Realms of Wonder from Action Studios

[Hardpoint]

First of all, the website is designed to be an ad, one I don't have to constantly update (save one page or so for new content and news)...but I do know that it needs work. Thanks for pointing the problem areas. At least now, when I tackle the website, I can fix them.

The stat issue is such that the average Hero will begin with a 50% chance to succeed out the gate, as a Novice. Most Skills can be performed at 0-Level, but some cannot, meaning those skills that require certain knowledge, such as Alchemy or Gunsmithing. The Base Numbers for each race run in the 8-10 range on average, with some stat bases as high as 15 (Troll strength for instance) and as low as 1. This, coupled with the max skill level of 5 provides a maximum of 30 ever (figuring in Heroic Gift bonuses) for a skill's Level/Chance setup. In actual play, 18-20 seemed a fairly standard starting Chance (figuring a Level 1 in a skill).
Stats are intended to be in line somewhat with DnD (admittedly not D20 necessarily).

Each Hero begins the game with a Heroic Gift (Humans get 2). This Gift can be anything to a bonus to skills, stat increases beyond the racial max, to some special abilities like Prophecy and even Heirloom Items (which can be magical if the GM decides so).

The Success Chart is static so that as you rise in your Chance (albeit a maximum amount of only +5 over the 0 Level Formula), you get an easier chance of getting the greater result. I left 30 as the lone chance for Fumbling as that seemed cinematically appropriate. Heroes in movies rarely Fumble just by happenstance. They tend to Fumble when it's dramatically approriate (or humor dictates he should). With Hero Points, players can also adjust the Rank Result as such that they can prevent Fumbling if it happens; even turning a Fumble into a great result, if they want to buy a success. The tradeoff on that is, while yes, you can buy a great hit, you have a limit of how many Hero Points you can have (12 for Humans 10 for everyone else), so the tactical use of Hero Points is desired. Earning Hero Points is accomplished by doing acts of a Heroic or particularly Dramatic nature. They are used as a reward for players to take chances, do cool stuff, really play up the swashbuckling, derring do atmosphere of the game. 7th Sea does something similar, but I think my system is a little simpler to understand.

I went with single die mechanics, as opposed to the Successes method you mentioned, because I found that method a little cumbersome for some players who were not as hardcore, plus I don't like the extremely mediocre results you frequently get (based on my experiences with Shadowrun, Vampire, and Werewolf). I also know that one die can be finnicky enough. Yes, multiple dice make for more consistent results, but also make for less cinematic ones in my experience. I've also found that straight math evaluations of dice are not the best method, as they do not take into account the superstitiousness of gamers and their "special" dice. While I don't put too much stock in that, I have seen enough wacky results in my time to know that straight odds is not enough. Dice, like computers, are not totally random sometimes (even without cheating).

Combat is a series of exchanges (actually have a fair amount in common with Riddle of Steel on that front). 2 Phases (Active and Reactive) dictate a Round. All those going first vie to attack those that React, but those that React get bonuses to their Defense Chances for things like Dodges, Parries, and Blocks. The combat was designed to be based around the movie fencing model, back and forth. The Combat Moves help facilitate this.

No, the game is still in development, so there is no full version to check out. I plan to make the freebie version available again (had to rework stuff a little for clarity). I'll let everyone here know when that freebie version is available, which will now be sooner than later, as that will give you all a chance to really get a look at what I'm doing.

As for the Wielders comment, yes your idea would be cool, but that is not this game per se, though I will be borrowing certain aspects of that if you don't mind, as I like some of that mentality. The Glory system is designed to do just that. As your Glory total rises, you become more well known and thus in time your name is known the world over. Stories of your deeds get more and more distorted as your Glory rises though, so those 10 guys you defeated can turn into 100 or more as your fame rises. Heroes do not start the game out as widely known individuals, but I am providing an avenue for starting the game out beyond the Novice Rank if the story you wish to tell is something along the lines of which you speak. You will probably have a slightly less powerful Hero that way, but that is the benefit for starting out at the beginning of your career. Of course, Hero Advancement totally depends on the amount of EP your GM hands out.

BTW, the GM is referred to as The Author in the game.

Things you can't do in D20 that I've seen so far (but to be honest, I don't play much D20), a Sorcerer casts a spell and divides his Power between 5 Aspects (Area, Range, Form, Intensity, and Duration). This means that at anytime, that fireball spell can be set to be area effect or just hit a single target; the Form allows the mage to dictate which targets are hit by the blast; Range is obvious (but done in broad terms, not exact measurements); Intensity is how hot the fire is (read Damage); and the spell can be set to burn for no time all the way to being effectively eternal. Of course, each time the spell is cast the Sorcerer has the ability to shift these points anywhere he wants, any way he wants. As an Ecomancer, the system is the same, but the Ecomancer can even change what the fire does (ie non-lethal damage, fire cage, wall of fire, etc) as well as how it does it. This sort of flexibility in spells is the thing I've not found in set spell lists like DnD provides. Yes, there will be ready made spells, but the player, at any time in game, can create all new ones (Ecomancers can do them IN COMBAT). Sorcerers are limited to what schools of magic they are skilled in (Combat, Conjuration, Information, Manipulation, and Travel), while the Ecomancer is limited to what Elements he knows (Air, Earth, Fire, Water, and Magic). Sorcery, in the game, is a pseudo-scientific approach to making the other 3 magic types occur. It can do similar things (even heal), but has to do so with formulas of spell components. The spell building system is connected to the Alchemy system through the ingredients list and what properties each ingredient governs.

[Matt Machell]

Weird how I missed this earlier. Your sig: "actions have consequences!" Is this going to be a tagline for your brand? It occured to me that in quite a few fantasy games actions don't have consequences, you could certainly distinguish your game by adding a focus on this.

-Matt

[Hardpoint]

Further setting data...

The Faithdom Nations (those Human nations what won their freedom from the Elves) war amongst themselves, though not openly yet. Small subtle things happen. Two of the strongest nations, Valron and Randisar, have effectively annexed the land in between them. With tensions like this Faithdom is ripe for a Schism.

The Elves are on the brink of Civil War, due to their Queen having taken a Human as a husband (who was later killed by an Elf during an uprising) and her general lack of political savvy. She's being pressured into things by powerhungry lords seeking to take her throne.

While this goes on the merchantile state of Xaxyia sits back and manipulates things to their own profit, having made strong alliances and insinuated their people so deep into other nations politics that they know everything that goes on in the world.

One change in the setting that is not on the site is that the Centaur Nations are not stuck in the Forest Realm, but rather are roving bands of tribal gypsies, making the whole world their home, but wanted by none. Their desire to find their true anscestral roots and remain among nature brings them into conflict with a world rapidly moving forward.

[Mike Holmes]

First of all, the website is designed to be an ad, one I don't have to constantly update (save one page or so for new content and news)...but I do know that it needs work. Thanks for pointing the problem areas. At least now, when I tackle the website, I can fix them.

I wish you'da said that before. I'm reviewing an ad. Sheesh. ;-)

The stat issue is such that the average Hero will begin with a 50% chance to succeed out the gate, as a Novice.

Read that again to yourself slowly. Hero's succeed 50% of the time. Are you sure that makes sense? Climb a tree, 50% chance at best....

The Base Numbers for each race run in the 8-10 range on average, with some stat bases as high as 15 (Troll strength for instance) and as low as 1.

Wow, I guessed exactly right, right down to the Troll's strength (OK, I guessed 14, but who's counting).

This, coupled with the max skill level of 5 provides a maximum of 30 ever (figuring in Heroic Gift bonuses) for a skill's Level/Chance setup.

So, if I as GM want to make a giant, or a dragon...they too have a Base 15 Str? Nothing has more? Or do monsties use different stats? If so, why?

In actual play, 18-20 seemed a fairly standard starting Chance (figuring a Level 1 in a skill).
Stats are intended to be in line somewhat with DnD (admittedly not D20 necessarily).

So, starting characters are putzes like in D&D? Only able to hit a three-toed sloth 60% of the time? Wait, I know, heroism is a state of mind.

The point is that it's a D&Dism to have to start out with wimpy characters. Have you considered an alternate way to go?

The Success Chart is static so that as you rise in your Chance (albeit a maximum amount of only +5 over the 0 Level Formula), you get an easier chance of getting the greater result.

But they don't get better. Only the Rank 5 success gets better. Seriously, I do this for a living. Yes, the expected value creeps up, but not the chances of any particular Rank other than 5. The others will occur at exactly the same rate.

I left 30 as the lone chance for Fumbling as that seemed cinematically appropriate. Heroes in movies rarely Fumble just by happenstance. They tend to Fumble when it's dramatically approriate (or humor dictates he should).

Read what you wrote again, slowly. Fumbles don't happen randomly, so everyone has the same random chance to get one.

If you really want fumbles to occur when it's dramatic, give the GM the authority to make them occur (maybe with some player reward or somesuch). Just an idea. In any case, as pointed out, these "heroes" are starting out with very novice chances to hit.

Earning Hero Points is accomplished by doing acts of a Heroic or particularly Dramatic nature. They are used as a reward for players to take chances, do cool stuff, really play up the swashbuckling, derring do atmosphere of the game. 7th Sea does something similar, but I think my system is a little simpler to understand.

Actually sounds just like 7th Sea. Which is cool, IMO. The only problem there is that you have what I call a "tight circle" of reward. Where players who spend points tend to get them back in spades. The problem with this is when the player gets low for some reason. Then he has to play conservatively so as not to lose the character, meaning that he'll have trouble getting points back (they tend to get given as pity points at that point). Just noting a standard problem with the mechanic. You might want to think about alternate ways to get them back, or some other "non-tight circle".

I went with single die mechanics, as opposed to the Successes method you mentioned, because I found that method a little cumbersome for some players who were not as hardcore, plus I don't like the extremely mediocre results you frequently get (based on my experiences with Shadowrun, Vampire, and Werewolf).

First, I'm not suggesting a dice pool. Many times you only roll twice with the system I'm talking about, and you never roll more than one die at a time. This system is in a game (Wayfarer?), but not WW, and probably in few others if any. I don't suggest the WW die pool systems. The system I'm talking about produces much more reasonable curves.

Second, I think that your claim about what "non-hardcore" players like is dubious at best. But we'll just call that one our opinions about it.

Third, did you not read where I said it was an example? Any feedback I give will likely not directly be solutions, but ideas that are intended to get you on the track where you can find your own solutions. If the mechanic doesn't inspire you at all, just say so. Would you like another, or are you satisfied enough with your system that you really wouldn't change it?

I also know that one die can be finnicky enough. Yes, multiple dice make for more consistent results, but also make for less cinematic ones in my experience. I've also found that straight math evaluations of dice are not the best method, as they do not take into account the superstitiousness of gamers and their "special" dice. While I don't put too much stock in that, I have seen enough wacky results in my time to know that straight odds is not enough. Dice, like computers, are not totally random sometimes (even without cheating).

I got no idea what you're talking about here. You're going to evaluate your system on superstition? Well, I don't share your superstitions, so I'm probably not going to be able to help you there. If not by statistics, then what do you suggest? Why are your numbers better?

Combat is a series of exchanges

Ah, OK, had no idea about that. All I saw was the chance to hit calculations.

No, the game is still in development, so there is no full version to check out. I plan to make the freebie version available again (had to rework stuff a little for clarity). I'll let everyone here know when that freebie version is available, which will now be sooner than later, as that will give you all a chance to really get a look at what I'm doing.

Cool. That would make life easier.

Stories of your deeds get more and more distorted as your Glory rises though, so those 10 guys you defeated can turn into 100 or more as your fame rises.

Hmm, that's an intriguing mechanic. Does it have any other mechanical effects?

BTW, the GM is referred to as The Author in the game.

That actually says a lot about your design philosophy right there. In fact, that's the local equivalent of a Freudian Slip. :-)

Things you can't do in D20 that I've seen so far (but to be honest, I don't play much D20)

Then why compare? This is the Heartbreaker attitude. Yes your game kicks the shit out of D&D. So do most other games that are not D&D. You aren't (and as you note, can't) competing with D&D. So why compare? Tell me how this is better than Exalted, or TROS? How is it better than Earthdawn or Donjon? How is it better than Talislanta or The Pool? Harn or FUDGE? Pendragon or GURPS or Hero System? LegendaryQuest or Burning Wheel? These are your competition, and the bar is set very high in many cases. Most of these games do all the things that you mention that D&D doesn't do, and much more. Are they perfect? No. Can your game be better? Sure.

But I don't think we've seen that special part yet.

Mike

[Mike Holmes]

Weird how I missed this earlier. Your sig: "actions have consequences!" Is this going to be a tagline for your brand? It occured to me that in quite a few fantasy games actions don't have consequences, you could certainly distinguish your game by adding a focus on this.

Following on the above post, I just wanted to say that Matt is quite right. This occured to me as well. I think what your tag means is that "combat is dangerous", but have you seen Sorcerer by any chance? Games like it, actually have methods for making choices in-game have mechanical consequences to back up the theme in play.

I think a fantasy game that really embodied that would be cool. In some ways this could be said of TROS, but I'm thinking outside of combat as well as in it.

Mike

[Hardpoint]

Weird how I missed this earlier. Your sig: "actions have consequences!" Is this going to be a tagline for your brand? It occured to me that in quite a few fantasy games actions don't have consequences, you could certainly distinguish your game by adding a focus on this.

-Matt

This is actually the philosophy of the game to a great extant. I think I explained the Black Soul Marks concept, but if not, here's a brief overview.

As actions are perfomed in game, sometimes we do things that are no so nice, thus we can earn Black Soul Marks. BSMs are a percentage of evil on one's soul. There is a sliding scale which governs your status, and how far you are on one end dictates how difficult it is to earn them and lose them. Doing good deeds moves then towards 0, while evil deeds moves it towards 100. This score will dictate where your soul goes upon death, be it Heaven or Hell. It also affects certain Holy and Unholy items and places. 50 is the worst, for to die with exactly 50 means your Hero becomes a ghost, forever doomed to walk the world until somehow a deed can shift the balance, but being a ghost, that is not easy since you really can't affect much. The system is set up to make it easy to slide to the middle, but increasingly difficult to move towards one of the ends.

For example, if you are really evil, and act of selflessness like risking your own life to save another's, would erase a lot more BSMs than it would for someone really good. The idea there being that when you are good, you are expected to do good, while evil dark acts are expected.

The scale itself

0 = Pure (nearly impossible to attain)
1-10 = Holy
11-25 = Good
26-49 = Decent
50 = In Balance
51-75 = Wicked
76-89 = Evil
90-99 = Unholy
100 = Malevolent (also nearly impossible to attain)

[John Harper]

So, your game has:

- A metagame resource for PC protagonism (Hero Points).
- Player-created abilities (the Gifts).
- The Glory system, which is something that has been done before, but not quite like this. This is a very cool element, IMO.
- A flexible on-the-fly spellcasting system.
- A system for tracking the fate of a character's immortal soul (BSMs), placing morality and metaphysics front and center.

Dude. These are all very cool things. I didn't see any of this on my quick tour of the website. Maybe I missed them, but to me, these should be screaming at me right up front. This kind of thing says to me, "I'm not someone's D&D/homebrew fantasy heartbreaker."

I agree with Mike's assessment of the system, though. The idea of starting out as a "level 0" putz who fails half the time is a D&D legacy that you should examine. What purpose does it serve in your game? Why not simply let players choose what Level their heroes should start at? Why not start out with actually heroic levels of ability?

Also, Mike's "tight circle" comment about the Hero Points is spot-on. They're a great addition to your game, but you might want to consider an alternate way for players to generate them during the game.

[ethan_greer]

Dude, every tidbit you reveal about this game makes me want to know more.  At this point it might be good to take the advice you've gotten so far into account and crank out a full document of the game that we can look at.  Once that's done, you can start another thread and we can go through another round...But that's just my opinion, and only a suggestion.

Someone somewhere around here has said, "every word you write on the forums is a word that you're not writing to finish your game."  Or something like that.

Edit: Cross-posted with John "Feng" Harper.  I definitely agree with his entire post.

[Hardpoint]

I wish you'da said that before. I'm reviewing an ad. Sheesh. ;-)

Sorry...you're right about that.

The stat issue is such that the average Hero will begin with a 50% chance to succeed out the gate, as a Novice.

Read that again to yourself slowly. Hero's succeed 50% of the time. Are you sure that makes sense? Climb a tree, 50% chance at best....[/quote]

Some things players can just do. Skill are only required when a Quality Rank is needed. Meaning a player wants to climb a tree, he just gets to do it, but if he wants to climb a tree while someone is shooting at him, he needs to roll.

This, coupled with the max skill level of 5 provides a maximum of 30 ever (figuring in Heroic Gift bonuses) for a skill's Level/Chance setup.

So, if I as GM want to make a giant, or a dragon...they too have a Base 15 Str? Nothing has more? Or do monsties use different stats? If so, why?[/quote]

Larger creatures simply have a different scale for detemining things like Damage Rating, Hit Points, etc. The reason for this is to have a consistent mechanic.

So, starting characters are putzes like in D&D? Only able to hit a three-toed sloth 60% of the time? Wait, I know, heroism is a state of mind.

The point is that it's a D&Dism to have to start out with wimpy characters. Have you considered an alternate way to go?

In actuality, starting characters are not that wimpy, since I don't do the DnDism of increasing Hit Points. The idea was to create a combat system that meant the Seasoned Warrior had to make sure that he was tactically sound to face a fight, not just wade through enemies like Kobolds at a Paladin picnic. Yes, fights are dangerous. Because higher Ranking characters get additional Actions (everyone has at least 2 per Round), they are less likely to be killed by an ill trained peasant.

I specifically created the system to take into account the "wimpy" character perception, which they are not that much wimpier than higher ranking ones. The major difference is how effective a less experienced hero will be rather than a more experienced one.

For example, Hero A is a Novice and has 2 Actions. Hero B is a Master and has 5 Actions. Hero B also has bonuses to his Initiative beyond what Hero A has. While it is possible for A to defeat B, the results are likely that B will defeat A, unless the dice (and good Hero Point usage) go A's way.

But they don't get better. Only the Rank 5 success gets better. Seriously, I do this for a living. Yes, the expected value creeps up, but not the chances of any particular Rank other than 5. The others will occur at exactly the same rate.

This is true, but the idea is that the more skilled characters are more likely to get the more impressive result as an artifact of the greater chance of getting the Rank 5. The idea is not to make a game where the likelyhood is that the GrandMaster will get a lot of minor successes. I am going for cinematic (yet keeping a little grounded), thus a rank 5 Result is more likely by a more skilled character. This is also why the Critical Success Chance goes up with Skill Level increase.

If you really want fumbles to occur when it's dramatic, give the GM the authority to make them occur (maybe with some player reward or somesuch). Just an idea. In any case, as pointed out, these "heroes" are starting out with very novice chances to hit.

I didn't want to maintain the percieved adversarial GM/Player relationship that games like DnD have always had in my eyes. I thought that having a single, solitary, even handed chance to fumble was fair and equitable. It gave a failsafe for "supercharacters" at the same time didn''t penalize low statted or "wimpy" heroes.

Actually sounds just like 7th Sea. Which is cool, IMO. The only problem there is that you have what I call a "tight circle" of reward. Where players who spend points tend to get them back in spades. The problem with this is when the player gets low for some reason. Then he has to play conservatively so as not to lose the character, meaning that he'll have trouble getting points back (they tend to get given as pity points at that point). Just noting a standard problem with the mechanic. You might want to think about alternate ways to get them back, or some other "non-tight circle".

Actually the Hero Point system as used by myself and the one in 7th Sea are both derived from James Bond which did it a long time ago. James Bond is also what inspired my cinematic style gaming. A truly underratted game. Also to show it's influence, check out Spycraft's Chase rules, which are very much influenced by VGs Bond Game.

Would you like another, or are you satisfied enough with your system that you really wouldn't change it?

I've found that the dice mechanic I use works just nicely. Instead of tearing it apart and suggesting new ones perhaps testing it out and seeing how it works (see the end of this for a taste of the game...)

Ah, OK, had no idea about that. All I saw was the chance to hit calculations.

Whoops...my mistake there. Like I said, website flaws...

Cool. That would make life easier.

Here's a link to a version that was released to the public for a short time, but was pulled to fix and re-work the format. I probably should have done this a while ago, but I know this version is a little shaky clarity wise. But here goes. It's about 15.6megs, so be aware. It contains editable areas of the PDF (for the characters) and the art by Larry Elmore is there with consent, as the release is free.

http://www.actionstudios.com/realms/deliverance/files/jsa1.pdf

Hmm, that's an intriguing mechanic. Does it have any other mechanical effects?

Glad you like it. It does affect NPC reactions and can be used as a method for intimidating foes (though that is still being worked out exactly)

That actually says a lot about your design philosophy right there. In fact, that's the local equivalent of a Freudian Slip. :-)

I wanted to use Storyteller or something similar, but Author seemed the most style oriented, yet not proprietary.

Then why compare? This is the Heartbreaker attitude. Yes your game kicks the shit out of D&D. So do most other games that are not D&D. You aren't (and as you note, can't) competing with D&D. So why compare? Tell me how this is better than Exalted, or TROS? How is it better than Earthdawn or Donjon? How is it better than Talislanta or The Pool? Harn or FUDGE? Pendragon or GURPS or Hero System? LegendaryQuest or Burning Wheel? These are your competition, and the bar is set very high in many cases. Most of these games do all the things that you mention that D&D doesn't do, and much more. Are they perfect? No. Can your game be better? Sure.

But I don't think we've seen that special part yet.

Mike

Someone here asked what ROW could do that D20 couldn't, which is the only reason I went there. Normally I wouldn't. HERO on the other hand I might.

In HERO you have to build everything in detail, with little or no flexibility after that "spell" is created. You can't improvise. Being able to adapt to varying situations is at the heart of ROW. It was the one thing that turned me off to Hero, the lack of adaptability and free form gaming. HERO still seems locked in its wargaming roots.

In ROW, you create a spell (we'll use sorcery for this example), give it the essence of what that spell is about (by picking an Intensity Type, like Lethal Attack, Entangle, etc) and then have full freedom on how it is used, changed, or adapted to whatever situation it comes into. I refer back to the fireball example. If you built one in HERO you'd have to declare up front if it did Area Effect or not, pay the points, and never be able to change that AoE. In ROW, you decide if and when it needs Area and how much. Yes, HERO has the Variable Power Pool, which is similar to what I'm doing, but by defining those 5 Aspects into simple tables (provided on the Sorcerer's Magic Sheet mind you) you end up with a system that is fast and simple, yet deep, depending on how you use it. You could cost things out ahead of time to speed up basic situations, but you are not forced to.

I played a lot of HERO for several years, so that is the one I'd be able to compare to the best. I share some stylistic elements to TROS, but my system is less based on how good the player is at the tactics of combat, allowing for the character's skill to fill in where the player is less so. I like TROS, but only discovered it a few months ago. Have not had a chance to actually play it yet.

Anyone in central Oregon wanna play?  (off topic I know...but it's a funny)

[Hardpoint]

So, your game has:

- A metagame resource for PC protagonism (Hero Points).
- Player-created abilities (the Gifts).
- The Glory system, which is something that has been done before, but not quite like this. This is a very cool element, IMO.
- A flexible on-the-fly spellcasting system.
- A system for tracking the fate of a character's immortal soul (BSMs), placing morality and metaphysics front and center.

Dude. These are all very cool things. I didn't see any of this on my quick tour of the website. Maybe I missed them, but to me, these should be screaming at me right up front. This kind of thing says to me, "I'm not someone's D&D/homebrew fantasy heartbreaker."

Well, check out the link I provided. I know the adventure is shaky (which is one of the reasons why it was pulled for reworking)

I agree with Mike's assessment of the system, though. The idea of starting out as a "level 0" putz who fails half the time is a D&D legacy that you should examine. What purpose does it serve in your game? Why not simply let players choose what Level their heroes should start at? Why not start out with actually heroic levels of ability?

I do provide methods to start at beyond Novice Level, but I built the system to give players the option for doing it the "old fashioned" way.

Also, Mike's "tight circle" comment about the Hero Points is spot-on. They're a great addition to your game, but you might want to consider an alternate way for players to generate them during the game.

Hero Points are handed out for a wide variety of things and are used for much more than just combat (forgot to mention that). They are used to get clues when you are stuck, they influence ANY skill or stat check, and can also be used to change the story a little in your favor. Only thing you cannot do with a Hero Point is to buy a Critical Success. Those have to happen naturally. There are also some rules that specifically state Hero Points may not be used on this Check. (for game balance reasons)

Hero Point Uses
- Alter Hit Location
- Altering Initiative Order
- Altering a Rank Result
- Find a Weapon/Tool when you really need one
- Get a Clue
- Negate a Crit against you or a Fumble (only time you can directly affect another person's roll with a Hero Point)

And this is from the actual text

Regaining Hero Points
The way to get Hero Points back is to act heroically. This is a game about heroes and villains, with the players cast in the role of the hero. "Those who walk the Path of Light shall be rewarded" is a quote from the Dom Sharrot. This is the type of world Realms of Wonder™ is set in. When you understand that, it will be much easier to slip into the roles you will be playing. Hero Points is one way of fomenting such heroic activity. Simple actions like feeding the sick, tending to the wounded of the enemy army, and dropping a few silver coins on the plate of a beggar can also net you Hero Points, as these are things Heroes do. However, the game is also about cinematic-style gaming, and that means panache and flair. Doing things with style and great drama is also a way to earn Hero Points. Examples of this include doing bold stunts, highly dramatic dialogue and speeches, as well as ideas that set the story along a path of great drama. Hero Points are awarded on the spot, typically, though some Authors will award them at the end of a Chapter. Hero Point awards are covered in more depth in The Book of Prophets (Page XX), as Authors will be the ones handing them out.
There is a maximum number of Hero Points one may have and that maximum is 10. Humans have a special ability that allows them to have 12 Hero Points, as Humans are inherently lucky. Don't forget, Hero Points are there to be spent, so don't hoard them. Hoarding Hero Points is ok for a time, but once you are at the ceiling, all earned HP are lost. If you are playing heroically, you will get them back, do not fear.

[Hardpoint]

Dude, every tidbit you reveal about this game makes me want to know more.  At this point it might be good to take the advice you've gotten so far into account and crank out a full document of the game that we can look at.  Once that's done, you can start another thread and we can go through another round...But that's just my opinion, and only a suggestion.

Someone somewhere around here has said, "every word you write on the forums is a word that you're not writing to finish your game."  Or something like that.

Edit: Cross-posted with John "Feng" Harper.  I definitely agree with his entire post.

I am working on it. I've essentially done the first 3 sections, but between work and my pregnant wife, time is more enemy than friend. Luckily the deadline is less a looming issue at work, thus I can get back to work on the game. I hope you like the sample (a better version is on the to do list). The character sheets there are essentially the full game versions, but I'm working on a simpler one for the JumpStart Edition.

[Daeglan]

I have been playing Realms of Wonder for several years now  and I have to say you are missing a lot of World info. Marcus can go on for hours on his world. trick is getting it onto paper. But I will say this, I cannot go back to D&D after playing it. the spellcasting system is the best i have ever seen. as a mage goes up in level he has more control over his magic not less like in D&D.

And something Hardpoint left out is that Difficulties can vary so a character can easily perform simple actions but more difficult actions require better skill.

[Hardpoint]

Edited my last post answering Mike as I'd forgotten to finish a sentence...whoops.

[Mike Holmes]

I wish you'da said that before. I'm reviewing an ad. Sheesh. ;-)

Sorry...you're right about that.

No worries. But as everyone here is saying, these are the things you need to put into your "ad". Basic mechanics aren't inspiring in terms of play. All a combat mechanic says is, "yep, this game, too, will be about killin' things and taking their stuff." Seems that your game has a lot more depth to it than that, and that's the stuff that you need people to see.

Some things players can just do. Skill are only required when a Quality Rank is needed. Meaning a player wants to climb a tree, he just gets to do it, but if he wants to climb a tree while someone is shooting at him, he needs to roll.

That's in the expanded rules, somewhere, right? I mean the general notion of when to roll and when not to do so. It's funny, because I often make fun of the many games out there who will tell GM's not to roll for things like crossing the street, and tying shoes. Does anyone actually do that? But lot's of people would roll for climbing a tree. What GM's need to know is what sort of things make sense to roll for in this partticular game. Seems that you only want rolls when there's significant pressure or somthing like that. Make that known with examples. Most designers miss this point in their text.

Larger creatures simply have a different scale for detemining things like Damage Rating, Hit Points, etc. The reason for this is to have a consistent mechanic.

But my point was to make only one scale, which would be simpler. Yes it would require a modification to rolling. But I guess my point is to ask if any of these "different scale" stats ever get rolled against. And if so, how do you accomodate that with the system. If only Str goes on this other scale, and is never rolled, well then I guess you have no problem. Still, it seems atrificial to cap ability ratings to me in order to keep them on a small scale, and there are fun and easy ways around this. Just saying. :-)

In actuality, starting characters are not that wimpy, since I don't do the DnDism of increasing Hit Points.

And, again, you kick the crap out of D&D there. But do a search here on the phenomenon called "Whiff Syndrome". Your game isn't as bad as some, but it's going to have significant amounts of this problem.

I didn't want to maintain the percieved adversarial GM/Player relationship that games like DnD have always had in my eyes. I thought that having a single, solitary, even handed chance to fumble was fair and equitable. It gave a failsafe for "supercharacters" at the same time didn''t penalize low statted or "wimpy" heroes.

That's an astute observation (about the adversarial relationship). But in general there are two ways to deal with this. One is, as you do, to limit the GM's powers to areas that can't be percieved as adversarial as much as possible. The other, however, is to create mechanics that speak to the neccessity of trust. Basically, it's an irony, but true, that the more you limit the GM, the more you inform them that they are working against the players in a limited framework. These limitations become something to work around to "get" the characters. There are lots of other ways to engender trust, IMO.

That said, I don't really like the GM having to make such subjective decisions (there are lots of potential problems in that). Again, you're taking my suggestions too literally. OTOH, equitable is just fine if that's truely your goal.

Actually the Hero Point system as used by myself and the one in 7th Sea are both derived from James Bond which did it a long time ago. James Bond is also what inspired my cinematic style gaming. A truly underratted game. Also to show it's influence, check out Spycraft's Chase rules, which are very much influenced by VGs Bond Game.

You're misdirecting. I might point out that when I bought James Bond (about the day it came out as I am a slavering fan of the franchise), I noted that it was itself influenced by Fame and Fortune points in Top Secret, which might be considered the first metagame resource mechanic.

But that's neither here nor there. You're dodging the question of whether or not the rewards are too tightly bound to what you are rewarded for. At GenCon playing with Wick, I saw this in action. In the game he was running for us, several times, he took a chip from a player only to hand it right back to him. John, I think, sees this as a good thing, but I don't personally. It doesn't encourage stretching out, it doesn't inform about anything other than playing dramatically. Which a lot of groups do anyhow.
(I firmly believe that the game John ran would have been exactly the same frolic that it was without the mechanics we used. Sorry to use you to make a point John :-(  That said, he was making the mechanics up as he want, pretty much, so that's not really a surprise. The real surprise whas how much fun the premise was. )

Just as another example, you could, for instance, link the rewards to increasing Glory or something (which seems to make intuitive sense), which could then, in turn be used to help the character in other ways. The point is that in extending the cycle to include other activities, you create links in your mechanics that can be useful in promoting the style you want to see. Do you see what I'm getting at?

I've found that the dice mechanic I use works just nicely. Instead of tearing it apart and suggesting new ones perhaps testing it out and seeing how it works (see the end of this for a taste of the game...)

Well, you did ask for feedback. And perhaps I flatter myself, but I've played so many different RPGs, that I think that I get a pretty good sense of how they're going to play even without doing so. OTOH, that may just be arrogance, and you can dismis it if you want. But I'd like to think that I've helped people with my commentary, and generally get feedback that I do.

OTOH, if you want to play, then bring it on over to Indie Netgaming. We're all about the Actual Play here. There's certainly something to be learned by playing the game. My point is not that it wouldn't be educational to do so. Just that I'm pretty good at eyeballing games, if I do say so.

Here's a link to a version that was released to the public for a short time, but was pulled to fix and re-work the format.

Cool. Do you want more feedback, or do you now think I'm an arrogant bastard who has nothing useful to say? ;-)  Further, if you do want feedback, could you make it a bit more clear what subjects you'd like to discuss. The more you tell us what you want, the more cogent help you'll get.

It contains editable areas of the PDF (for the characters) and the art by Larry Elmore is there with consent, as the release is free.

I thought I'd recognized that art. Very nice. You apparently haven't spared any expense to make this a good looking game (or do you have an "in" with Mr. Elmore?).

Glad you like it. It does affect NPC reactions and can be used as a method for intimidating foes (though that is still being worked out exactly)

Cool. Now that's worth waiting for. Want to work it out here at all?

I wanted to use Storyteller or something similar, but Author seemed the most style oriented, yet not proprietary.

Heh, like I said, Freudian. That's exactly what I predicted. Given your design, what you're doing here is, IMO, displaying an intuitive knowledge of GNS issues. That is, Storyteller is actually a bad name in some ways for what the GM is mandated to do in WW products, but much more closely fits your vision. I wish you had it instead. Still, Author works well. Good choice.

Someone here asked what ROW could do that D20 couldn't, which is the only reason I went there. Normally I wouldn't.

My mistake, sorry. That said, you do it in your text, and have several times here, already, the above example notwithstanding. It's been suggested here that comparisons to other games in your text is not a good idea. Because it gives an unconfident feel, as if the game is self-conscious and feels a need to measure up to the big guy. If the game is good, let it speak for itself. People will naturally make comparisons on their own anyhow, and see the advantages for themselves.

HERO on the other hand I might.

In HERO you have to build everything in detail, with little or no flexibility after that "spell" is created. You can't improvise. Being able to adapt to varying situations is at the heart of ROW. It was the one thing that turned me off to Hero, the lack of adaptability and free form gaming. HERO still seems locked in its wargaming roots.

I just got the new 415 page Fantasy Hero with it's 67 pages just on magic. :-) But I'll not disagree that Hero is more complex; there's no denying that. So (given that you acceed that you can do all this with a VPP) that seems to be your game's advantage. I'll buy that. In any case, I'm not actually asking for comparisons to individual systems; I was being rhetorical. What we need to know is simply what's special about your game overall, such that it's something that ought to be considered for play.

All that said, as others are now agreeing, we're starting to see where your game might shine. We're just wondering why you didn't make these things you major selling points.

I agree abou the "wargaming roots" for HERO, BTW. Yet, your game seems to bend to tradition quite a lot as well, IMO. I especially liked your note that says something like, "RPGs are about combat, and this one's no exception." For how I feel about that see Mike's Standard Rant #3: Combat Systems. I think almost all RPGs are still beholden to their wargaming roots, you see. Not that your game ought not to be about combat. Just to realize that these are all decisions on a spectrum, with none being better than another.

If you really want to get away from wargaming, there's lots of directions that you can go from what you have.

I share some stylistic elements to TROS, but my system is less based on how good the player is at the tactics of combat, allowing for the character's skill to fill in where the player is less so. I like TROS, but only discovered it a few months ago. Have not had a chance to actually play it yet.

Yeah, the choice to go with player skill or without is an interesting one. The point is that TROS has it, which makes it attractive to a certain group of players. It's out of the norm there. Do play it some if you get a chance - it's very good.

Mike

[Mike Holmes]

Following up on the previous post to Marcus's pal Daeglan here:

I have been playing Realms of Wonder for several years now  and I have to say you are missing a lot of World info. Marcus can go on for hours on his world. trick is getting it onto paper.

Indeed. Nothing more difficult than actually writing the game. If I had a dime for every time I had some guy say, "well, it's all in my head, and all I have to do is get it down."

And something Hardpoint left out is that Difficulties can vary so a character can easily perform simple actions but more difficult actions require better skill.

Is this something other than the Rank system? I get that you can require different ranks of success for tasks. My only objection was that the easiest tasks assignable were at about a 50% chance for most things. But again, as long as those things are supposed to be pretty difficult, I'm OK with that.

OTOH, with defenses being an equal 50%, that means that a combat like this will have one blow in four land. FWIW.

Mike