talents, which are traits attached to stats, to further specialise, such as 'crackshot, 'silver tongued', the usual sort of thing.

The reason for this appreach is to enable every player to fit in. I do not like skill lists because they are restrictive by definition. By allowing everyone to have a rating of at least 1, which they will (1-5), they can at least try something even though their character is not expected to do well. This is important and will not change. It also reflects the uniformity among the shadowmen - like the heroes of the Nevermen comic, the prime inspiration - or even the agents of the Matrix - they are capable and well trained. They aren't a collection of disparate and unique heroes as per Spirit of the Century of Adventure!

Or to look at my point another way, I think that it's frustrating to be told that (a) this list describes everything a pulp hero can do, and (b) oh yes, your character will have to suck at about half of them, at least. It's pure niche. Do you really want it to be pure niche?

It is pulp, but it is basically a unique kind of pulp - this is not about emulating regular pulp or actual pulp, but using those ideas, styles and concepts. Tomorrow City is a unique place and so are it's guardians. The charctres will have enough points to build decent characters who will be able to accomplish what they need without being over powered or enfeebled at everything else, that's the purpose of this approach.

So along with momentum and stats; pc's will also have talents - a prescribed number which are freely definable by the player that attach to a single stat and employ effects when an action makes use of that talent and descriptor. Characters will also have a single Flaw, a heroic failing which the GM can invoke (somehow).

I have also considered a slightly different task resolution system based on 3 levels of difficulty (there were only ever going to be three levels since it makes things easier, and since more levels can easily be accomadated anyway).
There are also two categories of action: normal and tense. The latter are simple actions that are easily resolved while tense actions are ones where there is some active opposing force offering a threat (combat, for example, is tense).

On a normal action, ignore Momentum and just resolve according to to requisite numbers of success and difficulty (see below).

On a tense action, include Momentum. If the action fails the character moves +1 to the right on the Momentum; if he succeeds he can move +1 or -1 (or 0, for simplicity's sake!).

Difficulty represents the number of Struggle Dice the player must roll; however these are offset by the size of the relevant stat pool. To succeed the stat dice must produce a certain number of even numbers. Struggle Dice that produce odds generate points for the GM's 'Doom Bank' (as mentioned above).

Now, if the Difficulty is lower than the stat pool, the player still rolls only that number of dice, but gets the difference as free succeses. If there is equality in difficulty annd pool then simply roll with 0 Struggle Dice.

If this is a tense action, factor in Momentum to the stat pool as a bonus and treat that new total as if that were the stat rating, thus:

Officer X, with Grit 3 (he's getting pretty tired now) and Combat 4, wants to shoot the Red Republic spy with an average difficulty (5). X has an effective stat pool of 7 (3 Grit + Combat stat 4). This means he already has 2 succeses before he rolls. There are no Struggle dice (we'll ignore what the Doom Bank and the evil GM playing the spy can or might do!). Looks like he's gonna hit!

Ok, that's all for now. Thanks for reading! I appreciates the feedback (any is better than none!)