Flawless victory! (new RPG: Final Stand)

[Tim Denee]

Finally (hah) finished, my martial arty kung-fuey tekkeny RPG.

Go put on the Mortal Kombat theme song and give it a read.

Final Stand

It's taken me an inordinate amount of time to get typed out, but now it's finished (kind of). I'd like to flesh it out a lot; full descripition of the styles, forms, and special techniques, more meat to the structure section, more in the "Final Thoughts and Useful Things" section. It also needs a lot of playtesting, but gimme a break; I've only just pdf'd the damn thing.

Phew. I love that "finally finished the mutha" buzz. Like when you finish an essay, but oh-so-much better.

Edit: I completely forgot to say this in the document, somehow: it uses six-sided dice.

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Tim,

Don't forget to put the link into the Resource Library, OK?

I got the file, and I'll be perusing it sooner or later. At first glance, I'm thinkin' I'd like a tad less on the "how to play your character" (which borders on intrusive; if I'm to play in this setting/genre, I know what the various "types" are like already), and a bit more in terms of funky-duty stuff to do in combat, specifically surprising applications of simple rules. But that's not real feedback; I gotta read it and run a couple Cranked thump-fests first. Be assured that I love this stuff and have always wanted an RPG that does it fun, fast, and colorful.

Congrats on Finishing the Thing, or this stage of it, anyway.

Best,
Ron

[Bailywolf]

I just downloaded this thing.  

It is cool as shit.


Looks like a blast to play and run...it has all my requirements for a good martial arts action game- a solid mook rule; fast and loose play; intresting and fun die mechanics; and a fast and dirty attitude.  

My initial impression leads me to this it will work quite well at simulating the wacky coreography of everything from a bone-crunching 70's Sonny Chiba smack fest to a dramatic wire-opera like Crouching Tiger.  

The reward mechanics seem to pay for the right kinds of behaviors- crushing your oponents, dramatic flair, genera-enforcing descriptions (I LOVE massive porperty damage!), and genera-apropriate strategies and actions.  

I'll give it a good working over this weekend...but Ron is dead on- the only real tell for a game is play and revsion from playtest results.

I personaly found the roles quite neat...and easy to adapt to any particular flavor of game...an Aristocrat could just as easily be a the son of a corporate president or political figure...  They struck me as less intrusive role playing guides, and more as springboards from which to bounce a good character.  

Some useful alterations to format and such I can suggest now.  Table lisiting all the techniques and move costs and roll difficulties would be useful- preferably with a small enough font to fit it onto a single page for quick reference.  

A character sheet should also include some quick reference info to keep a fight as fast as possible.  

As for non-combat actions... if each Stereotype, Style and Form included a block describing the kinds of non-combat Skills they include (or the kinds of skills someone who studies them might be likely to know) it will help provide a guide when judging such things... Your example of the Shadow Cobra warrior makes sense... I would just like a better idea of what my character can do than "its up to the GM"...

Perhaps, if one of a character's three major elements (Stereotype, Style, and Form) provides for the kind of action they want to take, they can describe a Basic Success, if two provide for the skill, a Full Success, and if all three cover the intended action, a Superlative success.  For example:

Shadow Cobra Mysterious Stranger:  All three elements cover sneaking over a wall.  a Superlative success.  He gets over, is unseen, and makes no noise.

Iron Crane Reformed Villian:  Only two really apply (the crane and the villian).  A Full success.  He gets over and is unseen, but makes some noise.

Stone Tiger Towering Ox:  Only one applies (and only just)- basicly using Towering Ox to haul his huge ass over the wall with brute strength.  A Basic success.  He gets over, but not quietly and he'll be seen.

Drunken Panda Street Bum:  He's got nothing.  He can't really climb with Drunken (or at least shouldn't try) and Panda form isn't known for its nimble acrobatics... and Street Bum...the less said.  He could get it, however, if he wanders up to the front gates pretending to be a drunken (well, more drunken) old begger, and so entertain the guards with his bumbling and crazy stories, that he gets the drop on them and takes them out.

Just my preference.  As a player it would make me more comfortable to have my capacities better spelled out.  As a GM I'd like to be able to seem less arbitrary to my players when judging their chosen actions.



Also, as an aside, this could make a very nice Chambara samuri and swords dueling game in the vein of Zatoichi and Lone Wolf and Cub.  Slash, Trusth, and Chop dice perhaps...

I can also see using the same core mechanics you have here for a game of magical dueling and outrageous magical action... roll your Conjure, Alter, and Invoke dice... groovy.



Anyhow, this looks like a great start to a fantastic game.  Good work.

[Rich Forest]

Hi Tim,

This is just the kind of game I love to see, being that I'm a verified Street Fighter (yes, both the video game and the RPG) nut.  Kudos, 'cause you did a great job.  

In no particular order, here's the stuff I noticed or had questions about.

I like the Style + Art = Way thing.  It looks like it'll allow for neat fun in creating a character's martial art,  and it nicely sidesteps anyone getting any misconceptions about the styles emulating real world martial arts.  Instead, it says, "These martial arts should have cool sounding names, and that's what really matters."  I like it.  

What about making the stereotypes more customizable as well?  When I first read them over, I kept thinking, "yeah, this does fit the 'towering ox,' but I can also think of other quirks that might also fit a towering ox. Say, I like the 'looming presence' quirk, but I don't want my towering ox to be a 'goof.'  I see him as more of a guy who gets enraged," or something like that.  So could there be a list of 3-5 possible quirks for each stereotype, and the player chooses two for his character?

Here's a note from my inner gamist:

In the game text, you wrote:

Again, just go with what you like the sound of; 'shadow cobra' or whatever. Don't read the specifics of every style and form and choose the most lethal combination. You'll have more fun choosing with gut instinct.

Well, the game does reward gamist decision making, doesn't it?  'Cause my inner gamist wants to know how these work before I choose them.  Maybe I wouldn't "have more fun" just choosing.  I'm just thinking these lines are kind of in conflict with the some of the gamist elements of the combat and resolution.  To me this says, you get Standing partially by being effective in combat, but You're not supposed to try to make a character who'll be effective in combat.  I don't know... it just seems like it's doing good gamist stuff, but then it's kind of looking down on gamist decision making in character creation.

Inner Peace is interesting, especially when I see the Reformed Villain getting it for acting true to his villainous nature.  Just some musings, but what about a competing force like "Inner Rage," or some such thing?  You could build up one or the other, or both, with various decisions.  I'm just thinking of the whole satsui no hadou thing in the Street Fighter games and anime.  Gouki definitely did not go the way of Inner Peace, and there's the whole, "Evil Ryu," etc. character type that shows up in a variety of fighting games.  

In the game text, you wrote:

power up
Before rolling your action dice at the beginning of a bout, you can power up. For each energy point you burn, you can allocate 2 extra, temporary (for this bout only), action dice where ever you wish. This is accompanied by you powering up (much like energy boost above).

Am I reading this wrong, or couldn't I just blow a ton of Energy on a Power Up at the beginning of the bout and then just waste my opponent before he got the chance to hit me?  There doesn't seem to be a limit on the amount you can blow to pump yourself up, and I haven't tried it, but it seems like the cost-benefit ratio would make it appealing to do this.  

A "bout" is basically an RPG combat round, right?  Round is also a fighting term.  Any reason for using "bout?"  It seems so much more final, and it's just one more term for the reader to have to figure out.  Personal preference, probably, but I tend to like the old standby terminology: it lets the experienced RPG reader just pick up a game and go.  And the term "round" really is appropriate to fighting.  Don't a lot of fighting games actually use the term?  I just know Street Fighter does.  Bout seems like the whole fight to me.  Not a big deal, of course.

I see how the Quirks give characters back Inner Peace.  What about the methods listed under Inner Peace?  How are they related to the Quirks, if at all?  I understand that I can't use any one of them more than x times per game, as listed, but... could I just do all of them the maximum number of times per game?  If so, as a player who wants to win fights and standing, I might try doing all of them as many times per game as allowed.  Of course, maybe that's what you're going for.  It might not be as appropriate to a quiet volume, however.

On page 10 it says, "each stereotype has two a description and two quirks." Actually, it looks like each one has a description, two quirks, and an ability.  And in some of the Stereotype descriptions, they are organized as "quirk, quirk, ability." But in others, they are organized "quirk, ability, quirk."  And in others yet, they're organized "ability, quirk, quirk."  It's just an organizational thing, but as a reader, I'd like to see them listed consistently in each stereotype.  

I like choosing the doom.  I like the tie-ins.  Along these same lines, I think that if the players and GM are interested in holding lots of martial arts tournaments during adventures, it would be interesting to have them also decide what role tournaments will play related to the doom and/or the tie-ins.  

Another clarity note: the Rewards section is a little bit unclear in a couple places.  When I read it, it seemed to imply that you get the rewards only at the end of the adventure, but then it also seemed to imply that you get them at the end of a level.  I'm interpreting this to mean at the end of the last level of the adventure, but I'm not sure if the text says that consistently.  

Bailywolf already covered the next main point I wanted to make, so I'll second what he said.  I'm not so keen on the "outside of fighting, it's up to the GM" part either.  I think it needs more guidelines.  I like Bailywolf's solution.

On a related note, I think the game could use a "Resolution" or "Mechanics" section, even it it's a short one, somewhere near the front.  As it's currently organized, the information about how actions are resolved kind of trickles in.  Even the stuff about the GM deciding what the characters can do doesn't appear until somewhere in the adventure creation guidelines.  Also, a "Resolution" or "Mechanics" section would be the place to get a mention in of the use of the d6.

I like the advice about letting players run NPC opponents.  In my experience, this also leads to the PCs losing more battles than when the GM is running all the opposition.  Whenever players run NPC opponents in our Street Fighter game, they really go for the kill with a passion to win that I just don't have when I'm running the NPCs as a GM.

Finally, I've always wanted to run a game with the look and feel of Power Stone.  I think this game would be great for that.

Rich

[Tim Denee]

Thanks for the feedback fellas (man, I love the Forge)

Ron,

When you say, "less on the 'how to play your character'", do you mean the stereotype descriptions, or something else?
If you are talking about stereotypes, I'm inclined to leave them as is. At this level of description, you can pick one up simply by the name and run it without a thought, or you can easily mould and shape the stereotype to your own vision.

"a bit more in terms of funky-duty stuff to do in combat, specifically surprising applications of simple rules" - do you mean more examples of how to use the rules in funky-duty ways, or more minor add-on rules for funky-duty stuff? The former, sure. The latter, I'm not so keen on. Maybe a little.


Bailywolf,

An appendix? Sure. I'd also like a one page reference sheet of all the uses of inner peace and energy, and all the methods by which to gain inner peace (with little tick boxes next to them so players can keep track of how many times they've used each one)

The non-combat action stuff is a stroke of genius. That's going right in. Basically, it's the same idea though: any obstacle can be overcome, but different combination of style/form/stereotype will overcome the same obstacle in different ways.


Rich,

You're right (on a number of things, but I'll go down the list); the game should say that stereotype quirks are customizable.  I see no reason why there needs to be a list of 3-5 to choose from though; just change the stereotype as much as you want (or not at all). No matter what the quirk is, it nets the same inner peace, so... there's no chance of abuse there. Although, the GM would have to be careful no-one made (in effect) a perfect hero stereotype.

The note about choosing based on cool names: yep, that was a cop-out. I knew as soon as I'd written it, it didn't belong. I'll get rid of it in the next draft.

Inner Rage vs Inner Peace: sounds like its getting a little complicated for my tastes; I'm more inclined to simply let a player call his Inner Peace by the name Inner Rage.

Yes, I suppose one could absolutely waste someone by fully powering up. Of course, if by some stroke of luck they survived, they'd only have to land one punch... In any case, I'll change this so that you can only burn 2 energy in this way per bout (so a maximum of 4 extra actions).

Speaking of bouts, yes, you're right. But I can't really be bothered changing it; besides, I kind of like the word. Unless there are other people this bothers, I'll leave it in.

Quirks are related to inner peace methods in that they're both strictly non-mechanical ways of gaining the same mechical reward (Inner Peace). Quirks are more for Fluff, methods are more for Levels.
Yes, you might as well try doing them as many times per game as allowed (that was intentional; makes the fights more interesting). I don't reaaalllly see how it's inappropriate for a quiet volume setting; quiet is only semi-realistic, after all.

Rewards: originally, there were rewards for every level. I changed to every session because I realized that otherwise players would be ridiculously powerful ridiculously fast. So yes, rewards at the end of the session. The ambiguity is there because when I didn't do a very good job of changing every mention of 'level' to 'session'
Also, rewards at the end of the session make the players more eager to have the next session, to play around with their new toys. It's a hook.

I'll put a short "basic resolution" section after the character section (before combat). Is there anything to put in it aside from non-combat resolution as outlined by Bailywolf? I can't really explain combat resolution without a full combat section...

[Rich Forest]

I'm glad some of the comments were helpful.  

I'm thinking about the "basic resolution" section, and you're right: it could be pretty short.  All it would have to do is: 1) explain how non-combat actions work; 2) talk about die rolling conventions (Combat uses d6 dice pools vs. a target number set by the kind of attack, and you roll it all up then assign the dice as you want.).  

That's basically all you'd need, as far as I can see.  Combat and the type of die, etc. would basically be included to give the reader a general standpoint for understanding the specifics later.  While #1 is actually giving the rules, #2 is working more as a textual device.  It's kind of an "abstract" of combat, so the reader has an easier time learning how combat works when he or she gets there.  

Rich

[Bailywolf]

Just a couple of quick second-though questions.

Why "inner peace?"  it seems a bit antithetical to this sort of thing (considering the highly kinetic cinema and video-game reference material)... why not go with the generic "Chi" which is as familiar and comfortable to a martial arts gamer as "Strength" to a D&D'er?  Then you could define your personal path to Chi... the Mystic finds a place of tranquility within... the Towering Ox taps his vast stores of vitality and rage... the Homeless Bum uses his undaunted will to survive... its all just Chi... Inner Peace seems to carry a value judgement with it.

What about wuxia-style action with weapon styles?  If I want Crouching Tiger, I need blades...

[Valamir]

You know.  It wouldn't take alot of effort to have these rules cover swashbuckling and derring do also...like 7th Sea...only fun.

[Kenway]

Just downloaded it.  Looks pretty amazing so far.
Suggestions:
-Rules for being blind a la Zatoichi.  Tip o' the hat to Bailywolf for mentioning "Chambara."  It's been years since I last heard that term.
-Rules for being one-armed, becoming one-armed, etc.  As the movies go, when you lose use of a limb you often have to develop a new style (no kidding) and often become a more vicious fighter.
-If you're going to have the Wuxia genre covered, you'll probably want accomodate the fact that the fighters spend 90% of their time in the air.  The duration of a single jump can be equivalent to 1 "bout."

[Bailywolf]

Keenway hits some good points... but you could cover Blindness and Missing Limbs by simply allowing additional Styles to be added to your Way...

Zatoichi
Stereotype: Wandering Gangster
Style:  Blind
Second Style:  Lightning
Form: Sword

Way: Blind Lightning Sword

Blind grants non-combat proficiency with your other senses- doing things like hearing which side a coin comes up on.  It also allows you to fight in any kind of visual condition w/o penalty.  Zatoichi has also shown that a Blind way is best used when reacting to an attack... you can't attack unless you are first attacked yourself (some rules here allowing a Blind style fighter to sieze the Attacker position after being attacked regardless of total moves etc.).  

One Arm could also be a style...

One Arm Drunken Panda Bamboo Tearing Swipe!  

Blind Lightning Sword Unseen Slash!

[Tim Denee]

Inner Peace was kind of an ironic joke. I might change it to Chi though. But chi seems so... mundane. Maybe Fire? Inner Fire? Power? Inner Power?

No eyes, One arm: it seems to me that these are purely cosmetic; the blind man you've presented is as functional as a person with sight, and the person with one arm might fight differently, but he fights just as well.

I'm not very familiar (at all)  with Chambara, but if you guys want to hash out some rule modifications for it, go nuts. Likewise if someone wants to put together swashbuckling rules, magic combat rules, or whatnot. I'd imagine, as y'all said, it wouldn't take a lot of work.

Anyone got any comments on the core fighting system?

[Tim Denee]

I was just making some changes to the game (changing Inner Peace to Chi, changing bouts to rounds). I was also putting in the non-combat resolution rules. I've added almost ad-verbatim what Bailywolf said.

However: do you think each style, form, and stereotype needs its own "style" description; a wee bit of text describing how they overcome obstacles? Or do you think it's pretty obvious what the styles, forms, and stereotypes can and can't do outside of combat? As Ron said, I've already said a lot about how to play these characters, stuff people know anyway; I'm hesitant to add more.

[Mike Holmes]

I liked "Inner Peace". I thgought it was brilliantly ironic.

Mike

[Kenway]

I have some questions about "Major Fights."
Should the first PC have a reasonable chance at winning?  Or should a GM plan for the last PC being able to win?  How should the Boss stats be determined?
I was thinking maybe the PCs should be allowed to "stack" together sort of like how multiple weak Mooks are able to in your MO,FC rules.

[Kenway]

[multiple post]