Mirima Tyalie core system

[bladamson]

Hi.  We've been working on a system for a few months.  It's almost finished, and I was hoping we might be able to get some constructive criticism on the game.

It can be found at http://www.mirimatyalie.org in PDF format.  It is a genre-independent system that we plan to use as the basis for more genre specific core books.

The system incorporates several things we're rather proud of (perhaps too proud of :).  Here's a basic overview in hopes of enticing a few more of you to visit the site:

1). The core system falls under an open license, so anyone can take it and do whatever they want with it, so long as credit is given to the original authors.  We plan on releasing a print version at some point in the future, when we feel that demand is high enough to make it worthwhile.
2). The system uses a single, scalable mechanic that only requires simple addition and subtraction while still preserving proper bell-curve and logarithmic properties.  No complicated charts, multiplication, or division are needed.  It may seem slightly confusing at first, but once you learn it, you've learned it all.
3). The system is classless and levelless.  Character generation is driven by the players' vision of their characters, not by some class or template.
4). The "XP paradigm" has been abandoned.  Skills are increased through use and through rewards for playing one's character well.
5). Through the use of modular rules, the system scales from simple story-telling to complex and detailed combat.  However the GM likes to run his/her games.
6). The optional rules contain a dynamic magic system for use in fantasy and other such genres.  It allows magic to remain fresh and unpredictable while providing enough of a framework to prevent chaos and confusion.
7). The optional advanced combat rules deal with such things as armor partial-coverage, damage to armor, multiple damage types, and specialized attacks without adding any more complexity than needed.

Gee, that sounds more like an advertisement than a request for criticism...  Anyway, any comments any of you have would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you!

[Mike Holmes]

Welcome to the Forge,

People, I can't think of how to say what I have to him in a non-alienating way. Can anyone help me out?

BTW, your game does have very nice art and layout. I was very impressed by the PDF.

Mike

[bladamson]

Welcome to the Forge,

Thank you.  Just ran across this forum recently.  I'm surprised I haven't found it before now...  It appears to be an excellent place.

People, I can't think of how to say what I have to him in a non-alienating way. Can anyone help me out?

Eh?  Say what you have to say.  I promise to take it gracefully. :)

BTW, your game does have very nice art and layout. I was very impressed by the PDF.

Thank you.  I'm using a markup language called LaTeX.  It's usually used by mathematicians for typesetting equations, but I think it also formats books very well.  It handles the formatting, etc itself, which makes things much easier.  Not sure of the usability under windows though (I'm a Unix person, myself).  The price is right though (free).

[Shreyas Sampat]

I have some questions, bla.

What goals did you have in mind when you wrote this?  Why did you choose to make a 'genre-independent' core system, rather than a system focused to represent one kind of play?  Is it your belief that through this system, you can bring about any kind of play one desired?

In light of that question, consider the choices you made.  In how many literary genres are combat and magic integral parts with their own independent tropes, worthy of having subsystems for in a roleplaying game designed to emulate them?  Given this, do you feel it necessary to include subsystems of this kind in a generic game?  Yes, I see that the magic system is optional.  Nevertheless, it sets a precedent, as does the (optional?) cambat system.

You ask a few interesting questions at the beginning of the Character chapter.  Tell me, why is it that these things are simply "often useful", rather than, say, integral, mechanical parts of the character?  You provide some frightening admonitions, like "AP should only be given out for good roleplaying", but then don't give us a rubric for deciding what 'good roleplaying' is.  You say that AP shouldn't be given out for overcoming obstacles, but clearly this is what AP allows you to do; if AP is a roleplaying award, shouldn't it give you exciting new roleplaying opportunities?

[Kester Pelagius]

Greetings bladamson,

And welcome to The Forge!

Hi.  We've been working on a system for a few months.  It's almost finished, and I was hoping we might be able to get some constructive criticism on the game.

What's that old saying about being careful what you wish for?  *smirks*


Mirima (first impressions)

Rules.pdf

Overview:  Clean.  Neat.  A bit of a strain at a glance, but the font is otherwise clear.  Has a contents page (no bookmarks), some clip art, author notes, and links (you'll need to cut and paste) to where the reader can find more info.

Summation:  Not a D/L for the lazy.

The Rules: Concept/Character driven.  First impression is the system uses almost Palladium like Attributes.  A closer glance reveals this to be superficial.  CharGen includes rules for random stat generation and point allocation.  Skill tests.  Detecting a medieval flavor in the combat.

Favorite Armor Type:  "Silly-looking Chainmail Bikini"

Medieval now becoming fantasy as we find a section on 'Magic and Psionics' save the flavor seems to be mulled cider rather than spiced ale, grognards be warned!

By page 21 I was going "D@mn!  That's it?".  Seems like something is missing, which I suppose is the point.  Gives us just enough of a 'taste' to make us curious, or hate what we've seen if we're jaded about this sort of thing I suppose.  But that, dear friends, is something for you to decide on your own.



Kind Regards,

Kester Pelagius

[ThreeGee]

Hey B. Lee,

Welcome to the Forge. I am sure part of what Mike is getting at is an invitation to read the articles, especially the ones about fantasy heartbreakers.

Having read the rules, I would say they are pretty bog-standard with no obvious problems. Somewhat like Rolemaster without so much detail.

LaTeX is great, but it does weird things with fonts. Maybe it is just the default font, but the type always seems too frail. I would suggest playing with it a little to find something a bit more readable. The layout is clean and to the point. Also, the term you are looking for is 'plain text', not flat text.

My question for you is: Why would I play your game? I read your design features, but they tell me what your game is not. I want to know what it is. When you can tell me, quickly and concisely, why I should play your game, you will be in the money.

Later,
Grant

[bladamson]

What goals did you have in mind when you wrote this?  Why did you choose to make a 'genre-independent' core system, rather than a system focused to represent one kind of play?  Is it your belief that through this system, you can bring about any kind of play one desired?

Goals:

I was tired of the D&D style paradigm.  I often found myself trying to figure out how to fit my character to the rules rather than fitting the rules to the character.  And the end result of such character molding to rules was that I ended up with a character that didn't really fit my vision of the persona, which is somewhat disappointing.  And I've always felt that XP based advancement is flawed.

Yes, I believe that a decent generic system can be fit to any kind of play desired.  It currently doesn't lend itself well to superhero type gaming due to the bounds that attributes must fall into, but I am of the mind that superpowers should be modeled in the same fashion as the skills are...

In light of that question, consider the choices you made.  In how many literary genres are combat and magic integral parts with their own independent tropes, worthy of having subsystems for in a roleplaying game designed to emulate them?  Given this, do you feel it necessary to include subsystems of this kind in a generic game?  Yes, I see that the magic system is optional.  Nevertheless, it sets a precedent, as does the (optional?) cambat system.

Well, I would certainly agree that the combat and magic systems detailed might not be what everyone wants or might not mesh well with the style the GM is trying to convey.  But I think they serve to cover a large slice of the pie, so to speak.  The idea was to create a generic system that incorporates what mose people would need in such a system, but to also leave it open in such a way that it could be "hacked at" if it didn't serve as desired.  The plan being to change bits and flesh other parts out in future books to deal with specific campaign worlds or genres.

It sounds like you're not a fan of generic systems. :)

Honestly, I'm not really either.  This is all moving towards the eventual creation of a post-apocalyptic game.  But hopefully the groundwork built along the way can be of help to others.

You ask a few interesting questions at the beginning of the Character chapter.  Tell me, why is it that these things are simply "often useful", rather than, say, integral, mechanical parts of the character?  You provide some frightening admonitions, like "AP should only be given out for good roleplaying", but then don't give us a rubric for deciding what 'good roleplaying' is.  You say that AP shouldn't be given out for overcoming obstacles, but clearly this is what AP allows you to do; if AP is a roleplaying award, shouldn't it give you exciting new roleplaying opportunities?

Such things become integral parts of one's character by helping to determine what skills the character will have and what personality the character will reflect.  Since a set list of skills is not given, some other method if inquiry into what a character can "do" is needed.  Of course, if a player already has a good idea of what sort of character they want to play, such questions are unnecessary.  The mechanic for rolling semi-skilled covers the fact that skills will be so diverse.

I kind of feel that the rubic for deciding what constitutes "good roleplaying" will vary between groups.  This is why the role-playing awards are given by the players themselves rather than the GM.  I've actually thought about removing that part entirely...  But there has to be _some_ method to compel the players to role-play well rather than be munchkins.  It creates an environment where in order to be a munchkin, you must not be a munchkin, if you know what I mean. :)  They have to work toward building the story rather than running the XP treadmill.

One thing I have observed is that a neophyte GM will usually be crushed by the system.  I'm not sure why, perhaps indeed because there _aren't_ rules for every concevable thing.  But I've also seen good GMs run amazing games with it.  But you'll probably have that with just about any system. :)

[bladamson]

Welcome to the Forge. I am sure part of what Mike is getting at is an invitation to read the articles, especially the ones about fantasy heartbreakers.

Hah!  Point well taken.  Honestly though (does it sound like I'm being too defensive here? :P ) I am soooooo tired of fantasy games I could spit.  Ran one with those rules.  Once.  Just to be sure it worked.  I've got no illusions that the thing would actually sell even if I tried.  I think people want content.  Worlds, timelines, NPCs, etc.  I'm no good at that "creative" thing, unfortunately....

Having read the rules, I would say they are pretty bog-standard with no obvious problems. Somewhat like Rolemaster without so much detail.

Eww.  Rolemaster.  I once thought about wallpapering the gaming room with rolemaster charts.

I should take out the rest of the charts.  God I hate charts.  Well, if they must be referenced during play.

This brings the point: The only one that has to be used during play it the hit location chart.  Well, assuming you are using hit locations, which I usually don't because it takes too long.  Combat should flow at a breakneck pace to preserve the feeling of furiousness...

Been trying to figure out how to do hit locations without using a chart.  One could link it to say, higher number of successes scored in combat hit a more vital location, but this is already done transparently via adding skill successes to damage values.  No, what we're looking for is some generic body area for use with partial armor.  Does it hit armor, and if so what part?  I can see a correlation, but there's no way to capture it with a standard mathematical model, much less one simple enough to realistically use in a tabletop rpg.

So far the best idea has been to decal glyphs onto blank d10s.  If anyone has a better idea I'd love to hear it.

LaTeX is great, but it does weird things with fonts. Maybe it is just the default font, but the type always seems too frail. I would suggest playing with it a little to find something a bit more readable. The layout is clean and to the point. Also, the term you are looking for is 'plain text', not flat text.

Will do.  Thanks for the advice.

My question for you is: Why would I play your game? I read your design features, but they tell me what your game is not. I want to know what it is. When you can tell me, quickly and concisely, why I should play your game, you will be in the money.

Hehe.  You probably _don't_ want to play this game.  It isn't really anything other than a mechanic.  Let's call it a tool for creating a game, with game defined as that awful and altogether inconsistent thing that pops out of the GM's head when he plops down at the head of the table.

[bladamson]

Thanks for the review. :)

By page 21 I was going "D@mn!  That's it?".  Seems like something is missing, which I suppose is the point.  Gives us just enough of a 'taste' to make us curious, or hate what we've seen if we're jaded about this sort of thing I suppose.  But that, dear friends, is something for you to decide on your own.

What do you feel is missing?  Content?  What am I missing?

Also, your comparison between mulled cider and spiced ale.  Should I read that as "dry and boring" or something else?  Can you tell me more specifically what problems you have with it?

If you could clarify the "mideval feeling" of combat, I'd be greatly appreciative.  I've been trying to stay away from that, and I'd like to fix it. :)

Thanks!

[Mark Johnson]

Why does your game choose all its examples from a genre you admit you are tired of?

Why the open license?

[bladamson]

Why does your game choose all its examples from a genre you admit you are tired of?

Well, I was kind of thinking that since there seems to be a glut of fantasy games, readers might be able to relate to it better.

May have been a bad idea though.  I should try to balance it out a bit more.

Why the open license?

I'm a big free software advocate, so I have the opinion that tools should be free and modifiable.  Like the mechanic.  Your content is the guts, what people pay money for.  That and services.  How many people have bought GURPS sourcebooks for the content but don't use the system?

Besides, copyrighting a mechanic doesn't work.  For something like a mechanic, you need a patent or it needs to be intellectual property.  I think intellectual property laws are unconstitutional, so that leaves a patent.  Which is probably more trouble than it's worth and may be unpatentable anyway.

I suppose the main reason though is that I hope someone who has an awsome idea for content but can't create a decent system will come along and do something with it.  This is actually the 5th mechanic I've designed, and I think it is rather decent (or perhaps I'm egotistical :).  I will go on for hours about the statistical properties if you like.  Mmm, weighted bell curves... :P

[Mark Johnson]

Besides, copyrighting a mechanic doesn't work.  For something like a mechanic, you need a patent or it needs to be intellectual property.  I think intellectual property laws are unconstitutional, so that leaves a patent.  Which is probably more trouble than it's worth and may be unpatentable anyway.

If you can't copyright a mechanic and you aren't patenting your invention why do you need a license?  (Especially given your views on intellectual property laws.)

[greyorm]

Unlike Mike, I'll be brutal.

What does your game do that a dozen other games designed along precisely the exact same lines don't? ie: Why are you proud of having reinvented the wheel?

Why do you claim that character creation is driven by player vision of their character, when it is clearly NOT driven by such, but by either a point-buy system meant to inspire the mythical beast called "game balance" or random rolls of the dice?

How does your system avoid the regular pitfalls of skill-based games and encourage the creation of realistic characters with coherent skill-sets rather than characters created with min-max effects in mind.
Or does it not attempt to encourage/discourage such at all? Does that bother you?

Why do you claim the "XP paradigm" has been abandoned when it also has clearly not been, simply renamed to "AP" which continues to drive the exact same carrot-and-stick point-buy/min-max character building methodology utilized by D&D and does not contribute to "good role-playing" or "characterization" but instead focuses mechanical character improvement as central?

Why do you oppose and contrast "complex and detailed combat" with "simple storytelling"?

What is the actual use of section 1.1.1? I can completely skip this part of character creation and it has no actual effect on the end product -- note that arguments about "your character won't be realistic/have plot hooks" are not the point. Think long and hard on this: there are no mechanical rewards or reasons for a player to even bother with section 1.1.1 -- "Concept" can be ditched completely without changing game play one iota, making it fluffy, useless, wasted text.

The game reads like D&D-cum-Harn. Why would I play this specific game over Harn? Or the other dozen games that handle things exactly the way this game does?

I'll be less of a bastard in my next post, I promise! Please try not to be defensive about the above questions and implied judgements, my honest point is to get you thinking about your design. If you like your design and you are proud of it, that's cool, but it may not be doing what you think it is doing.

Defintely read "Fantasy Heartbreakers" by Ron Edwards and "More Fantasy Heartbreakers" as well. No, your game isn't "Fantasy" or you don't intend it to be...no matter what the genre is, it is definitely a "Heartbreaker."

Take some time to think over your answers, and I look forward to hearing your responses and thoughts!

[Garbanzo]

bladamson-

My impression: Markedly crunchy.

I'm reminded of tables from the ol' DMG, with charts for things like the damage various lycanthropes take when breaking Hulk-like through their armor.  Or the illumination radius of a bullseye lantern.
I don't believe anyone on the planet memorizes all of these tables, and I hope no one on the planet would halt play to look something like that up.

(There's a chart for what to do when your armor's on fire.)


For me, even the chart explaining how a prone target is different from a kneeling target is too much.
I don't know whether it is for you or not.  With 80% of the text being "optional," I don't know what this game really is.

What do you think is necessary and good and streamlined and clear?  (You're the game designer, after all!)


"Several months of training to improve a skill"
-- Folks aren't going to put their characters out of action just to bump up a skill.  Therefore this is a between-adventures thing.  So everyone can just agree to take 6 mos between adventures to bump up a skill.  Why not?  The rules are suggesting and rewarding this.


This is what I say: cut out everything you don't think is 100% necessary, and see what you've got.  I have the sense there's a good sensibility buried between sections 3.0.3 and 3.0.4.
Don't try to please anyone but yourself (that is, no base covering) and, er, see what self-pleasure can do for you. (?.)
It may end up being generic, or it may instead strongly facilitate the post-apocalyptic thing you've said you really want to do.

This is my own take against generic systems - if you want a p-a game, mirima tyalie has lots of useless stuff in it.  And lots of stuff you'd need isn't there.  
We've got "verbal, somatic" instead of mutations and MadMaxmobiles, know what I mean?  So it's (by definition) going to be an imperfect fit.  Why not instead make a game that takes the parts you love about p-a and makes that a priority, all front-and-centerlike?  

Because mirima isn't going to replace gurps, and it isn't going to replace fudge.  It just might be a p-a game of choice, but only if you work like a devil to make it deliver a kick-ass p-a experience.


-Matt

Oh - the medieval feel for me comes from having the vast majority of weapon and armor lists be medieval.  And the full page picture of a castle on page one.  And, too, that the name sounds fantasyish.

[Kester Pelagius]

Greetings bladamson,

Thanks for the review. :)

The best feedback one can give, IMO.

By page 21 I was going "D@mn!  That's it?".  Seems like something is missing, which I suppose is the point.  Gives us just enough of a 'taste' to make us curious, or hate what we've seen if we're jaded about this sort of thing I suppose.  But that, dear friends, is something for you to decide on your own.

What do you feel is missing?  Content?  What am I missing?

Also, your comparison between mulled cider and spiced ale.  Should I read that as "dry and boring" or something else?  Can you tell me more specifically what problems you have with it?

If you could clarify the "mideval feeling" of combat, I'd be greatly appreciative.  I've been trying to stay away from that, and I'd like to fix it. :)

1) A lot is missing, which I assumed would be addressed in later 'supplements'.  2) There's lots of things that you could include, but then again...  3) A clear vision of what you want the game to be?

My advice to #3:  Plant tongue firmly in cheek and run with it.  Refer to my previous 'favorite armor type' comment.  Play that up.

Hmm.. My initial answer I thought to give was:  Mulled cider is. . . warm and smooth.  Spiced ale is sharp. . . and well it's grog.  You down it by the pewter mug full, whereas a mulled cider can be sipped and appreciated.  But I think the more pertinent answer is to the last question: 'Can you tell me more... ?'

Yes.  Problem is, and I mean this, my answer will just blend into the background noise of the other questions here.  You've mentioned so far all that you are trying not to have your RPG be, or rather portray, yet when you come right down to it fantasy is basically pseudo-medieval settings with magic.  Hard to make a fantasy RPG without those elements.

Even if you set it in the Bronze Age, people will still call it a 'medieval' kind of game.  And for good reason, the combat is essentially the same, only the implements and types of weapons change.  Marginally so.

That said I'd ask you this:

Do you want your game to be sword and sorcery?

Think carefully.  You may be tempted to say you want your game to fit any potential setting.  Problem with that tact is that it's not the 'game' but rather the 'game rules' that really provide the impetus for how the setting functions.  Game rules are the physics of your game reality.

Grab a sheet of paper and ask yourself this:

"What physics do I want present in my game?"

Think about your answer.  Make a list.  If you want magic, write that down.  If you don't, write it with a line through it.  When done look at your list.  What you will have are a list of in game properties that will need rules to address how they operate.  Thus, if you include hand grenades, you'll need rules for how to toss them, how they explode, yada yada yada.

Hope that helps.




Kind Regards,

Kester Pelagius