[Ferals] A full "Fixform" Streed Rpg

[Simon C]

Hi Catelf,

Do you have a real name I can use?

Why are the rules you've written like this, and not some other way? Why are these the best rules to use for this game?

[Catelf]

I use my actual name towards people whom i feel for, or who has earned it, but if you want to call me something at least a little less "official" than "Catelf", then it's ok with Cat or Katie.
.........................
I have a past of Basic Roleplay- and Palladium-variants, during a time of no one to play with.
I managed to try a few different Systems, though, but always thought "Wtf?" during Character Creation.
Then came White Wolf (and World of Darkness), and i thought "i Understand This!" and "Lovely!"

By then, i had also played some Miniature Games, but longed back to the First Miniature Game i played, only for it's quick Combat resolutions: One Die Roll for each Attack, not two nor three, nor more. (By the way, it was the Original Space Hulk, with Both Expansions!)

Due to this longing, more or less, i started to work on a Single Combat System, that could also accommodate for Roleplaying.
WoD("old"), offered a nice way: Rank a few Skills at 1-5,but when it is needed, roll D6 to see if it succeed, or not, rather than Roll as many dice and check Successes.
Other Games inspired me to use different Die for Alternate Combat Skills, like The Great Rail Wars(Deadlands Mini).

When i finally could let other play the miniature Game, or World of Darkness-adaptions of that kind, i virtually got three main responses:
One: Pointed out some glitches i've since corrected (i think...).
Two: Hardcore 40K-players, thought that "You Must have To Hit, Wound, and Save, seperately".
Three: The rest thought it went Smooth, Rpg- and Miniature Players alike.
Then, The Streed(R)System was truly proven as a good, and valid, foundation.
But, i want it to be playtested even more, especially the "Animal Traits" part, since those really is a bit on the experimental side.

Was these answers enough?

[Simon C]

Hi Katie,

That doesn't really answer my questions, I'm afraid.

What I'm trying to get at is the intent of your design.  What you're trying to achieve with this game.  From your post, all I get is "I wanted a game with only one attack roll".

Let me try asking the question in a different way:

When you were were writing your game, I imagine you came across situations where you had to choose between two different ideas for how something would work in your game.  For example, in character creation, you get a certain number of points to build your character.  How do you decide which rules to choose? How do you decide that you get this number of points and not another number? Why does "Pointy Ears" give you +2 and not +3? What is the basis on which you make these decisions?

[Catelf]

Simon:
It obiously do help to rephrase both Questions and Answers, because, i thought that i'd already awsered everything .... and, in a way, i'd say i have.The Intent of the Design was, and IS, to have as simply understood, and fastplayed Fixform mechanisms as possible, without having to exclude the myriad ways thar obviously exist for "spicing up" an Rpg(Magic, Mutants,Combat Moves...)

But, a more detailed question requires a more detailed awnser, so:
Yes, i have tried other Systems, mainly variations of "Basic Roleplaying"(or 3D6 for Main Attributes), i even had a go at Palladium Books, since i had Heroes Unlimited & TMNT(&os)! I almost ran into a brick wall(metaphorically, of course): It didn't seem possible to make the really fast-paced System that i wanted.

The Attribute Points comes from the WoD System: The Value of "2" in each Attribute is the said "Normal Average" for a Human. If you count the Points, it leads to an average of 2 in half the Attributes, and 3 in the rest, which is a little better than the average, but not much. Old WoD had far more, but i wanted the Game to work for regular humans, and not just superpowered beings.

"Pointy Ears" give +2, Currently, and not +3, because i'm having/planning Rules for Traits (not yet written down here)that also Regular Humans can have, without seeming less Human, like Acute Hearing of +1, or +2. I thought that once those are introduced, some with Pointy Ears will take this as well, bringing their Hearing up to most probarbly, Trice the time of an average human, ot even more, if the senses Attribute is heightened over 3!I thought that was... quite enough.

But, i'm unsure whether i've still awnsered you or not, You maybe want to know the broader way of how i make decisions....?
Ok: I usually work from Standards i noticed within White Wolf's Games, and then tweak them into my own interpretations. Otherwise, it is a case of "Gut Feel" and really simple math.
How's that for an awnser?

[Simon C]

You're getting it in the last bit: "I usually work from Standards i noticed within White Wolf's Games, and then tweak them into my own interpretations. Otherwise, it is a case of "Gut Feel" and really simple math."

Tell me more about these standards, this "gut feel" and what you're doing with your simple math.

I'm not just asking because I like to be difficult.  There's no objectively "good" rpg.  I can't tell you whether your rules are good or bad until I know what you're trying to achieve with them - I need to know what you think is a good rpg.  Then I can tell you whether these rules are going to work for you.

[Catelf]

Part of me wants to scream. I am about an inch from giving up on this "Forge" entirely.....

Simon C, I believe that you don't want to be difficult, but it is obvious that you have misunderstood one fundamental part:
I Know These Rules Works, Point.

What i want, no, need, is advices on how to shape the Presentation of the Rules(so they get clearer, easier understandable), and people to actually Playtest them, and, if possible, any other additions to the Core rules that i have, or may have, to then tell me what works well, and what does not! And, if they work "not good" or not at all, then advices on how to correct them!

I do not need nor want people telling me if it'll "work for me", as i've alreaydy said(written), THIS IS NOT FIRST THOUGHTS!!!

I also clearly disagree on there not being any "Good" Rpg:
I considers Rpg's with cumbersume Rules systems, like the classic Palladium and maybe, sadly, still, DnD, to be "far from as good" as Games that really is easy to understand, and possibly even easier Character Generation, like Wod(old, mainly, and most Freeform Games, and that is a Diplomatic way of putting it!
When the Rules are in the way of understanding the Rules themselves, i truly can´'t call them "good games". Can you? Really?
Or do you mean that all Rpg's is objectively "Bad"?
*Sigh*
Is Anyone here interested in PLAYTESTING Ferals?

[Vulpinoid]

Catelf,

I don;t thinl anyone around here is deliberately trying to throw curveballs at you, we're just interested in why you've made certain choices?...and why you thought coming to the Forge would be a valuable step in the development of your game?

Some of your statements are confusing and self contradictory...

I Know These Rules Works, Point.

Followed by...

...then tell me what works well, and what does not!

If you know what works for you, why do you want us to turn the rule into something you didn't want?

Most of the questions I've seen heading in your direction are simply attempts to find out what you're design intentions were. Once you answer them honestly, we'll be able to help you honestly. If you get defensive, we'll just ask..."Why?"

As for your last question (about people playtesting your game), there are dozens of designers here all struggling to get their own designs playtested some of whom have struggled to get their games accepted after being here a year or more...why should we look at your game ahead of those people who've been polite and courteous, those people who've asked the right questions and have seriously considered the words of others?

If you want to give up on thew Forge, you'll lose a valuable resource. Plenty of the people around here are successful game designers, and most of the others have huge enthusiasm for the hobby. Many of the people here have a huge wealth of experience to share with you.

With that in mind, lets try this from a different tactic...two quick inoffensive questions that might help me work out a good way to help you...

1) What do you mean when you call the game a "Fixform"?
2) What is "Streed"?

V

[Catelf]

Hi, Vulpinoid.
(Reply part 1)
No, i didn'nt think of curveballs, i thought more of constant misunderstanding, ignorance, and people being busy with their own projects.

I really don't mind telling why i've made specific choises, but Simon followed it up with

...I need to know what you think is a good rpg.  Then I can tell you whether these rules are going to work for you.

And ..... i obviously have to detail the answer, to explain the two qotes from me...:
The "Streed Rpg System" is the Core Rules. They incude the Skill Resolution, the Combat Resolution, and currently the Character Generation up to, and Including, Some of the Merits.
These Rules, I do Know Work.

However, The Core Rules is also intended to include the other Merits, and a more extensive Equipment List.
These are not as well tried out(The Weapons might be, but not the "Merit: Equipment" that handles their Access).
Ferals also includes "Animal Traits", and those are really not tried out at all, at least not in this variant.
Those are the ones that is the most in need of playtest, to see if they works as intended, or not.

They should work enough to try them out, though, and if it was only up to ME, i know they'd work.
Therefor, my two seeming different answers.
Question is, do the Rules work as intended for others, as well?
...I'll make a second Reply, real soon......

[Catelf]

(Reply part 2)
There is obviously some misunderstanding going on, but the communication that we're possibly doing now, should help remove some of the worst, at least....

I have been answering ALL your questions honestly. ALL of them.
You obviously didn't Understand My answers, and i probarbly Misunderstood Your questions: it took a rephrasing by Simon to make me understand what he Truly were after, after all!

...there are dozens of designers here all struggling to get their own designs playtested some of whom have struggled to get their games accepted after being here a year or more...why should we look at your game ahead of those people who've been polite and courteous, those people who've asked the right questions and have seriously considered the words of others?

My foolishness, i thought many of those already had been helped, especially if they'd done everything Right, as you describe it.
Also, how am i supposed to know what is the "Right questions to ask"?

Oh, and your first question: I read an intervju with a "Jonathan Tweet", and his advice for gamecreators was .... the Forge.
And, if it might still prove itself as a valuable resource to Me.
However, since you've proven reasonable to me(and i hope i have to you), you've currently got me "hanging" for i while more.
I wouln't have ditched it totally anyway, i do my best to help others where i can: I am an enthusiast myself, but if i don't understand, i can't help.    .......(I see a Pattern here)....
And now to your two last ones:
(It is a good idea, by the way, it may even work, ocasionally.)
1)   I call it "Fixform" since it isn't Freeform(despite it being "short").
2)  "Streed" is really My Main Rules for Miniature Gaming,
     "Streed Rpg" is a general description for any Rpgs that has the "Streed Rpg System" as it's Core Rules.
     "Streed Rpg System" is what is explained in several ways, above.
(*phew*)
Did that explain it?

[Simon C]

I'm going to give this one more go.  Katie, if this is still not helpful to you after this post, that's cool.  Hopefully someone else can be more help.

You say:

What i want, no, need, is advices on how to shape the Presentation of the Rules(so they get clearer, easier understandable), and people to actually Playtest them, and, if possible, any other additions to the Core rules that i have, or may have, to then tell me what works well, and what does not! And, if they work "not good" or not at all, then advices on how to correct them!

You want to identify rules that work "not good" or not at all, and you want advice on how to correct them.  Excellent! That's what playtesting is for.  Here's the problem:

One person's "good" is different from another.  I like games with a strong thematic component and unusual resolution systems.  If I were to give you advice on how to make the game "good" for me, it wouldn't be much like the game you started with, and chances are you wouldn't like it very much.  Similarly, if Vulpinoid tells you how to make the game good for him, you'll get a different game again.  People like different things in games. 

People also like different games for different reasons.  I like Dogs in the Vineyard, and I like The Mountain Witch.  They're very different games, but they're both good.  They're good at different things.  If you're trying to make Dogs in the Vineyard, and I'm telling you how to make it more like The Mountain Witch, we're going to have problems.

So.  What kind of game are you trying to make? What do you like about it? What are the fun bits? When you playtested the game, what was fun, and what wasn't? Tell me what you're trying to achieve, and I can help you get there.

[dindenver]

Cat,
  Being new to the Forge is hard. People will ask you to explain things that you have internalized, but never expressed (like what do you want the players to experience when they play the game). No one else will ask you these kinds of questions. It's awesome, but frustrating because in most people's minds, this is a given. But in reality, a game like Call of Cthulu will give the player a different feeling than a game like Paranoia. Yet, subjectively, they are similar games. They are both about mystery, both about your characters acting insane and dying. Yet, a player who likes one, may not like the other, because the feeling you get when you play them is very different, right?

  OK, one thing that bothers me about your game is the math. I know the system works "as is" but I think as you add more things to it, you will find that this scale of numbers are not friendly to multiple modifiers.. Maybe you can get around it by using a stacking rule. Maybe only one trait or merit can generate a bonus on one roll, ever. Two examples:
1) You and I made average characters, they have a STR and Body of 3. I have bare hands (and a Brawl of 2), you have a leather jacket. In order for me to wound you, I need to roll a 5 or 6 on 1d6. In order for me to defeat you, I have to attack you an AVERAGE of 9 times. I might be able to take you out in three, but that is not very likely (a little under 4%). If you take the jacket off, I only need to roll 4 or higher. An average of 5 attacks take you out and I might be able to do it in two (a little less than 3% likely). The difference is one point between our characters (1 armor on the jacket).
2) You and I made average characters, they have a STR and Body of 3. I have a karbine (and a Firearms of 2), you have a heavy leather jacket. In order for me to wound you, I need to roll a 7 or 8 on 1d8. In order for me to defeat you, I have to attack you an AVERAGE of 12 times. I might be able to take you out in three, but that is not very likely (a little under 4%). If you take the jacket off, I only need to roll 4 or higher. An average of 3 attacks take you out and I might be able to do it in two (a little more than 14% likely). The difference is two points between our characters (4 if you take off the jacket).

  Also, your writing is improving from previous posts. I noticed you added (or revealed for the first time) the terror rules. From what I can tell, the campaign doesn't look like it is centered around terror. It seems to mostly be about survival and thriving in a sort of cyberpunk atmosphere. Based on that I would expect more of a ruthlessness stat or some kind of a humanity stat. Is there some sort of supernatural element to Ferals that you just haven't revealed so far?

[Catelf]

First, Simon, i'm glad i didn't "scare you off", or such. You was, after all, the one one who made me understand what you truly meant, and with this post, you cleared up the (now obvious) misunderstanding as well. Thank you.

The Problem.... i dare say that is a case of preferences, rather than "Good", i agree there(and it was That you meant before).
However, i've gotten the impression that "Dogs..." and probarbly the "Mountain Witch" is fairly "Short" or one could say "with Concentrated Rules sections" (instead), mainly designed for those games only. Am i right?
That would make them "Good" as far as i see it, since they are also easy to understand.
However, they would not be proper, not correct, for what i'm aiming for.

I have LOTS of ideas, so just aiming for One Game would be impossible to me, but i AM clearly aiming for a single Game System, that i more or less already have.
You could compare the idea to World of Darkness, Palladium(especially due to Rifts), or Tri-stat. (But easier to understand, & so on...)
Now, i'll try to answer your probarbly harder questions:

* I'm Really trying to make several games, that is clearly combinable with each other, due to the common Core Rules.
* I like... the combinability, and the fastpaced rules. While Playing, the quick rules are the most noticed feature.
And that is despite it being Fixform, and not Freeform.
* The fun bits.... is virtually the same as what i like about it, above. Or are you asking if it is the Genre i like?
* When it was Tested (it was a few years ago, now), i found all of it fun, and it did seem the others enjoyed it as well, but the ones more bright-minded pointed out problems with the probabilities in a "Perfect Roll" mechanics i had, as well as in the earlier rules for claws.
Those rules had been changed, or removed, since then, and i think it should work now.
* What i am trying to achive.... To sum it up, ar least 3.4 Games, with full compatibility, and Fast (& so on...) Rules, despite its "Fixform".

[Catelf]

Now to You, dindenver.
You seem to understand my view well.
Well, i intend to keep "further Modifiers" to a minimum, and if the amount of Modifiers would get higher than 2 different, it is probarbly a specific Activated Power in effect, possibly deserving both a slow down in speed, as well as being slightly cumbersome, Ruleswise.

I have a slight problem with "Number & Probabiliy-crunching", but i find no problems with your results.... But i thought i had written "Heavy Leather Coat" (not "Jacket"). I Think what you are saying, is that it is very deadly rules, unless one get some Armor, ....is that it? If so, it's completely within what i try to make.
The Damage & Armor Values might need some tweaking, though.

Yes, the Terror Rules...  The Original work on the game Ferals, really described Five Main Corporations, of which Three were available for Player Characters, each with their specialties: Shapeshifting, Bionics, and.... a wierd mishmash of "Good" and "Bad".
However, the two others, were said to create Fomor Monstrosities, and Demons, respectively, instead.
Maybe i unconsiously wanted a remainder of that...?

However, that is just the Game "Ferals", which i Really only pieced together from "Core+(some)Animal Traits", in order to present something more coherent than in my earlier Threads/Topics.
It has "Grown on me" a bit, though, already
The other games i have planned, and would really like to do, has names like "Animakin", "Roxic", "Alleyways", and "Eerie".....But i have problems deciding on which one, since i Like them All as much, and seem to hav problems with focussing my attention to one, or the other.
As an example, the Terror Rules is really Intended for Eerie and Alleyways, while Animal Traits is mainly from Animakin, but also occurs in the other games, more or less.

[Catelf]

Um... the Mail i got was from you, dindenver, hm?
I tried to Reply, but i'm unsure wether it got through...at all.. so here comes a shortened version:

Thank you, i really doesnt look at my hotmail much, i saw this just.
Personally, i belive in Reasoning, communication, even when the topic gets "heated", becase, if one do so, one might at least end up agreeing about disagreeing, and cool it down in that way.
But, really, had the game i wanted to play, and GM, already existed, and been available to me, i wouldn't "have" to make it.
That is the real, simple, answer, and i have been thinking critically, often.
....Thinking of the other thing, "what do you want players to feel..."
Many players are unused to Freeform, with my Games, they'll get close to the simplicity of Freeform, and the "safety"(what they are used to)of Fixform!

And as i noted in my reply(ies) in the thread, i didn't mean One Good System, but that a System is Good if it works well and easy, and...."not" if it doesn't.
And i'm not counting in personal preferences(i think...) into this.
             Catelf.

[Catelf]

This is in two parts: A comment to what recently transpired in this thread, and a cosideration to change a Mechanism i hadn't yet mentioned, Divided by a quote i daresay fits both parts, in a way.

I just read a Topic/Thread in First Thoughts, by ... Morgan Coldsoul, i think the name was, about Dragon Scroll.
I don't exactly fancy his Rules for games, but i understood him all the way, when it came to "the purpose of his game"!
At the same time, i truly got the impression that most of the others didn't, including Ron Edwards, who is a Moderator here, and has written many important essays on Roleplaying Games!
There is obviously a kind of language barrier here, and not just "internalised questions":
Sometimes answers just are that simple....

In that thread, i also came across a quote:

A guy called Mike Holmes said "Write rules that deal with what's important in your game and gloss the rest." To me that's gold.

I Totally agree.

However, the thread also started to make me wonder: I had intended to use more or less the same XP Mechanics as WoD, but ..... maybe a different kind of Learning Mechanics would be more ... appropriate .......
Note this:
It would have to be fitting, not just Ferals, but also the Core, that is, ALL games i'm having ideas for, within the "Streed Rpg Family", no matter if they're Action, Horror, Cyberpunk, or Western.
I'm truly curious of what you will suggest.... If you will, that is.