Forum changes: Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.
Started by ethan_greer, April 16, 2003, 10:53:54 PM
Quote from: ethan_greer- I'd like some feedback on the organization of the document, specifically the order in which the different sections are arranged.
Quote- I could use some sample descriptors, better/more interesting than the sucky ones I've got down currently.
Quote- How're the mechanics? Do you like them? Why or why not?
Quote- What do you think of the way I handled the Vices?
Quote- What do you think about character advancement?
Quote from: Mike HolmesI think [the Descriptors are] not terrible. I do worry that with "Dragons" as a suggestion for Beast Lore, that you'll never see "Beekeeper". That is, some of these descriptors are just more appropriate to the sort of characters that one is envisioning by the time they get to the descriptors. "Alert" is one that's so often critical in RPGs that it'll probably get taken a lot. There's nothing wrong with this, except that in the case of players who lack creativity, you're going to get a passel of similar characters. Which may be problematic. You could mandate round-robin descriptor selections as a fun fix. That way only one character gets to be the "strong" guy.
QuoteInjury gives -2 or -4 to all rolls. I assume this means that these penalties are subtracted from the pertinent stat, not the roll itself. Assuming that's true, then what if my stat is reduced below 2 by penalties? Do I still succeed on a 2 (this is what I'd assume from the rules, but you may have intended otherwise).
QuoteWhile the characters cannot die, I can see them getting incapacitated a lot if they get into a lot of fights as fighting is very balanced. That's to say that unlike a lot of games with fighting, the characters in this game do not have much of a mechanical advantage (this assumes NPCs are created equally to PCs, which one has to assume from the text). I'm thinking that fights are going to be common, no? Is it intentional that characters will not do well in these situations?
QuoteI'm torn between the fact that the source material characters are the way you describe them, and the idea that it would be cool to have characters do stupid things for their vices. Perhaps there's a third angle that could be worked in.
QuoteMake the roll to gain an ability opposed by the current level of the ability. That way it's easier to raise poor abilities, and harder to raise higher ones.
QuoteAlso, as this is "like" purchases, can you make more than one with the -2 penalty? Are these penalties separate from the purchase penalties, or additive with them? The latter would be problematic, as I think players will opt for ability increases over equipment any day.
QuoteOn Abilities, first, I think that Wisdom seems out of place. Call it Will, or Perception, or both, or whatever, just not Wisdom. It just seems to me that a truely wise character wouldn't have gotten into this line of busisness in the first place.
QuoteAlso, as an alternate gteneration method, why not just say that the player has 49 points to distribute (with the same caps, and mentioning that seven is the average)? I'm just curious.
QuoteIt's interesting to note that the highest Mastery a starting character can have is seven, and that's by having all stats balanced at seven. Was that an intentional statement? Very Tao.
QuoteI'd make "retirement" mandatory at Mastery 8. This allows for a definite ending point to shoot for, though one that can be approached as quickly as the player desires.
QuoteOn purchasing Magic items I assume you forgot some penalty for buying them? Otherwise why buy a +0 Sword when I can buy a +50 Sword just as easily?
QuoteI like the open admittance of the "party" as a genre convention, and other such rules. I think that such will be very effective in play. I can really see this game working with published materials well, and making them more functional than most systems (even the ones they are designed for) would.
QuoteYou ought to acknowledge Donjon. If it wasn't an actual inspiration, it should have been. Some very similar ideas.
Quote from: ethan_greerI like that round-robin idea a lot. The whole Descriptor thing needs work, obviously. Beekeeper was mostly a joke. I just braindumped some Descriptors out there. As I said, it's rough. :) And now that I think about it, Alertness probably needs to be its own Ability, especially considering how often I use it when I run games...
QuoteYour impressions are accurate. 2 always succeeds, even if your injury penalty takes your Ability down below 2. Likewise, 12 always fails, even if your Ability with modifiers is 12 or more.
QuoteI'm not sure about these mechanics, to tell the honest truth. I like the spread of abilities, but the dice mechanic... I just don't know. That's something that I'm going to look at when I start playtesting.
QuoteThis is another case of the rules being in first draft. Basically, right now I'm thinking that combat rolls will only happen when the characters are facing a challenge. So, random guards at the evil henchman's stronghold will fall like wheat to a scythe, no rolls necessary. Likewise, you won't roll Prowess to take out a group of random goblins or similar beasties. On the other hand, when fighting significant NPCs (including fell beasts such as giant snakes), that's when the Prowess rolls will happen.
QuoteQuoteI'm torn between the fact that the source material characters are the way you describe them, and the idea that it would be cool to have characters do stupid things for their vices. Perhaps there's a third angle that could be worked in.Not sure what you mean here. Could you clarify?
QuotePotato, Patata. In the end, I'll probably include both descriptions and allow the individual to decide how they want to think of the process, since functionally it makes no difference.
Quoteso I'll have to take your word for it that it's Tao...
QuoteQuoteI'd make "retirement" mandatory at Mastery 8. This allows for a definite ending point to shoot for, though one that can be approached as quickly as the player desires.Interesting. I just may do that.
QuoteHmm. Hadn't taken any ideas from Donjon, at least not intentionally. It seems another read of my copy is in order.
Quote from: Mike HolmesBasically what you suggest needs to indicate things that are of the same general relevance in terms of coolness. That's all I'm getting at.
QuoteTo make a better example, I think you'll see a lot of dragonriders over, say, horseriders. The idea of controling dragons is just that much cooler than, well, any others I can think of.
QuoteYou're missing my point. Sure you can make a mook rule and put that in. But shouldn't a Giant Snake get really good stats? The way the characters are created, the way it's stated, they are totally average. The snake will be better than them along with all other major protagonists. If the characters are meant to be of a "heroic" calibre, just say that the "average" human is a 6 instead of seven. That way you can rationalize good NPCs being only on par with the PCs. Instead of easily dwarfing them.
Quote from: ADGBossI am not sure if that is of your own devising or inspired but either way its cool.
Quote from: ethan_greer1) There's a 16 percent chance of rolling 10+. There's a 58 percent chance of rolling 7 or less. I hear your concerns about the spread. Just something that'll need tested... I want one more revision under my belt, and then I'll start playtesting.
Quote2) That's not a bad idea. I'll have to mull it over. In the meantime, Vices can figure into the game by providing possible adventure seeds in and of themselves. For example, getting thrown into the local drunk tank. However, that's hardly formalized in the mechanics...
QuoteInSpectres? Never read it, although the more I learn about it, the more I'm inclined to.
Quote from: ethan_greerInSpectres? Never read it, although the more I learn about it, the more I'm inclined to.