KARMA system: Feedback on Combat Mechanic please

[Aelios]

I've been working on this for a long time now, but I can't shake the feeling that I'm missing something.  I don't have a specific GNS target I'm aiming for, but I think my play style is mostly simulationist; just in case that makes a difference. (The dice mechanic is similar to Godlike.)

The (almost) complete system is here:
http://www.wyrdtech.com/asmythe/system/index.html

Combat
Whatever is fun should be what's done.

The combat system is not intended to be realistic. It is an easy, fair system designed to quickly resolve aggressive contests in an exciting, descriptive manner. Descriptive detail is absolutely required in any good combat scene. The reason this system is so basic is to you free from restrictive rules and defining charts; there are no combat maneuvers or weapon tables just good old fun. Any creative description you can dream up, that fits within the game setting, can be used to describe the actions of your character.

Combat is initiated when a character takes an aggressive action toward another character. This starts the round and until the end of the combat turns are taken around the table in clockwise order. There is only one roll for attack, defense, and damage. Every action is a contested action representing the combined attack and defense of each character, and every character gets the opportunity to defend and counter attack every action against them. Whoever won the contest can usually carry their successes into their next action, while whoever lost the contest takes damage and suffers a penalty.

Note: A "round" is the order of turns around the table. It is not an measure of time any more than walking to the kitchen is a measure of time. Likewise a "turn" is the opportunity a player has to declare and resolve an action. In combat time is very subjective; it doesn't matter if you think of a round as a sequence of consecutive actions, as a lot of simultaneous ones, or a combination of both. Nobody keeps track of where the big hand is pointing to when they are trying not to get killed. Remember, the game is fun, not realistic.

   Trevor, Mike, and Brandon (in order) are finishing up a night of revelry at the pub.
   [Trevor has six dice in "avoid paying the bill"; Mike has four dice in "pick on Trevor"; and Brandon has three dice in "fairness".]
   [Trevor's turn]:Trevor initiates an aggressive action against Brandon with the sneer "aren't you going to pay?"[Since Trevor's action was against Brandon they each roll their appropriate skills: Trevor rolls 2:6 and Brandon rolls 1:9, Trevor won with 1:6]
   Brandon: "OK, but I paid last time."
   [Mike's turn]: "Trevor, you little twerp, it's your turn. Pay up." [Mike rolls 2:7 & 1:9 but Trevor rolls 2:9, Trevor wins again with 1:9]
   Trevor: "Shut up Mike, I don't have any money."
   [Brandon's turn]: "You ordered the nachos, Trevor, and you owe me for last time." [Brandon rolls 1:10, he lost a dice from the damage, but he spent a point of karma (the nachos) to make it 2:10. Trevor rolled 2:1 and 2:2 but no tens. Brandon wins with 2:10.]
   Trevor, cutting his losses: "Fine, wait here while I get some money."
   Mike: "Do you think he's coming back?"
   Brandon pays the tab: "No. Let's get out of here."

[Mike Holmes]

Hey Aelios,

I'm trying to track down what you think might be missing. It seems pretty solid to me. Can you point to any sections that seem to be problematic to you? Have you playtested much? Can you speak to your goals outside of combat?

BTW, I wouldn't agree that the system isn't realistic. It'll be as realistic as the narration that players use. What it isn't is detailed in some ways. Though, that said, it's lots more detailed than a lot of other systems. I think that you've found the level you're happy with and stuck with it. And that's the only thing that's important.

So I'm really not sure where the problem might lie. It's complete enough that I think that only play would reveal problems at this point.

BTW, what's bad about the bad examples of Motivations? I often play Get Rich characters. Basically, looking at the list, I'm not sure how any to judge any other motivation.

Mike

[Aelios]

I have not play tested much, so that is probably where my doubt comes from. And I am not aware of any other games that use a similarly "open" system, meaning a lack of specific modifiers and determinants.

I'm looking for areas of weakness. What could a player do to break the system without breaking the game; I mean actions that a character would be able to take within the premise of the game but that the rules would contradict or make impossible. System weaknesses.

The "bad" motivation examples are bad because they are too broad, thus just about any action could be thought of as progressing toward that goal, thus sending karma aquisition through the roof, which would escalate beyond control one the character had enough karma to use miracles without fear of limiting his dice pool.

I am hoping to play test this system with Fading Suns soon, if my group is willing.

[Mike Holmes]

I have not play tested much, so that is probably where my doubt comes from. And I am not aware of any other games that use a similarly "open" system, meaning a lack of specific modifiers and determinants.

Ah, if it's just examples of systems that work this way that you're looking for, there are a ton that work just like yours (in terms of being Fortune in the Middle, and having other similar parts), and are played to good effect all the time. I'd suggest looking at Story Engine (or the free Story Bones), Hero Quest, Fate (which discusses multiple levels of detail), The Pool, Donjon, InSpectres, a couple that I've designed, etc. Most of the independent games written here, actually work very much like your system does. Not only is this an effective way to play, but it's getting pretty popular in some quarters.

Check out some of the links here. I somehow had the idea that you were more familiar with the sorts of games that we do around here.

I'm looking for areas of weakness. What could a player do to break the system without breaking the game; I mean actions that a character would be able to take within the premise of the game but that the rules would contradict or make impossible. System weaknesses.

I'll hav to look more closely again. But I didn't see anything on first go through. The thing is that simple systems are much harder to break.

The "bad" motivation examples are bad because they are too broad, thus just about any action could be thought of as progressing toward that goal, thus sending karma aquisition through the roof, which would escalate beyond control one the character had enough karma to use miracles without fear of limiting his dice pool.

Ah. That should be indicated in the text. The idea that a good motive is fairly restricted in scope. Good thought.


As far as playtesting goes, if you can't get your local group to try it out or just want to try your system with people who are used to such systems, check out the group in my sig. Indie-Netgaming does a lot of playtesting of games a lot like yours.

Mike

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Aelios,

All the games Mike mentioned are excellent references, but also check out Risus if you get the chance.

Best,
Ron

[Aelios]

Thank you. I've heard of most of these games, here on The Forge, but have not yet had a chance to look them up. It is ironic then that my selfish desire to improve my own game is helped by the altruistic promotion of other people's games.  I am encouraged, yet overwhelmed by the volume of material already out there.

I have, or will soon have, most of the games you mentioned, plus a few others. But I'm having trouble finding Story Engine (lots of dead links). And Fate is a very large document to print, is there a dead-tree version?

[Mike Holmes]

The inestimable Mr. John Kim keeps a site that lists RPGs. In the section of free RPGs (subsection Universal) you can find Story Bones:

http://www.darkshire.org/~jhkim/rpg/freerpgs/bykeyword/universal.html

I recommend to anyone taking a look around his site to get an idea of the breadth of what RPGs are available. Another great resource can be found at:

http://www.pen-paper.net/rpgdb.php

An excellent source for researching RPGs.

Mike

[Aelios]

I think I figured out what has been bothering me about the combat mechanism. Two things, one easy to fix, one not.

1. The damage system result in long encounters, too long for my taste anyway. This should be easy to fix by increasing the "damage" that each attack does, with a KO at three instead of four for instance.

2. A party of PCs attacking one strong foe is esentially the same as each PC attacking identical strong foes, because each attack gets an equal counter attack. Except that if one PC wins they all win.  However a sufficiently strong foe would easily wipe out even a large group of PCs is a single round. I'm not sure how to solve this problem without introducing some sort of increasing "action" penalty, which I'm not too keen on doing.