[AnyDie]Homebrew generic system: looking for a better title and a piec of advice

[Van Hoering]

Okay, this is my first post on The Forge. I think I'd better introduce Myself first. My name is Jef, 30 yo, schoolteacher in the north of France, roleplayer since the early nineties. I'm tinkering with my own homebrew generic system in order to save myself the hassle of learning new ones. This system will also be used in the Citizen H project, but I will save thos topic for another thread.
My goal is to design, not the perfect system, but the one that fits my gamemastering style perfectly. Right now I have designed the basics of it, and you could say it is a mix of the dice mechanics of Savage Worlds and the type of freeform character creation system you find in Robin D. Law's systems.
Everything revolves about Traits. Traits are anything that makes your character stand out, be it natural gifts like strenght or beauty or spirit, skills like nuclear physics, sudoku, fencing or bycicle riding, useful contacts, rank in an organisation (priest, colonel, etc), useful possessions (mithril coat, lightsaber...) or creatures (monkey, tiger, familiar, djinn, whatever).
Every Trait is rated by a dice type. D4 is lame, d6 is average, d8 is good, d10 is outstanding, d12 is awesome, d20 is godlike. You try to roll high. The dice expolde. Every Trait you don't have on your sheet is d6 by default.
It's coming out pretty well at the moment, but a friend of mine (co-author of the Citizen H project) told me that I needed to make a difference between broad traits (more expensive at character creation) and specialised traits (cheaper), and between permanent traits and temporary traits (you could always lose a friend or a possession).
The thing is, I can't see how I could do that without the system getting to complicated (I'm more into streamlined, free-form, rules-lite gaming). Any advice?
And please, pretty please, help me find a better title!
PS: Please excuse my poor English, on the account of me being French!

[Krippler]

If any trait not listen is a D6, why would I want to name a trait that's a D4?

[J. Scott Timmerman]

Aloha Van,

Remember that you're making this game for your own gamemastering style.  You may want to try it the simple way before adding in any extra complexity.  If problems with these issues arise through play, you can fix them for future games.  That said, if you'll allow me to make a few assumptions about the type of roleplaying game you'll be running with this system, here are my humble thoughts and opinions on the issues themselves. 

First, you've got to think about how, mechanically, your system supports the difference between broad and specialised, as well as the difference between temporary and permanent.  If your game recognizes no mechanical difference between these factors, it is problematic to introduce pricing differences based on them.  That is, even one's learned swordsmanship abilities can be taken away by amnesia, if that is a valid event in your game.  Only if your game supports the permanence of permanent traits, as well as the real likelihood that temporary traits will be denied to the player some time in the game, only then do you need a price difference.  And only if your game mechanically prevents a character from using a specialised trait in a situation demanding a broader trait, only then would you need a price difference.

I have found that some systems do not provide an actual mechanical difference here (beyond perhaps a suggestion) to support the distinctions that your friend suggests.  And those systems work just fine.  Then again, some systems do discriminate mechanically on these bases, and provide a difference in cost, and those systems work just fine, too.

All of that said, differentiating might not be too hard to implement.  You could do it with simple math.  Perhaps if broad traits cost 1 point per step, then specialised or temporary traits could be two-thirds of a point per step, and a trait which is both narrow and temporary could be half a point per step.  But that's just one way of doing it, and of course assumes that you're mechanically supporting the difference between the traits.

-J. Scott Timmerman

[Van Hoering]

[Van Hoering]

Oh! I forgot to mention that I think "Anydie" is quite a lame title. And as I intend to first write it as a stand-alone, generic system, I need a name for the ruleset itself. A better name. Feel free to suggest!
By the way, call me a N00b, a Lamer or whatever, but I still can't figure out how to edit my posts...

[Mikael]

[Mikael]

Oh yes, you cannot edit posts on the Forge. The idea is that you should really compose the post somewhere else, with good spell-checking capabilities, and read it a couple of times before posting, rather than quickly post some crap and rely on the possibility of editing the post later.

[Van Hoering]

Well, Mikael, although I don't think I'll take everything you said for granted, I must admit that you really gave me food for thought.

I agree that the best rulesets are the ones designed to fit a particular setting. But I still intend to figure out, not the "most awesomest system" in the world, but the one that fits me best as a GM. I have added some mechanics to ensure that while I keep a single core engine, the rules can (and must) be tweaked to fit any setting. The Citizen H project will have rules to manage the Hero's reputation, morale, and ethical dilemmas. You could end up losing your special talents just because your hero has a bad reputation, has messed up his private life, and gets so depressed he quits his caped crusade.

As for your idea of making Wounds temporary Traits, I like that. In fact, I had thought of it myself, for another project that is now in "stand-by". I think I would be stupid not to use it in my current project.

I must confess though, that I quite don't get your point regarding my Traits being more "skills" than "Traits". What's the difference between and "add-on" and the substitution of a higher score to a default "average" value? In both cases, you end up having higher chances of succes if the relevant Trait is on your sheet.And if you read all my examples, you'll see that I intend Traits to reflect aspects of a character that have nothing to do with skills. Wealth would be a Trait. Status would be a Trait. A landed noble would have "Fief" as a Trait. Of course some Traits cannot default at d6 for every character.

But anyway, even if I don't end up agreeing with everything, it's still a great help in my design process. And I expect the playtesting phase to be even more decisive, of course.

[jag]

I must confess though, that I quite don't get your point regarding my Traits being more "skills" than "Traits". What's the difference between and "add-on" and the substitution of a higher score to a default "average" value? In both cases, you end up having higher chances of succes if the relevant Trait is on your sheet.And if you read all my examples, you'll see that I intend Traits to reflect aspects of a character that have nothing to do with skills. Wealth would be a Trait. Status would be a Trait. A landed noble would have "Fief" as a Trait. Of course some Traits cannot default at d6 for every character.

At the risk of putting words in Mikael's mouth, "traits" are often used to describe things that are extremely character specific.  These don't lend themselves to having a default value.  For example, if my character has a trait like 'Pet Vorpal Rabbit d10' or 'Must avenge father d12', it doesn't make sense for another character (who neither has a pet rabbit nor a slain father) to have a default value of 'd6' in these traits.

A simple way around this would be that characters only have a "default value" in a trait/aspect if it makes sense that the characters would have some ability in that area.  So a resident of a city might be expected to have default values of d6 in Haggling and a farmer in Milk Cow, but neither would have a default value for Nuclear Physics or Must Avenge Father.

james

[tarafore]

Perhaps a better way of phrasing the "default trait" would be to say that a character attempting an action for which she has no relevant trait rolls 1d6, unless the action requires specialized training (such as brain surgery, helicopter piloting, or casting magical spells).

As far as better titles, I'll throw out a few ideas, based on the Any____ model, but working on the idea of the game's applicability to multiple settings, rather than the dice it uses.
AnyWorld
AnyWhere
AnyWhen
AnyTime

And of course, one that's silly:
AnySMURF (Simple Multipurpose Universal Roleplaying Framework)

[FrankBrunner]

I'll chime in and agree with the suggestion of tying the mechanics to the setting. Perhaps give a bonus for traits that fit closely with the setting and a penalty for those that do not. And think about context-specific bonuses: maybe a focused (or narrow) trait used in its specific context gets a bonus, and it gets a penalty if used out of its context - or it gets a really big bonus if used out of context in an especially appropriate or amusing way. Then there is an intriguing choice at character creation: do I take narrow traits with the chance to use them with bonuses and penalties depending on context, or do I take broad traits that can be used in many places at a flat rate?

But as you said this was a game mainly for your personal GMing style, I would argue that the most important thing is how it fits with that style. Playtesting is probably the only way to find that out.

As for titles, I'd go with tying it to the setting, also. Maybe "Fists vs. Tentacles?" Hm, that sounds a little silly. Maybe "The Cruelest Years"? Too dark?

[Van Hoering]

Well, I'd like to thank all who have posted suggestions for my pet project. You didn't make me change my mind about my basic mechanics, but you did change the way I explain them in my first draft.
As for the Title, I think I like the Acronym "SMURF", but sadly, it translates to "SCHTROUMPF" in French (if we are both refering to the tales of little blue men by Belgian cartoonist Peyo)...