Basic RPG

[Xenoheart]

It has occured to me quite a few times that I was asked to guide a group of 9, maybe 10 year old kids as a Game Master in all sorts of private and official gaming groups(I don't know how it is in the rest of the world, but it is very common in Israel for a community center to host RPG sessions with many young kids, proffesional "teachers" and an assortmant of snacks and drinks for a few NIS per hour. You can even sign so that you will be given hours every week for your long running campaing group).
One thing that I always seemed to notice while guiding those young, unexpericanced barbarians is that most types of official RPG's I end up teaching them(D&D, EXALTED, GURPS, The World Of Darkness, Call of Cthulhu...) are to complicated for them. They never quite remember what die to roll, they ignore rules(Or worse, they check the book a thousand times per hour to make sure they didn't), they take many hours to make character sheets, they can't sit in one place for ten minuets and listen to setting overviews, and sometimes even the math challanges them.
I have decided to try a new tactic. I will create a new role playing game for solving just that problem. A simple, flowing, addictive game perfect for introducing new guys into the hobby befor they can try the "more advanced stuff".(Or, you know, for playing once in a few months with your girlfriend and three classmates who come primarly for the pizza and social interaction and don't want to be bothred with nonsense like this). Something like Steve Jackson's "Advanced Fighting Fantasy" books... Only less sucky... I guess...

-The new game system should be generic, "classical" fantasy(Think Lord of The Rings, Dragonlance, Eragon, Wheel of Time...), for the simple reason that most young kids who somehow become interested in RPG(At least here) are often familiar to a degree with the genre, through books or computer games or whatever.

-The new game system would only utilise the standard six sided dice(Known is some social groups as "D6"). The fewer the better. Many dice of differant types confuse the younglings.

-Character creation will be fast and simple, at least in mechanical terms.

-While the game should be mechanically simple, it should not be mechanically "plain". Easy to learn, hard to master, you know. It needs to be simple enugh to allow the younglings to learn the basics quickly, but it needs to provide enugh interesting options to keep older gamers interested(As I said befor, many adults won't care to play RPG sometimes, some will even like it, but they just don't have the kind of personality to get really "into it").

-The game should encourage creativity and role play, but not like Amber or Wushu. Just enugh to teach the kids how it's done. Plus, one player in most groups(Kid or adult) almost alwayes finds the hobby through some sort of drama class or something(Don't ask me why it is so. It just happens), so he should be able to have some fun with his deep, emotionally colourful, tragic character.

-I don't know if I should use a class and level system. On one hand, people say it is not good to start with those because it harms the kids creativity creating their character. On the other hand, IT IS a lot simpler and quicker. Maybe something basic, three to five classes with some sort of bonus or special ability for each. I will try to avoid creating a "Cleric" or "Priest" class here, as popular as they are, simply because whether you portray them as bloodthirsty narrow minded fanatics or divine miracle workers you just can't do good to the worldview of the poor kids.

-Since most kids gaming groups meet in the "Course" format I descirbed above, once a week or even twice, it is improtant to include some sort of character development system, based on training or levels or experiance points or whatnot. It gives the kids a motivation to play for.

-That is probably something to do later, when I already have the basis, but I want to allow the game to operate on multiple levels, with the "level" being chosen by the Game Master and the players according to their preferances. "Level 1" games will have very little character traits, straight mechanics, simple combat, read one page worth of rules and you are ready to go. More advanced levels will include rules for casting spells, hiring henchman, creating settings, monsters, buying or making equipment, stuff like that.

Does anybody have any suggestions? Advice? Help? Notes? Opinions?
I will appreaciate it very much if you responded clearly and kindly, but, well, thanks anyway.  I will be going now.

Yours, Xenoheart.

[mjbauer]

The system I am working on is very similar to what you are describing. I am developing it to attract friends of mine who are mostly into online First Person Shooters, so it has to be fast and simple, yet fun and challenging. Some of the things I've included don't exactly match up with what you've stated you want, and the fact that it's a futuristic shoot-em-up style game means that I haven't taken into account any type of magic usage, but many of your goals are the same things that I am trying to accomplish with the system design.

Like:

• A d6 system: since they are the easiest to find.
• Only 6 dice (maybe a few more for bonuses) in a single roll.
• Simple Math: Dice rolls are either Successes (5&6) or Failures (1). There is no dice totaling.
• More concise rolls: A single attack roll includes the degree of success as well as the damage inflicted.
• Weapons have 3 damage levels (minimum, medium, maximum) instead of damage dice: One Success in an attack = minimum damage, two = medium, 3 = maximum. 4 or more can be some type of Critical hit with a special bonus. So a weapon's damage would be 3 numbers like: 3/6/9.
• Quick character creation (Three stats (Strength, Agility & Intelligence) cover all of a character's abilities), these stats also represent the number of hit points a character has and the number of actions he can take during a round.

There are many areas that I'm still working out but I thought that this might give you some ideas. If you'd like more specific info I'd be glad to send it to you.

[Xenoheart]

Cool. I would like to see your FPS RPG one day. Sounds like fun for a one nighter. Thanks for the advice.  I think the "Roll dice, X and above counts as a success" is a good resolution method. BTW, in your system, if 5-6 are success, and 1 is a failure, what do 3 and 4 do?

[mjbauer]

BTW, in your system, if 5-6 are success, and 1 is a failure, what do 3 and 4 do?

I was thinking the exact same thing while I was typing that rule.

Basically 1-4 are failures and 5-6 are successes, however I think of it more like: 6-5 = you were successful in your attempt, 2-4 you were unsuccessful and 1 you actually made things worse (Critical Failure).

I still don't know how these are going to work together, I still have a lot of work to do.

[chance.thirteen]

I'd like to suggest that automatic failures, which are the usual fallout of critical failure/fumble rules may be too much for a beginner.

However, an idea I have been trying to explore for a while is that such a low roll indicates a complication, hopefully some dramatic sub-challenge that adds detail or character to a situation. Simple examples might be a dangerous manuever is required in an otherwise difficult but safe climb, or that during negotiations a personal issue intrudes, such as an old ally, friend or lover working on the other side.

In otherwords, making more play, not stopping the current effort. Hopefully it would also be a way to bring in other aspect of character capacity, such as jumping and daring for the climb, or self control or passion for the negotiations. Reminds folk that the game is about events, not rolls.

[Xenoheart]

Maybe it becomes a critical failure if ALL the dice show a 1?(Yes, I am ripping of Grimm. Grimm is an awsome game.)
That way having a higer *die pool*(I don't know how it works in your game. Skills, advantagous circumstances, willpower expenditure, whatever) not only increases your chance of success, but also decreases your chance of a critical failure(It's harder to roll "All 1's" on six dice than on two dice).

Is it good?

[chance.thirteen]

Probably good enough. Just note that at 4+ dice your chances of it are very low, and with a single die it is quite high. If a single die is cheap and easy to get, thats fine, but if it represents any significant ability, it's probably too much.

Why? Because the 1 die isn't going to be enough for tasks that need 2+ successes, yet even for tasks it can succeed at 1 in 6 will be catastrophic efforts.

You may note that I have a prejudice against critical failures, so don't let me sway your thinking too much. Too much Deadlands play probably. (I swear that the player with 3d6 went Bust more often than the one with 2d4. A lot more often. So much it became a schtick.)

[mjbauer]

I'd like to suggest that automatic failures, which are the usual fallout of critical failure/fumble rules may be too much for a beginner.

I agree, I wasn't suggesting using critical failures. I think a simple Succeed/Fail system would work though.

[Josh Roby]

How simple do you want to get?  Also, are you intentionally assuming a GM figure based on your context (kids coming to play in events run by adults)?

Cause you can go as simple as: "Describe three things about your character.  Those are your stats.  Whenever you want to do something, roll a die.  If any of your stats are pertinent, roll another die.  The highest die rolled is your result.  Compare that to the opposing roll (GM's or other player's).  If you're higher, you win, if you're lower, you lose.  At the end of each adventure, you get to add one stat to your guy."

If you consider the above, and figure out where and why it's not enough, you'll get a good idea of what you want your game to actually do...

[BrunoDeLaBomba]

i did something like this a while ago anf i can't imagine a better system for beginers than the simple d100 roll under you skill thing, i think the kids we were Gm:ing were from 10 to 13 or something. and they got the hang of it.

if the different die confuse your players, then you could use a d10 for all damage. in that way the children could learn that they roll two for succes and one for damage.

and i think the class thing you had going on is'nt going to help them. it's much more rewarding for early players to define there roles by there skills and stuff.
something that could help is if you took one of these meetings and let it be all about your characters, first they could write down half a page of background,
then perhaps you could have small acting games were they interact with each other in real life as there characters would do. cause it can be difficult for children that young to fully understand that they ar meant to take on a different role.

so write a litle, improvise/act a litle, get comfortable, do the characters and play.

[Bert]

Hi Xenoheart,

I'd steer clear of levels, purely because experience points become the focus of any action with younger players (and some older ones!). Add to that the fact that levels don't make much sense unless your character is completely one dimensional.

Class is not so easy. Having kids pick one class is alway going to limit their thinking, but I don't think you should drop the idea of class as a means of providing bundles of related skills. A 'class-lite' system based on selecting a range of limited backgrounds would really help younger players get their heads around what their characters can do. Being able to say something like 'my character is a warrior, a hunter and an animal tamer' is great for younger players, and making up backgrounds instead of picking them from a list will provide avenues for creativity. It beats picking skills from a list as well, which can get confusing - what does this skill do again?

If you follow this route I think you're more likely to be able to suck the character out of a 100 word character description.

G'luck!

Bert

[Jason Kottler]

Xenoheart -

The game I'm working on at Ultrablamtacular! sounds like it might be what you're looking for. In particular, it will scratch these itches for you:

-The new game system would only utilise the standard six sided dice(Known is some social groups as "D6"). The fewer the better. Many dice of differant types confuse the younglings.

-Character creation will be fast and simple, at least in mechanical terms.

-While the game should be mechanically simple, it should not be mechanically "plain". Easy to learn, hard to master...

-The game should encourage creativity and role play, but not like Amber or Wushu. Just enugh to teach the kids how it's done. Plus, one player in most groups(Kid or adult) almost alwayes finds the hobby through some sort of drama class or something(Don't ask me why it is so. It just happens), so he should be able to have some fun with his deep, emotionally colourful, tragic character.

I don't use a class / level system - in fact, I have explicitly avoided both of those constructs. And my system is genre-independent. So you can make and / or adapt whatever fantasy setting you would like. If you are interested, email me or send me a PM and I'll make sure you get on the playtesting list.

Just so you know, I have run large games for the age groups you indicate, and know just what you mean - I find myself fudging the rules with most games all the time just to keep things going!

Best wishes,

Jason

[alseeger]

I made a d6 based system that is pretty simple (at least my playtesters thought it was simple). It actually has two different types of dice systems you can use: one that involves a dice pool and an optional "super fast" system that requires a mere role of a six sider. You can find out more on my website store. There is also a free download there that explains the basic rules and has a simple dungeon crawl demo adventure. Feel free to shoot me an e-mail if you have questions.

store is: http://www.lulu.com/poigamestudio

Al

[Egonblaidd]

Hi Xenoheart,

I'd steer clear of levels, purely because experience points become the focus of any action with younger players (and some older ones!). Add to that the fact that levels don't make much sense unless your character is completely one dimensional.

Class is not so easy. Having kids pick one class is alway going to limit their thinking, but I don't think you should drop the idea of class as a means of providing bundles of related skills. A 'class-lite' system based on selecting a range of limited backgrounds would really help younger players get their heads around what their characters can do. Being able to say something like 'my character is a warrior, a hunter and an animal tamer' is great for younger players, and making up backgrounds instead of picking them from a list will provide avenues for creativity. It beats picking skills from a list as well, which can get confusing - what does this skill do again?

If you follow this route I think you're more likely to be able to suck the character out of a 100 word character description.

G'luck!

Bert

You seem to be describing a template system (a "starter pack" of skills, as opposed to a rigid system of which skill a character can or can't get), which actually sounds like a good idea.  If you make a bunch of templates and let each character have three or so, then that could be the entire character creation process.  On the other hand, to get diverse characters you would need a lot of templates, and that might overwhelm kids.  The advantage of a class system is that it limits the options so that new players aren't so confused.  A better idea might be to drop class, templates, and even skill entirely.  A trait system might be what you're looking for.  Each player makes up a trait about their character that gives them a bonus or penalty in certain situations, and everything else is assumed to be average, or that gives them an ability no one else has.  Like, "I'm good with swords," +2 when using swords, "I can talk to animals," unique skill, "I'm really strong," +1 to any strength based contest.  Looking back through the other replies, this is the sort of thing that Josh was suggesting.

Another option would be to go for a highly simplified attribute/skill system.  I assume that the PCs are fighting the forces of evil in an epic struggle that will decide the fate of the world.  So, as mjbauer suggested, three stats; strength, the amount of hit you can take before you die, agility, the number of actions you can do in a round, and intelligence, how many spells you can cast (over some interval).  To complement those attributes, three skills that add dice to the dice pool for that skill; fighting, stealth, and magic.  As an example of play, let's say we have three players, Bob, Jeff, and Sam.  Bob's stats are 5 Strength, 2 Agility, 0 Intelligence; 5 Fight, 2 Stealth, 0 Magic.  Jeff's stats are 3 Strength, 4 Agility, 0 Intelligence; 3 Fight, 4 Stealth, 0 Magic.  Sam's stats are 2 Strength, 1 Agility, 4 Intelligence; 1 Fight, 1 Stealth, 5 Magic.  When a player tries to do an action, they roll the number of dice equal to their skill and try to get a 5 or 6.  Attacking does one damage, but magic can do one point of damage for each success.  They can also sneak by monsters to get the key to a door or what have you.  The problem with this system is it seems to enforce a gamist perspective, but whatever.  It's also a really narrow perspective for an RPG, but that seems fine for an introductory game.

[Callan S.]

Hi Xenoheart,

I think to a strong degree roleplay is about being interested in encountering the artistic contributions of others.

If you'd agree it is, are they interested in that? If so, to what degree are they interested? What's your estimation?

Personally rather than a question of levels and dice and rules mastery, I think the design problem is about making sure the artistic contributions roughly match the (estimated) levels of interest. Making sure artistic contributions actually happen, but at the same time making sure someone doesn't just get wrapped up in their fantasy and can go on for as long as they want. Beyond gamist stuff, levels and dice often do manage stuff like this.

I'll add my idea on getting contributions to happen in the first place. Something I like is that a person gets a mechanical bonus during a test or whatever, for making any contribution at all. As long as they talk, they get a bonus. Perhaps if the GM likes it/thinks it suits the imagined situation, they get a second bonus on top. But the benefit here is that making a contribution is rewarded, rather than just making contributions that fit the imagined space. [soapbox]I think in roleplay culture for years there's been almost a disrespect for making an artistic contribution at all. The only thing that's gotten respect are contributions that fit the imagined space.[/soapbox]