Game concept that lacks a vital mechanic

[Emmett]

Sorry for not posting for a while, I've been preoccupied with the mundane.

I'm sorry Mike, but I haven't gamed the hero system in a long time so even though there are vauge fuzzys floating through my head of the system, I think I lost it.

However I agree that sucess on a previous roll should vastly improve a continued effect. For example, I create a dragon to start breathing fire at you, once the dragon is there and breathing fire, even if you don't want it to be you are now pretty convinced that it is there.

Now if all I can manage is a dragon "ghost" (some kind of etherial dragon looking illusion that can also breath fire) you are possibly going to expect that it will dissapear soon and is therefore only a temporary effect. However if I keep up some bit of the illusion, like the sound of the dragon's breath walking around the room, I may also get your subconscience to aid me in re-creating the dragon ghost again.

Tony, the idea of using NPCs to either create or modify a pool is one of my favorite parts of this idea. I like the idea of a Charlatain getting all the people in a village to belive that they are some kind of savior. Once the Charlatain gets enough of the people to lend you their belife points or pools, you suddenly become the saviour that you told them you were. This is powerful and dangerous at the same time. If your pool wavers you can suddenly loose all your power. One failure can cause you to have to build up all over again.

I don't know that you would need too many different catigories of effects to do everything you want to do. Catagories like Direct Damage, Movement, Attribute Augmentation, Object Summoning (which would include animate and inanimate), and maybe a few others that don't immediately come to me. Under say movement, you could say that Teleportation is harder for others to oppose since it happens and then it's done but takes more to suddently belive your where you want to be (usually would include closing your eyes and concentrating which isn't good during combat). Flying has the advantage of not needing something to land on immediately and once it is achived becomes easier to maintain etc.

clehrich hit a point that I greatly want to avoid. Since everything is possible the Players will try to do anything they want. If the rules are ambiguous then the GM is usually stuck arguing why what the player interperated them as will not work. This causes a lot of grudges that don't easily die. That is why I am for the Player having to justify any benifits they should enjoy. If the game is set up from that prospective, the bar is as high as it can go and the players must bring it down. That way the players don't go "I want to turn the room into an oven but not effect me" and look at the GM, waiting for him/her to tell them what requirement they must fulfill.

Basically, the difficulty for an effect is infinite unless you can show me how you are going to accomplish it.

That way the Players really get into their effects and will have their favorite ones.

[Mike Holmes]

The reason I suggested the Hero System as an example is precisely because the system can be used to determine how "difficult" anything is to do. So the GM doesn't have to. Want a Dragon? How many points of Dragon? That neatly avoids the problem.

So what I'm saying is that I think you need a system that can enumerate anything. Have you seen how Hero Wars handles this?

Mike

[Emmett]

Have you seen how Hero Wars handles this?

I have, but I will have to find a copy to read it over again. I play five or six sessions of Hero Wars a while ago and I don't remember exactly how it works. On the other hand maybe I should re-invent the wheel since nobody likes a copy cat.