Starting Designs for a Fantasy (aD&D-like) RPG - stuck already

[Locke]

- 3rd edition to pathfinder have been seen as decent systems.  what about them do you not like?
- I, as well, don't like d20 rolling but why don't you?
- The way you describe feats they CAN be min/maxing or not depending on how you design the feats.  Image eating really bad ice cream.  Now image someone saying, "wow this ice cream stuff sucks, they should make some ice cream that tastes good!"  its the same for feats.  They don't HAVE to be anything and in DnD really just add flavor.  But remember there are two types of feats: class feats and general feats and you can't min/max class feats as they are assigned by class and designed.

[Callan S.]

Guys, your at the forge - this is a place where instead of battling the terrible min maxing, it's recognised as gamist play (though it can actually be part of nar and sim, when dedicated to those purposes).

You don't battle min maxing - someone who wants gamism, at least at that moment, doesn't want what you want. You don't fight min maxing - you play with people who want the same game as you.

Rules that are min maxable don't exactly force players to min max them...they want to do it. It's what they find fun. They don't, currently, match what you want to do.

[Necromantis]

alright... where was I.

I recall someone (Locke) asking the question "whats the difference between Prowess and Precision?
Thats a bit harder to answer than I expected. Prowess is almost a combination of other things. But I worked that around in my head a bit today at work and couldn't talk myself into getting rid of it or having it be the average of other abilities. (wisdom and strength and ??instincts??) So I guess its sort of an innate ability to attack... its not defensive. If anything I think Might and Precision are more interchangeable. Think Bruce Lee.. Not a ton of might but so precise he could knock the heck out of you. Precision of course meaning (in my mind) the ability to tell you body to do something and being able to do it as commanded. a perfect score in Precision would be that a Monk (with his hands or staff) or a fighter (with his sword/bow) could place his shot how he wants it.
I thought about dropping Might because of this but I realized that its just as necessary but in a different way.

But Locke I do agree with your Idea. Start elsewhere and deductively find what works. I might try that.
Also Excalibur might have given a better Idea than he (possibly she) thinks.
Or at least I have never thought about Piety in this way.
Maybe there is a way to make it some sort of minor ability.
If I use the 3d6 method (I am fond of it) but them have minor stats that apply only to certain classes..
anyone have anything like that?

Having played D&D and some of the other games I mentioned earlier I believe that there are empty stats
Stats that really don't do much as far as gaming goes but they are needed anyway. My thought is (great another goal)
To minimize that also. I'll give an example
Now let not get crazy I hope anyone whose played a game of D&D will understand what I mean here.
Charisma - I mean as far as the standard 6 of D&D go .. its the one that if it didn't exsist It would make the least impact.
8 out of 10 times  - girls that play consider this how hot they are.  In my different groups at least.
Rarely does it come into play.. did you convince the Alchemist to show you his poisons? Did you seduce the guard?
So its necessary but I mean really ... its a empty stat.. there is room for improvement. I think anyway.
I wonder if Piety can avoid this? I know comeliness cannot (I play with a pretty good amount of females - its over half the table most nights - not all but most of them are pretty cute.. now you can thank Harry potter. Thats about all hes worth to me - bringing hotties to the dark side

Not sure where to throw this in. So I'll do that here.
I have played some games that only use 1 type of die  - over and over ..
I understand the point in it. Simplicity for intuitions sake.
I don't dislike it but I don't want to use it either.
I think that if you limit yourself to 1 die (d6 or d% for example)
then you have to find cute little ways around using only those dice.
youre locked in. Plus Its fun to have different dice (and all my groups agree)
Who here doesn't have a favorite d20? - mine is yellow and black and name school bus
he will destroy you and people gasp when I bring him out. **insert evil laugh**


Now about my gaming group(s)
I have mentioned (during gaming sessions) "you guys .. does this seem broken to you? Couldnt this be better?"
and we kick it around a little. it will end with "hows your game coming along?"
To which I reply "slowly.. now lets get back to the game - Odonya! you were shouting Odins name to the heavens and calling a bolt of lightning to charge your sword, what is your attack plan?
(This is always my response haha .. shes if forever doing that... )
Basically what I have told them about my ideas they are all behind me .
Well my Min-maxing brother doesnt like anything that makes him less powerful or could get him killed easier.
I want a deadly game when I am done and he and a few others are worried about that.
I asked if anyone was interested in dropping the "knocked out at 0hp - dead at -10 rule"
and nearly all freaked. They freak out when I have them bleed out round to round and when they live they rejoice
without that drama is like a video game. You Have to fear death in my games. "if you don't sweat at the sight of a dragon.
You are playing 3rd edition" (a saying my group has adopted) LOL

I gotta run to the Store..
Thanks
Look forward to the comments and suggestions.

Necro.

[stefoid]

Realism.
As I stated in my original post I'd like a balance in speed of battle and realism.
I know its really easy to muck up a battle with too much realism. I have tried on the fly and it never goes well.
But if i can build it into the rules of the game I feel I can at least achieve something that you can use common sense rather that some chart that explains why something happens
Its a difficult line to walk and I don't have high expectations for gaining a lot of ground here.

one example of realism that I WILL be installing in the rules for my game is weapon types.
Through history weapons where designed to fight different armor types. and vice versa.
chain mail doesn't hold back the destructive force of a bludgeoning weapon well but against a slashing weapon it does.

Can you specifically answer what realism is to you, and why you feel it is an important aspect of your game design? 

[Excalibur]

OK, well, I should have asked this before and I try to ask it every time. So, here it goes...

What is your game about?

It isn't about medieval warriors in a fantasy realm with dragons and troll wenches. That's the setting.

Off the top of your head, without pondering the mechanics or the setting, what one or two words makes you think of your game?

Start with that question and then think about what attributes best exemplify that.

**************************************************
Now, on to more suggestions.

Personally, the more stats there are, the less interested I become in a game. There are a lot of attributes that can become skills or abilities (such as Physical Beauty, Charisma) and can be removed from the attributes list.

Actually, have you thought about removing attributes entirely and making everything skills? There is no Strength or Fortitude attribute that has a static or slowly changing score, but a skill that a player can increase, have decreased, and advance like anything else. Why shouldn't you be able to increase your Strength through practice? If that's all you concentrate on, you'll end up like your stereotypical body builder. If you concentrate on speed and precision then you might have a Bruce Lee character. Invest your points in Wit, Charm, and firearms and you have the indomitable Captain Malcolm Reynolds.

Sure, you could do that with Attributes, but just think of the wonders of a unified mechanic!

Better than skills, why not have everything be an aspect of the character. Give a list of "skills," "attributes," or "abilities" and have the character choose 5 of them. They then rank those 5 from 1 to 5 in order of most important to least important. Each aspect is then assigned a polyhedral die. If you want hard challenges to be high numbers, assign the most important aspect a d20, then a d12, d10, d8, d6, and finally d4. To succeed at a challenge, they roll the die associated with their stat to equal or beat the target number.

If you want more difficult things to be smaller numbers, reverse the order of the dice and roll under the target number.

I think that would be fast and you could narrate the realism as you saw fit.

Another option (a personal favorite) is each player rolls a number of d6s (or d10s, d12s, your choice). For every 6, they get 2 successes. For every 4 and 5, 1 success. 2 and 3 mean nothing. And 1 represents 2 failures. After the dice are rolled, remove any matching 1s and 6s or 1s and a combination of 2 4s, 2 5s, or 1 4 and 1 5. If there are any successes left, the player succeeds. If there are any failures, the player borks the challenge. Otherwise it's a failure (but not catastrophic).

In my current game, it's a combination of dice and cards and turned out to be pretty fun.

[Necromantis]

Can you specifically answer what realism is to you, and why you feel it is an important aspect of your game design? 

I can try.


Realism: meaning imitating real life outcomes.

For example  - Initiative
Determining who goes when by rolling dice and adding modifiers (for speed and such)
The modifiers add an element of realism.

Messing with realism can however slow combat down (and its long enough most of the time)
for example - keeping initiative
everyone keeping the 1st initiative rolls and going in that order for the entire battle
Effect - saves time --- but is even less realistic. ( too consistent)

I would like to add as much realism as I can without destroying the pace of the game or being tedious

Example:

GM - Kaileg your initiative roll is a 6 but you have a bonus of +2 for your dexterity So you can go before The Duergar makes his attack.
GM - (switching roles) - You see a flash of light as the torch your holding glints off the drawn steel in the Grey dwarfs grimy hand. He smiles and begins to Fade before you very eyes. With your extreme Agility you are able to yank free your weapon and charge if you so choose.
Kaileg - I use my bastard sword as I already have it in hand. I drop the torch freeing my left hand for a two handed strike.   
Jeff (player) - does the fire go out?
GM - - Dice - No - Kaileg you need a 16 to hit
Jeff (player) - Shouldn't he take a penalty for charging and losing some precision? I mean I know it would add damage to the attack because of the charge but Seems like it would be harder to hit if hes charging.
DM: Jesus christ! - Kaileg  - 16 to hit. - Jeff Leave the DMing to me and stay in character or its xp docked.


I dont know if I can Make it more Clear than that.
I am not saying thats its clear
But I can do no better.

_{anyone pick up that I use to game with an annoying rules lawyer named Jeff - Aka Crunk the half orc barbarian? .. ugh... that guy.}

[Aelwyn]

Excalibur mentioned Runequest! Ah... you always remember your first love.

If you want a more realistic feel for armor, you might want to check out that system. It's evolved into Basic Roleplaying, sold by Chaosium, still available and being used with Call of Cthulhu. Runequest is also still being sold by Mongoose Publishing, but I don't know how faithful it is to the original. In BRP, skills are percent chances. Roll under your percent to hit, give the other person a chance to parry or dodge (also a percentage). Armor subtracts from damage instead of making it harder to hit. If you want to get really detailed, you can use hit locations tables, but that tends to bog down combat a lot. BRP has Special hits, Critical hits, and Fumbles that you might like. These depend on the type of damage--impaling, slashing, crushing. They also tend to slow down combat, but it sounds like you want detail and realism rather than speed. I think it's a nice combination of detail and ease-of-play, and you can start chucking rules if it bogs down or if you prefer use every crazy alternate rule in the book, including fatigue and sanity.

Then there are the many indie systems that don't try to simulate every single action in combat. You just have one roll (or whatever mechanic is used) to determine who wins, and maybe to what extent they win. Then the GM or the player narrates the whole combat based on that one die roll. Play tends to be fast, wild, and creative. You should try it. You'll either go, I don't get it, how do I know what happened? Or you'll say, damn, this is fun! Spirit of the Century and Mortal Coil are the ones I'm most familiar with, but there are many others. Most of the systems are designed for specific worlds but are so free-form that it would be easy to port them to anything you want to do. (Mortal Coil is a horror game, but I've used it for fantasy; SOTC is pulp, but I've seen it used for space opera; by adding or subtracting skills but not changing the system, you could use SOTC for anything you want.)

And for a completely granular, realistic system, check out The Morrow Project. If I recall correctly, hit locations included "toes of left foot" and "upper chest, right side." It is also still being sold, but I don't know if the 4th edition preserves the insane granularity of the original. I kind of hope it does. I found it completely unplayable, but you might eat it up. And if I've got The Morrow Project confused with some other game, please don't flame me--it's been 25 years since I played it. Although looking at their website, I'm getting a funny itch to climb into my Commando Scout and start looking for Snakeeaters.

[Ar Kayon]

For example  - Initiative
Determining who goes when by rolling dice and adding modifiers (for speed and such)
The modifiers add an element of realism.

Messing with realism can however slow combat down (and its long enough most of the time)
for example - keeping initiative
everyone keeping the 1st initiative rolls and going in that order for the entire battle
Effect - saves time --- but is even less realistic. ( too consistent)

I would like to add as much realism as I can without destroying the pace of the game or being tedious

For comparison, here's how I handled initiative:

Your reflex attribute determines turn order.  Combatants in the same turn order go by their speed attribute and alternate combat actions.  If your reflex is below 6 and you didn't initiate combat, you may only use response actions in the first round and cannot make active turn actions (these action types both use combat actions, in which you get 3 total every round).  If you have remaining actions when the round is over, that improves your turn order for the next round.

[Excalibur]

For comparison, here's how I handled initiative:

Your reflex attribute determines turn order.  Combatants in the same turn order go by their speed attribute and alternate combat actions.  If your reflex is below 6 and you didn't initiate combat, you may only use response actions in the first round and cannot make active turn actions (these action types both use combat actions, in which you get 3 total every round).  If you have remaining actions when the round is over, that improves your turn order for the next round.

Nice one. Fast and realistic I'd say. The more I think about it the more I like it.

Excalibur mentioned Runequest! Ah... you always remember your first love.

If you want a more realistic feel for armor, you might want to check out that system. It's evolved into Basic Roleplaying, sold by Chaosium, still available and being used with Call of Cthulhu. Runequest is also still being sold by Mongoose Publishing, but I don't know how faithful it is to the original. In BRP, skills are percent chances. Roll under your percent to hit, give the other person a chance to parry or dodge (also a percentage). Armor subtracts from damage instead of making it harder to hit. If you want to get really detailed, you can use hit locations tables, but that tends to bog down combat a lot. BRP has Special hits, Critical hits, and Fumbles that you might like. These depend on the type of damage--impaling, slashing, crushing. They also tend to slow down combat, but it sounds like you want detail and realism rather than speed. I think it's a nice combination of detail and ease-of-play, and you can start chucking rules if it bogs down or if you prefer use every crazy alternate rule in the book, including fatigue and sanity.

Then there are the many indie systems that don't try to simulate every single action in combat. You just have one roll (or whatever mechanic is used) to determine who wins, and maybe to what extent they win. Then the GM or the player narrates the whole combat based on that one die roll. Play tends to be fast, wild, and creative. You should try it. You'll either go, I don't get it, how do I know what happened? Or you'll say, damn, this is fun! Spirit of the Century and Mortal Coil are the ones I'm most familiar with, but there are many others. Most of the systems are designed for specific worlds but are so free-form that it would be easy to port them to anything you want to do. (Mortal Coil is a horror game, but I've used it for fantasy; SOTC is pulp, but I've seen it used for space opera; by adding or subtracting skills but not changing the system, you could use SOTC for anything you want.)

And for a completely granular, realistic system, check out The Morrow Project. If I recall correctly, hit locations included "toes of left foot" and "upper chest, right side." It is also still being sold, but I don't know if the 4th edition preserves the insane granularity of the original. I kind of hope it does. I found it completely unplayable, but you might eat it up. And if I've got The Morrow Project confused with some other game, please don't flame me--it's been 25 years since I played it. Although looking at their website, I'm getting a funny itch to climb into my Commando Scout and start looking for Snakeeaters.

You may call me Curt since people don't seem to like handles much here.

Anyway, there's an even more detailed system called Rolemaster. If you wanted to find out what kind of critical you would get if you hit the left foot ring toe with a toothpick, they had a chart for that. As a matter of fact, I think that's where iPod and Verizon got the idea for "There's an App for that" or "There's a Map for that." (though we know that Verizon is stealing Apple's thunder). Anyway, there was a chart for every single thing you could do in combat. Had a hafted, blunt weapon and needed to find out what kind of critical you did, look in Arms Law. Wondering what kind of damage you did with that vorpal blade? Look in Arms Law. You get the picture.

Needless to say, while the charts were cool and all, it bogged down play quite a bit.

Another good initiative/turn order system comes from Hero System, particularly Champions, the superhero version of the game. Everyone has a speed attribute and based in it and combat phases, characters were able to act at certain phases. I think the phases ran from 1-30. There were powers that could help you attack faster, there were circumstances that caused you to act in a later phase. It really makes things easy (though there were a TON of d6s thrown around the table).

Personally, I like Ar Kayon's reflex order best. Though, if you must have randomness, there is a pretty good alternative in the 3.5 edition of Unearthed Arcana. Basically, everyone draws a card from a deck and that's their turn in the game. I can't remember the full details, but it looked like an interesting system if you were tired of dice.

In my game, I use a combination of 2d10 and a card with a score on it. Each player has 3 cards in hand and when they roll, they can choose to modify their initiative or their maneuver with a card from their hand. Though they may choose to not use a card at all. If you win initiative, you get to go first in the combat. If you win maneuver (but lose initiative) you can choose your defense after seeing your opponent's attack or you may choose to attack after seeing your opponent's defense. If you win BOTH initiative and maneuver, your opponent does not receive a counter attack (IE they lose their next attack) because you completely outmaneuvered them and they are only able to defend against your superior attack. The card you play can help to improve your initiative, improve your maneuver, or swap the dice. I was able to playtest the majority of this initiative system in addition to cards only and dice only. Everyone who tried them or saw them liked the sacrificial I&M best of all the variants.

[stefoid]

Can you specifically answer what realism is to you, and why you feel it is an important aspect of your game design? 

I can try.

Realism: meaning imitating real life outcomes.

For example  - Initiative
Determining who goes when by rolling dice and adding modifiers (for speed and such)
The modifiers add an element of realism.

Hi.  OK so the other question is WHY do you want to imitate real life outcomes in your game?   

[Necromantis]

Hi.  OK so the other question is WHY do you want to imitate real life outcomes in your game?

It just seems more intuitive.
Easier to suspend disbelief.
Easier for me to GM. Just ask myself what would happen in real life  - theres your answer Rather than looking it up in a book or chart.

I could be way off base when I say this. But does this line of questioning lead you a prepared speech about realism in rpgs?
I just get that feeling.
If so, lets hear it. I'm openminded. There is plenty of information on this website that I have yet to tap into yet. Plenty of folks with more experience than me offering their ideas. I am all for it.


On a different note. I have wanted to check out basic roleplaying. I saw a review and considered getting it.
Also call of Cthulhu is on my "to do" list. I just got excited about a game tailored exactly to me gaming style. Thats all.
Still lots to learn.

[Necromantis]

I just went online an downloaded an illegal copy of basic roleplaying chaosism 4th edition. WOW. Looks great for the most part.
As I don't like PDF's and only use them to determine whether or not to purchase a book
(good example - looking at the 2nd edition D&D players options books. That was a "dont buy" senario

I will be buying this book. (EDIT: done - thanks amazon) Maybe I can get my group to try it out. (middle of a major plot twist unveiling in my regular campaign and they are reluctant to play anything else until that gets settled - (another 3-4 sessions is my guess)
But I think I will put my own system on hold until I can study my hard copy of BRP when it arrives later this week (i hope) or next week.

I will still be checking in here for your input however, sometimes Ideas hit me  --- sometimes those ideas are other people's ideas -- but they hit me all the same.

thanks guys (and girls)

Necromantis

[Falc]

Hi.  OK so the other question is WHY do you want to imitate real life outcomes in your game?

It just seems more intuitive.
Easier to suspend disbelief.
Easier for me to GM. Just ask myself what would happen in real life  - theres your answer Rather than looking it up in a book or chart.

I could be way off base when I say this. But does this line of questioning lead you a prepared speech about realism in rpgs?
I just get that feeling.
If so, lets hear it. I'm openminded. There is plenty of information on this website that I have yet to tap into yet. Plenty of folks with more experience than me offering their ideas. I am all for it.

I sort of doubt stefoid was heading for a speech. To really, properly help you make the game you want, we need to know in exact detail what you want. It's very very easy, especially when having a discussion with nothing but written text, to get your wires crossed, to assume things about the people you're discussing with that just aren't correct.

Which makes it nicely ironic that I started that paragraph off making assumptions about stefoid :-)

To dig a bit further, you answered the first question by saying "Realism: meaning imitating real life outcomes". Already, it's interesting to note that you speak of 'outcomes' but not of 'situations' nor 'characters'. Was this a deliberate choice of words on your part, or not? If it was, why? If it wasn't, which of those 3 would you prioritize?

[stefoid]

Hi.  OK so the other question is WHY do you want to imitate real life outcomes in your game?

It just seems more intuitive.
Easier to suspend disbelief.
Easier for me to GM. Just ask myself what would happen in real life  - theres your answer Rather than looking it up in a book or chart.

I could be way off base when I say this. But does this line of questioning lead you a prepared speech about realism in rpgs?
I just get that feeling.
If so, lets hear it. I'm openminded. There is plenty of information on this website that I have yet to tap into yet. Plenty of folks with more experience than me offering their ideas. I am all for it.

kind of.  more a rant on game design with realism as the straw man.

in none of your answers did it mention "because its more fun", or "the players really dig realism!" etc...   ask yourself if 'more realism" was something that you really enjoy about any of the games you played?   I doubt it.

your answers themselves seem dubious - more like searching to justify a decision that you made without knowing why?  As an example , not to get hung up on and railroad the entire discussion, no two people would agree on what constitutes a "real life outcome", mostly because you, me and the average joe woulnt have a clue.  Our version of realism comes from 'cinematic realism" from movies and such, which has more to do with drama and excitement than anything else.    In short, your answers dont hold water.

Im not trying to pour crap on you.  The point is that you need to work out what are the bits you really want to see in a game, and WHY you enjoy those bits, and what are the bits that you dont like in a game, and WHY you dont like them, and then free yourself of any preconceived mechanics that you have already used, and try to model YOUR game on your own terms. 

Realism is a good start because I can see someone pouring a whole heap of mechanics into a game pursuing it, with misguided, unquestioned assumption that more realism is better, and accomplishing the opposite of what they really want , which is a fun game, by simply drowning their players in pointless crunch, and we all know that _pointless_ crunch is a really great way to bore players to tears.

rant over. 

[Necromantis]

Realism to me.

Realism to me I think mostly happens in roleplaying and narration.
Some of the rules I have played with are at times  - to my mind and my group - seem ... hard to swallow?
I can't think of an example right now so I will say. I get the sense that among the forums here at the forge
Realism is a really hotly debated subject.
I think that perhaps My offhand mentioning of it maybe have been misinterpreted.
I think that the game that I play most (3 or more times a month) 2nd Edition D&D, Is pretty unrealistic a lot of the time.
That is probably due to the fact that it is so loose in terms of rules.
I think that with realism (could be wrong) you are hemmed in. Rigid. Lots of rules.
That is something that I am not fond of.
When I said (originally) that " balance speed of combat with realism as much as possible."
I meant it different than it sounds. You gotta think That I'm talking about fixing D&D

Take ar kayon's system.
That is a precise combat system that seems (to me at least) to be fairly accurate realistic system. It seems fairly complicated though.
Well more -- technical..is maybe the word. Like if a group of black belts played a RPG together. Theyd want the precision that his/her system provides.

I just want what weapon you fight with to matter.
People just use whatever weapon does the most damage in D&D
or they use something else based on their character design or for roleplaying purposes. (jack sparrows pistol in pirate of the caribbean 1)
and thats fine. but I think that it should make a difference when you hit certain armor types.
Based on history (that sort of realism)
whether your average joe knows it or not.
as armor evolved so did the weapons.
as weapons evolved so did the armor.
Still to this day (and if you can imagine it - in a cyberpunk world as well)
armor is used. Bullet proof vest protect against bullets. Right?
Do you think that armor piercing rounds would exist if vests weren't invented?
The entire time. This was mostly what I was referring to with realism.
That and some other things. my "forbearance" stat - making it harder to fight injured depending on your ability to Bear injury.
that kind of stuff.
I don't think they are as major I get the sense that some of the guys here
who are perhaps going for ground breaking systems are.
Thats a good way to put it too. Ground Breaking. Cause Ive read some things here that seem to my low level of experience as ground breaking.
I hope that clears up what I truely meant by realism.

a quick word on min-maxing.

Someone said something along the lines of - play with people who play the way you want them too.
every min-maxer I have every played D&D with has come from a 3rd edition table. I think that system breeds min-maxing
but what i meant was I'd like to ensure (as much as possible) that my system does not do that. does not breed/support min-maxing
So what my brainstorming hs come up with is --- the seedling of an idea - but here it is. as close to all Abilities need to give some advantage
to a character no matter the class/role
ex - why shouldn't (in 2E AD&D terms) Intelligence and dexterity or even wisdom etc give a bonus to a "to hit" number or the "to damage" number
what if
intelligence gave a damage bonus
Wisdom gave a to hit bonus
and dexterity giave a to hit bonus
Maybe fighters wouldnt have stats that end up like this so often

STR - 17
DEX - 14
CON - 16
INT -  5
WIS -  8
CHA -  4